GOALS OF BEEF CATTLE AND DAIRY PRODUCERS: A COMPARISON OF THE FUZZY PAIR-WISE METHOD AND SIMPLE RANKING PROCEDURE

Beef and dairy producers' goal hierarchies over seven goals are compared using fuzzy pair-wise comparison and simple ranking methods. Results show the two methods do not provide similar goal rankings. Producers place greater importance on some goals than others, but are not in agreement as to the relative importance of goals.Livestock Production/Industries,

Record-Keeping Technology Adoption in the Louisiana Dairy Industry

Louisiana farmers were surveyed to determine their adoption of information and record-keeping technologies, including the internet, DHIA, use of financial measures, and frequency of use of computerized records. Factors influencing adoption included having a family successor, overall technology adoption propensity, diversification, off-farm income, college degree, and others.Livestock Production/Industries, Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies,

Processor Willingness to Adopt a Crawfish Peeling Machine: An Application of Technology Adoption under Uncertainty

Crawfish processors’ ex ante adoption rates of three hypothetical crawfish peeling machines are assessed using a polychotomous-choice elicitation format. Adoption rates would likely range from 23% to 70%, depending upon which machine was offered and whether it was purchased or leased. Processors most likely to adopt are determined using ordered probit analysis. Likely adopters would be larger, more diversified processors with greater resources and longer planning horizons.crawfish, ex ante technology adoption, peeling machine, Agribusiness, Farm Management, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety, Industrial Organization, D81, Q16,

Beef Producer Preferences and Purchase Decisions for Livestock Price Insurance

Personal interviews were conducted with beef cattle producers in Louisiana to determine their preferences and purchase decisions for livestock price insurance. Conjoint analysis was utilized to determine the importance of selected attributes of insurance policies for these producers. The characteristics of producers who prefer given attributes were also identified. Producers rated products given four economic situations to evaluate. A two-limit tobit model was used to estimate the part worth utility values for each attribute. Univariate probit models were estimated to evaluate the influence of producer characteristics on purchase decisions.conjoint, livestock price insurance, ordered probit, two-limit tobit, Agribusiness, Demand and Price Analysis, Livestock Production/Industries,

Preferences for Livestock Revenue Insurance Among Beef Producers

Personal interviews were conducted with 52 Louisiana cow-calf producers to determine their preferences for a livestock revenue insurance (LRI) product. Conjoint analysis was utilized to determine the importance of selected attributes of insurance policies for these producers. Two-limit tobit models were estimated. Producers were segmented using cluster analysis based upon preferences for LRI product attributes. A multinomial logit model was used to determine differences between characteristics of producers in each cluster. Producers generally preferred higher-premium, zero-deductible products; 180-day policy length; the state price series; and an in-person method of marketing. Cluster analysis yielded three groups of preferencesPersonal interviews were conducted with 52 Louisiana cow-calf producers to determine their preferences for a livestock revenue insurance (LRI) product. Conjoint analysis was utilized to determine the importance of selected attributes of insurance policies for these producers. Two-limit tobit models were estimated. Producers were segmented using cluster analysis based upon preferences for LRI product attributes. A multinomial logit model was used to determine differences between characteristics of producers in each cluster. Producers generally preferred higher-premium, zero-deductible products, 180-day policy length, the state price series, and an in-person method of marketing. Cluster analysis yielded three groups of preferences, Agribusiness, Livestock Production/Industries,

PROJECTED COSTS AND RETURNS FOR BEEF CATTLE, DAIRY, BROILER AND FORAGE CROP PRODUCTION IN LOUISIANA, 2001

This report presents projected costs and returns for beef cattle, dairy, broiler and forage crop production in Louisiana for 2001. Data for this report are based on Louisiana agricultural Experiment Station research results and selected surveys. The procedure used in this report was to apply new machinery and other current input price data to production practice data. This report is organized as follows: Tables 1 - 4 present forage requirements assumed for beef cattle production and summaries of costs and returns for each of the enterprises examined in this report. Tables 5 - 7 report breakeven selling prices for each of the products produced from these enterprises. Budgets in this publication are presented in two sections. The first section (tables with `A' designation) presents budgets showing a summary of estimated costs and returns for each enterprise. The second section (tables with `B' designation) presents cost budgets showing detailed costs and labor requirements by operation for each enterprise. The detailed cost budgets are presented in the same sequence and bear the same table numbers for each enterprise presented in the first section. For these enterprise budgets, expenses are itemized as fixed and variable, and returns above direct and total specified expenses are also calculated. Each of the budgets incorporates overhead costs as a residual claimant. The total overhead costs for a firm are related to tenure and size of business. The overhead costs included in this report are estimated on a per acre basis, and thus are included in enterprise budgets on a per acre of land use basis. Land use for beef and dairy is calculated as acres of open permanent pasture plus acres used for silage or summer annual forages. Since livestock enterprises are combinations of both crop and livestockproduction activities and some pasture crops are double cropped, particular attention is called to the accounting procedures used. No overhead is charged to forage production activities. Therefore, overhead costs appear directly as a residual cost in beef cattle and dairy enterprise budgets. Wintergrazed weanling calves do not include overhead charges since it is assumed that all wintergrazed crops would be double cropped on either pasture or cropland. Broiler budgets do not include overhead charges. A land opportunity cost is charged for livestock enterprises. This is interpreted as the amount that would be charged for the land if it were being rented to another producer. It assumes that pasture is rented at $15/acre. A land opportunity cost is not charged for broilers.Farm Management,

PROJECTED COSTS AND RETURNS FOR CRAWFISH AND CATFISH PRODUCTION IN LOUISIANA, 2001.

Aquaculture production enterprises, like other farm enterprises, require advanced planning to make production and marketing management decisions that are likely to result in profits. The purpose of this report is to provide production cost estimates for selected aquaculture enterprises to assist aquaculture producers in making production decisions and obtaining adequate financing. Aquaculture enterprises and their associated costs differ considerably among producers and resource situations. The projected costs presented here should not be interpreted as averages for producers in the industry. The purpose of the cost projections is to provide guidelines whereby producers and others with an interest in aquaculture production costs can make cost estimates appropriate to their unique situation that will facilitate sound management decisions. Data used in development of the budgets is a combination of information obtained directly from producers, Louisiana Cooperative Extension Service Specialists and Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station Scientists. Current machinery and other input price data were combined with production practice data using the Microcomputer Enterprise Budget Generator developed at Mississippi State University. Fixed costs were estimated based on typical rates of use and sizes of operations. Production budget estimates are presented on a 'per acre' basis to facilitate using the estimates for different size operations. Overhead costs associated with operation of the farm business have been allocated as a residual claimant on a per acre basis in the enterprise budgets, but have not been included in the computation of breakeven selling prices.Farm Management,

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RISK PREFERENCE ELICITATION PROCEDURES USING MAIL SURVEY RESULTS

Research Methods/ Statistical Methods, Risk and Uncertainty,

PROJECTED COSTS AND RETURNS FOR BEEF CATTLE, DAIRY PRODUCTION, SWINE PRODUCTION AND FORAGE CROPS IN LOUISIANA, 1997

Data for this report are based on Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station research results and selected surveys. The procedure used in this report was to apply new machinery and other current input price data to production practice data. Production practice and performance data for beef cattle and associated forage crops are based on surveys of beef cattle producers supplemented with research records for beef herds maintained at six branch stations of the Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station.Production practice data for dairy production are based on unpublished survey data, Cooperative Extension Service recommendations and records from the LSU dairy herd.Farm Management,

The Economics of Organic Versus Conventional Cow-calf Production

Costs, returns, and profitability of cow-calf farms that are organic or transitioning to organic are compared with those of cow-calf farms that are non-organic. A method of matching samples is used for the comparison. Results suggest higher cost of organic production due to higher unpaid labor, taxes and insurance, and overhead costs.Matching Samples, Profit, Costs, Farm Management, Production Economics,