Who buys crop insurance? Predictors of the participation gap between organic and conventional farms

Belasco, Eric J.; Fuller, Kate B.

doi:10.1002/aepp.13187

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To gain additional insights on burger selection rates and differences across consumers, we explore selection behavior using a binary logit model. The binary burger selection is modeled as:

y_{i}^{*} goodbreak= β X_{i} goodbreak+ ε_{i}

where

y_{i}^{*}

is the expected utility for individual i for Beyond Meat compared to beef;

X_{i}

is a matrix of treatment indicator variables (relative to the omitted base treatment) and covariates for individual i , and

ε_{i}

is a random error term (Belasco & Fuller, 2021; Greene, 2007). The distribution of

y_{i}^{*}

is unobserved and we observe the discrete variable

y_{i}

such that

y_{i} goodbreak= ({, \begin{matrix} 1 if y_{i}^{*} > 0 \\ 0 otherwise \end{matrix})

Here

y_{i} = 1

reflects selection of Beyond Meat Burger meal and

y_{i} = 0

reflects selection of the beef burger meal.…”

Section: Overview Of Data and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…where y Ã i is the expected utility for individual i for Beyond Meat compared to beef; X i is a matrix of treatment indicator variables (relative to the omitted base treatment) and covariates for individual i, and ε i is a random error term (Belasco & Fuller, 2021;Greene, 2007). The distribution of y Ã i is unobserved and we observe the discrete variable y i such that…”

Section: Overview Of Data and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Market potential of new plant‐based protein alternatives: Insights from four US consumer experiments

Tonsor

Lusk

Schroeder

2022

Applied Eco Perspectives Pol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reports results from four studies determining the US market potential for plant‐based meat alternatives in different contexts and settings. The first study shows that a pair‐wise choice between beef and a plant‐based alternative was not significantly affected by the presence of nutrition facts panels or ingredient lists. A second study, framed as a food service meal choice, reveals that the introduction of a plant‐based burger has roughly the same effect on beef sales as does the presence of a chicken wrap. The final two studies estimate own‐ and cross‐price elasticities of retail demand. We find small cross‐price elasticities between plant‐based patties and ground beef. Each of the aforementioned results varies for regular meat consumers as compared to consumers who self‐identify with an alternative diet such as flexitarian, vegetarian, or vegan. Combined, this study increases understanding of the impact presented by plant‐based offerings in the US protein market.

show abstract

“…To gain additional insights on burger selection rates and differences across consumers, we explore selection behavior using a binary logit model. The binary burger selection is modeled as:

y_{i}^{*} goodbreak= β X_{i} goodbreak+ ε_{i}

where

y_{i}^{*}

is the expected utility for individual i for Beyond Meat compared to beef;

X_{i}

is a matrix of treatment indicator variables (relative to the omitted base treatment) and covariates for individual i , and

ε_{i}

is a random error term (Belasco & Fuller, 2021; Greene, 2007). The distribution of

y_{i}^{*}

is unobserved and we observe the discrete variable

y_{i}

such that

y_{i} goodbreak= ({, \begin{matrix} 1 if y_{i}^{*} > 0 \\ 0 otherwise \end{matrix})

Here

y_{i} = 1

reflects selection of Beyond Meat Burger meal and

y_{i} = 0

reflects selection of the beef burger meal.…”

Section: Overview Of Data and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Overview Of Data and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Market potential of new plant‐based protein alternatives: Insights from four US consumer experiments

Tonsor

Lusk

Schroeder

2022

Applied Eco Perspectives Pol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The crop insurance demand response to premium subsidies: Evidence from U.S. Agriculture

Tsiboe

Turner

2023

Food Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fitting a square peg in a round hole: Applying U.S. farm policy to organic farms

Whelan,

Orlander,

Balsam

et al. 2024

J. Agric. Food Syst. Community Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The suite of U.S. federal farm programs available to organic farmers includes conservation programs through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), risk management through crop insurance, and the Organic Certification Cost Share Program (commonly referred to as Organic Cost Share or just Cost Share). Of these programs, the Organic Cost Share is the most widely used. Many organic farmers do not enroll in conservation programs or purchase crop insurance. The underutilization of federal farm programs by organic producers is well known in the organic community, but there is a lack of systematic evidence about the rationale for not applying for or using programs. Using qualitative data collected through structured interviews, we find that many organic producers want to participate in the Organic Cost Share, EQIP, CSP, and crop insurance. Many are successful, but others face institutional, cultural, and programmatic barriers that prevent them from participating. A key recommendation from this study is the creation of specialized, highly trained crop insurance and conservation agents with expertise in organic farming systems to facilitate the application process and program use for conservation programs and crop insurance. The Organic Cost Share Program would have more impact if its funds were used to support beginning organic farmers in addition to small-scale farm operators.

show abstract

Who buys crop insurance? Predictors of the participation gap between organic and conventional farms

Cited by 3 publications

References 19 publications

Market potential of new plant‐based protein alternatives: Insights from four US consumer experiments

Market potential of new plant‐based protein alternatives: Insights from four US consumer experiments

The crop insurance demand response to premium subsidies: Evidence from U.S. Agriculture

Fitting a square peg in a round hole: Applying U.S. farm policy to organic farms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About