Hostname: page-component-55f67697df-twqc4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-24T08:17:14.868Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Profit and Variance Analysis of Cotton Production Technologies and Rotation Crops in Georgia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Archie Flanders ,
Fred C. White ,
W. Don Shurley  and
Steve M. Brown
Archie Flanders
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia, Athens, GA
Fred C. White
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia, Athens, GA
W. Don Shurley
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia, Athens, GA
Steve M. Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, University of Georgia, Athens, GA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Genetically modified cotton varieties have the potential for increasing returns and/or decreasing labor requirements. A nonlinear optimization model is applied to a whole farm analysis for evaluating cotton production technologies. This model maximizes farm utility, composed of expected returns and their variability, at various risk aversion levels in order to evaluate cotton production technologies. Results show that while conventional cotton maximizes utility in a risk-neutral situation, transgenic cotton varieties entered into the optimal solution as higher levels of risk aversion were considered.

Keywords

cotton production technologiesmathematical optimizationrisk aversionwhole farm analysisC61Q16
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , December 2003 , pp. 685 - 694
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, J.R., Dillon, J.L., and Hardaker, B.. Agriculture Decision Analysis. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Babcock, B.A., and Hennessy, D.A.. “Input Demand under Yield and Revenue Insurance.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 78(1996):428–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryant, K.J., Allen, C.T., Bourland, F.M., and Earnest, L.D.. “Cost and Return Comparisons of Roundup Ready and BollGard Cotton Varieties.” 1999 Proceedings—Beltwide Cotton Conferences 1(1999):236–238.Google Scholar
Frontline Systems, Inc. Solver. Incline Village, NV, 2000.Google Scholar
Georgia Agricultural Statistics Service. Georgia Agricultural Facts. Athens, GA, editions for 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000.Google Scholar
Gibson, J.W. IV, Laughlin, D.L., Luttrell, R.C., Parker, D., Reed, J., and Harris, A.. “Comparison of Costs and Returns Associated with Heliothis Resistant Bt Cotton to Non-Resistant Varieties.” 1997 Proceedings—Beltwide Cotton Conferences 1(1997):244–247.Google Scholar
Huang, W.Y., Hewitt, T.I., and Shank, D.. “An Analysis of On-Farm Costs of Timing N Applications to Reduce N Losses.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 23, 2(1998):445–467.Google Scholar
McCarl, B.A., and Bessler, D.A.. “Estimating an Upper Bound on the Pratt Risk Aversion Coefficient When the Utility Function Is Unknown.” Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics 33, 1(April 1989):56–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGriff, D.E., Hudgins, J., Steen, B., and Brown, S.M.. “Comparison of Transgenic and Conventional Cotton Varieties on Deep Sands.” University of Georgia, College of Agriculture, Department of Crop and Soil Science. Internet site: www.griffin.peachnet.edu (Accessed April 15, 2000).Google Scholar
National Agricultural Statistics Service. Census of Agriculture. Washington, DC, 1997.Google Scholar
Sandmo, A. “On the Theory of the Competitive Firm Under Price Uncertainty.” American Economic Review 61, 1(March 1971):65–73.Google Scholar
Shurley, D. “Loan Deficiency Payments for 1998 Cotton.” University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Cooperative Extension Service, October 8, 1998.Google Scholar
Stark, C.R. Jr.. “Economics of Transgenic Cotton: Some Indications Based on Georgia Producers.” 1997 Proceedings—Beltwide Cotton Conferences 1(1997):251–253.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency. “Georgia Report ID: MDR201-R001, State LDP Summary Totals.” Athens, GA, 1997-1999.Google Scholar
University of Georgia. 2000 Cotton Production Guide. Cooperative Extension Service, College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, Athens, GA, December 1999a.Google Scholar
University of Georgia. Crop Enterprise Cost Analysis. Cooperative Extension Service, Agricultural and Applied Economics, Athens, GA, 1998 and 1999b issues.Google Scholar
University of Georgia. Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics. Economic Issues in Agriculture 15, 6(July 1999c).Google Scholar
University of Georgia. Performance Tests. State Variety Testing Program, Georgia Agricultural Experiment Stations, Athens, GA, various issues.Google Scholar
University of Georgia. Using Machinery Costs to Make Decisions. College of Agriculture, March 1991.Google Scholar
Ward, C.W. “Comparison of Conventional and Transgenic Technologies Under Alternative Cultural Practices for Cotton in Georgia.” M.S. thesis. University of Georgia, 2000.Google Scholar
Ward, C.W., Flanders, A., Isendildina, O., and White, F.C.. “Efficiency of Alternative Technologies and Cultural Practices for Cotton in Georgia.” AgBioForum 5, 1(2002):10–13.Google Scholar