Management Strategies for Controlling Soybean Cyst Nematode: An Application of Stochastic Dynamic Programming

Zacharias, Thomas P.; Liebman, Judith S.; Noel, G. R.

doi:10.2307/1349157

“…Marra and Carlson, 1983;Moffitt et aI., 1984;Taylor and Burt, 1984;Gold and Sutton, 1986;Johnston and Price, 1986;Zacharias et al, 1986). The assumption of risk neutrality is often made for the purposes of simplicity and tractability (e.g.…”

Section: Risk Neutrality Versus Risk Aversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pests and pesticides, risk and risk aversion

Pannell¹

1991

Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

361Pannell, D.J., 1991. Pests and pesticides, risks and risk aversion. Agric. Econ., Theoretical and applied literature on risk in decision making for agricultural pest control is reviewed. Risk can affect pesticide decision making either because of risk aversion or because of its influence on expected profit. It is concluded that risk does not necessarily lead to increased pesticide use by individual farmers. Uncertainty about some variables, such as pest density and pest mortality, does lead to higher optimal pesticide use under risk aversion. However, uncertainty about other important variables, such as output price and yield, leads to lower optimal levels of pesticide use. Neglect of these variables in most studies has led to the false assumption that pesticides are always risk-reducing inputs. Furthermore, there is evidence that, in general, the pesticide dosage which maximises expected profit is lower under risk than under certainty. Depending on the balance of forces to increase and decrease pesticide use under risk, in many circumstances the net effect of risk on optimal decision making for pest control may be minimal. The effect on risk of information about pest density and other variables (as in integrated pest management programmes) is discussed. Evidence on this issue is mixed. A range of analytical techniques for analysing risk in pest control is reviewed. Throughout the paper, gaps in the existing literature are identified.

show abstract

“…The assumption of risk neutrality is often made for the purposes of simplicity and tractability (e.g. Marra and Carlson, 1983;Moffitt et aI., 1984;Taylor and Burt, 1984;Gold and Sutton, 1986;Johnston and Price, 1986;Zacharias et al, 1986). The first part of this discussion considers the validity of this assumption.…”

Section: Risk Neutrality Versus Risk Aversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another circumstance where risk can affect the decisions of 'risk-neutral' decision makers is where the problem is dynamic (Antle, 1983). Zacharias et al (1986) tested this hypothesis in their DP study of soybean cyst nematode. They found modest support for the hypothesis, with very small differences between the results of their deterministic and stochastic models.…”

Section: Risk Neutralitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Pests and pesticides, risk and risk aversion

Pannell

¹

1991

Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

361Pannell, D.J., 1991. Pests and pesticides, risks and risk aversion. Agric. Econ., Theoretical and applied literature on risk in decision making for agricultural pest control is reviewed. Risk can affect pesticide decision making either because of risk aversion or because of its influence on expected profit. It is concluded that risk does not necessarily lead to increased pesticide use by individual farmers. Uncertainty about some variables, such as pest density and pest mortality, does lead to higher optimal pesticide use under risk aversion. However, uncertainty about other important variables, such as output price and yield, leads to lower optimal levels of pesticide use. Neglect of these variables in most studies has led to the false assumption that pesticides are always risk-reducing inputs. Furthermore, there is evidence that, in general, the pesticide dosage which maximises expected profit is lower under risk than under certainty. Depending on the balance of forces to increase and decrease pesticide use under risk, in many circumstances the net effect of risk on optimal decision making for pest control may be minimal. The effect on risk of information about pest density and other variables (as in integrated pest management programmes) is discussed. Evidence on this issue is mixed. A range of analytical techniques for analysing risk in pest control is reviewed. Throughout the paper, gaps in the existing literature are identified.

show abstract

Economics of biological control of pests

Carlson

¹

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological pest control techniques usually have identifiable costs and constraints that they must overcome before they will be adopted by farmers. Many biological control agents are developed in the public sector and need economic assessments at an early stage. The methods often have hidden costs related to farm labor adjustments or initial costs of development. Living biological controls frequently escape, and they may be disrupted by pesticides, regulations, or farm commodity programs. Pest control registration procedures and small markets also present obstacles. Area-wide implementation programs and changes in incentives for researchers may speed development and adoption of biological controls.

show abstract

Management Strategies for Controlling Soybean Cyst Nematode: An Application of Stochastic Dynamic Programming

Cited by 6 publications

References 11 publications

Pests and pesticides, risk and risk aversion

Pests and pesticides, risk and risk aversion

Pests and pesticides, risk and risk aversion

Economics of biological control of pests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About