{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/35767"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/35767","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Risk Analysis of Adopting Conservation Practices on a Representative Peanut-Cotton Farm in Virginia","abstract":"The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs of reducing pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment losses of a representative risk-neutral and risk-averse peanut-cotton farmer in Southeast Virginia. Five currently popular rotations and eight alternative conservation rotations are evaluated for the representative farm. The Erosion-Productivity Impact Calculator (EPIC) model is used to simulate pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil loss from each rotation using actual rainfall and temperature data from the study area. A Target-MOTAD mathematical programming model, REPVAFARM, is developed and solved with GAMS. The objective of the farmer is to maximize expected net return, while meeting a target income with certain allowable expected shortfall from the income target. The farmer is also constrained by land, labor, peanut quota, and levels of pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil losses. Major findings of this study are: reducing pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil losses imposes costs to the farmer regardless of his risk attitude, with costs ranking from high to low in the order of reducing all pollutant losses, reducing nitrogen losses, reducing phosphorus losses, reducing soil losses, and reducing pesticide losses. Costs of reducing pollutant losses are higher for more risk-averse farmers than for less risk-averse and risk-neutral farmers implying that risk-aversion is an obstacle to the adoption of alternative conservation practices. Reducing pesticide losses has little impact on other pollutants. Reducing pesticide and nitrogen losses simultaneously achieves similar reductions in soil loss and phosphorus loss.","abstract_html":"The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs of reducing pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment losses of a representative risk-neutral and risk-averse peanut-cotton farmer in Southeast Virginia. Five currently popular rotations and eight alternative conservation rotations are evaluated for the representative farm. The Erosion-Productivity Impact Calculator (EPIC) model is used to simulate pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil loss from each rotation using actual rainfall and temperature data from the study area. A Target-MOTAD mathematical programming model, REPVAFARM, is developed and solved with GAMS. The objective of the farmer is to maximize expected net return, while meeting a target income with certain allowable expected shortfall from the income target. The farmer is also constrained by land, labor, peanut quota, and levels of pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil losses. Major findings of this study are: reducing pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil losses imposes costs to the farmer regardless of his risk attitude, with costs ranking from high to low in the order of reducing all pollutant losses, reducing nitrogen losses, reducing phosphorus losses, reducing soil losses, and reducing pesticide losses. Costs of reducing pollutant losses are higher for more risk-averse farmers than for less risk-averse and risk-neutral farmers implying that risk-aversion is an obstacle to the adoption of alternative conservation practices. Reducing pesticide losses has little impact on other pollutants. Reducing pesticide and nitrogen losses simultaneously achieves similar reductions in soil loss and phosphorus loss.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Peng, Wei"],"institution":"Virginia Tech","degree_name":"Master of Science","degree_level":"masters","degree_discipline":"Agricultural and Applied Economics","degree_department":"Agricultural and Applied Economics","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["Bosch, Darrell J."],"committee_members":["Taylor, Daniel B.","Pease, James W."],"year":1997,"date_issued":"1997-09-26","date_published":"1997-09-26","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:20:43Z","subjects":["Grains","Expected Utility","Target-MOTAD","Nonpoint Source Pollution"],"languages":[],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-111997-112257"],"render_values":[{"text":"etd-111997-112257","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/35767","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["Bosch, Darrell J."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Taylor, Daniel B.","Pease, James W."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Agricultural and Applied Economics"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Peng, Wei"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-03-14T20:48:09Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-03-14T20:48:09Z","1999-01-07"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["1997-09-26"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Tech"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Agricultural and Applied Economics"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Grains","Expected Utility","Target-MOTAD","Nonpoint Source Pollution"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-111997-112257"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/35767"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs of reducing pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment losses of a representative risk-neutral and risk-averse peanut-cotton farmer in Southeast Virginia. Five currently popular rotations and eight alternative conservation rotations are evaluated for the representative farm. The Erosion-Productivity Impact Calculator (EPIC) model is used to simulate pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil loss from each rotation using actual rainfall and temperature data from the study area. A Target-MOTAD mathematical programming model, REPVAFARM, is developed and solved with GAMS. The objective of the farmer is to maximize expected net return, while meeting a target income with certain allowable expected shortfall from the income target. The farmer is also constrained by land, labor, peanut quota, and levels of pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil losses. Major findings of this study are: reducing pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil losses imposes costs to the farmer regardless of his risk attitude, with costs ranking from high to low in the order of reducing all pollutant losses, reducing nitrogen losses, reducing phosphorus losses, reducing soil losses, and reducing pesticide losses. Costs of reducing pollutant losses are higher for more risk-averse farmers than for less risk-averse and risk-neutral farmers implying that risk-aversion is an obstacle to the adoption of alternative conservation practices. Reducing pesticide losses has little impact on other pollutants. Reducing pesticide and nitrogen losses simultaneously achieves similar reductions in soil loss and phosphorus loss."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Risk Analysis of Adopting Conservation Practices on a Representative Peanut-Cotton Farm in Virginia"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["Bosch, Darrell J."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Taylor, Daniel B.","Pease, James W."],"dc:contributor.department":["Agricultural and Applied Economics"],"dc:creator":["Peng, Wei"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-03-14T20:48:09Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-03-14T20:48:09Z","1999-01-07"],"dc:date.issued":["1997-09-26"],"dc:description.abstract":["The objective of this study is to evaluate the costs of reducing pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment losses of a representative risk-neutral and risk-averse peanut-cotton farmer in Southeast Virginia. Five currently popular rotations and eight alternative conservation rotations are evaluated for the representative farm. The Erosion-Productivity Impact Calculator (EPIC) model is used to simulate pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil loss from each rotation using actual rainfall and temperature data from the study area. A Target-MOTAD mathematical programming model, REPVAFARM, is developed and solved with GAMS. The objective of the farmer is to maximize expected net return, while meeting a target income with certain allowable expected shortfall from the income target. The farmer is also constrained by land, labor, peanut quota, and levels of pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil losses. Major findings of this study are: reducing pesticide, nitrogen, phosphorus, and soil losses imposes costs to the farmer regardless of his risk attitude, with costs ranking from high to low in the order of reducing all pollutant losses, reducing nitrogen losses, reducing phosphorus losses, reducing soil losses, and reducing pesticide losses. Costs of reducing pollutant losses are higher for more risk-averse farmers than for less risk-averse and risk-neutral farmers implying that risk-aversion is an obstacle to the adoption of alternative conservation practices. Reducing pesticide losses has little impact on other pollutants. Reducing pesticide and nitrogen losses simultaneously achieves similar reductions in soil loss and phosphorus loss."],"dc:description.degree":["Master of Science"],"dc:identifier.other":["etd-111997-112257"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/35767"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Tech"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:subject":["Grains","Expected Utility","Target-MOTAD","Nonpoint Source Pollution"],"dc:title":["Risk Analysis of Adopting Conservation Practices on a Representative Peanut-Cotton Farm in Virginia"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Agricultural and Applied Economics"],"thesis:degree_level":["masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Science"],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:20:43Z"}