Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Manure Transfers in the Midwest and Factors Affecting Adoption of Manure Testing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2015

Sarah Ali
Affiliation:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, Washington, DC
Laura McCann
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
Jessica Allspach
Affiliation:
Jessica Allspach is an accountant, Chariton Valley, Macon, Missouri
Get access

Abstract

Using manure as a substitute for commercial fertilizer could potentially reduce fertilizer costs and also reduce non-point source pollution. Livestock farmers in Missouri and Iowa were surveyed regarding their manure management practices. Eighty-one percent of turkey farmers versus 5% of beef farmers transferred manure to other farmers. Fifty-one percent of farmers who transferred manure indicated it had been tested. Factors decreasing adoption included higher off-farm incomes, solid versus liquid manure, and more animal units per acre. Factors increasing adoption included distance transferred, a contract for the manure, payment, and thinking that manure testing was profitable.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Abdalla, C.W., and Lawton, J.L.Environmental Issues in Animal Agriculture.” Choices 21,3(2006):177–82.Google Scholar
Asche, F., Roll, K., and Tveteras, R.Economic Inefficiency and Environmental Impact: An Application to Aquaculture Production.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 58(2009):93105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benson, V.W., Farrand, T.D., and Young, R.E.Graphically Speaking: Don't Call it Waste: Phosphorus Available.” Choices 15,3(2000):4041.Google Scholar
Bosch, D.J., and Napit, K.B.Economics of Transporting Poultry Litter to Achieve More Effective Use as Fertilizer.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 47,4(1992):342–46.Google Scholar
Carreira, R.I., Young, K.B., Goodwin, H.L. Jr., and Wailes, E.J.How Far Can Poultry Litter Go? A New Technology for Litter Transport.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 39,3(2007):611–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, A.R. and Budumura, Y. “Poultry Litter Use and Transport Survey in Harvey and Pendleton Counties: A Summary Report”. MAWP 0603, Mid-Atlantic Regional Water Program, August 2005.Google Scholar
Contant, C.K., and Korsching, P.F.Farmers' Commitment to Continued Use of the Late Spring Soil Nitrogen Test.” American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 12,1(1997):2027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, J.C., and Keim, R.W.Incentive Payments to Encourage Farmer Adoption of Water Quality Protection Practices.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 78,1(1996):5464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daberkow, S.G., and McBride, W.D.SocioEconomic Profiles of Early Adopters of Precision Technologies.” Journal of Agribusiness. 16,2(1998):151–68.Google Scholar
Dillman, D.A.Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2000.Google Scholar
Dorfman, J.H.Modeling Multiple Adoption Decisions in a Joint Framework.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 78(1996):547–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dou, Z., Gallilgan, D.T., Ramberg, C.F. Jr., Meadows, C., and Ferguson, J.DA Survey of Dairy Farming in Pennsylvania: Nutrient Management Practices and Implications.” Journal of Dairy Science 84,4(2001):966–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feder, G., Just, R., and Zilberman, D.Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries: A Survey.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 33,2(1985):255–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleming, R.A., Babcock, B.A., and Wang, E.Resource or Waste? The Economics of Swine Manure Storage and Management.” Review of Agricultural Economics 20,1(1998):96113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fughe, K.O., and Kascak, C.A.Adoption and Diffusion of Natural-Resource Conserving Agricultural Technology.” Review of Agricultural Economics 23,2(2001):386403.Google Scholar
Gedikoglu, H., and McCann, L.Adoption of Win-Win, Environment-Oriented and Profit-Oriented Practices Among Livestock Farmers.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 67, 3(2012):218–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gedikoglu, H., McCann, L., and Artz, G.Off-Farm Employment Effects on Adoption of Nutrient Management Practices.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 40,2(2011):293306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, R.C., and Bromley, D.W.Agricultural Runoff as a Nonpoint Externality: A Theoretical Development.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 64,3(1982):547–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habron, G.B.Adoption of Conservation Practices by Agricultural Landowners in Three Oregon Watersheds.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 59,3(2004):109–15.Google Scholar
Hall, L.M., Paudel, K.P., Gauthier, W.M., and Westra, J.V. “Decision to Adopt and Exit Best Management Practices by Dairy Farmers.” Paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Portland, Oregon, July 29-August 1, 2007.Google Scholar
Halstead, J.M., Kramer, R.A., and Batie, S.S.Logit Analysis of Information in Animal Waste Management.” Journal of Production Agriculture 3,4(1990):540–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, O., and Moore, J.Incomplete Contracts and Renegotiation.” Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society 56,4(1988):755–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoag, D.L., Lacy, M.G., and Davis, J.Pressures and Preferences Affecting Willingness to Apply Beef Manure on Crops in the Colorado High Plains.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 29,3(2004):461–80.Google Scholar
Hoag, D.L., and Roka, F.M.Environmental Policy and Swine Manure Management: Waste Not or Want Not?American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 10,4(1995):163–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, K.L., Roland, R.K., Bazen, E.F., Menard, J.R., and English, B.C.Farmer Willingness to Supply Poultry Litter for Energy Conversion and to Invest in an Energy Conversion Cooperative.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 42,1(2010):105–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, N., McBride, W.D., and Ribaudo, M. “Changes in Manure Management in the Hog Sector.” Paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Orlando, Florida, July 27-29, 2008.Google Scholar
Kim, S., Gillespie, J., and Paudel, K. “Count Data Analysis of the Adoption of Best Management Practices in Beef Cattle Production.” Paper presented at the Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meetings, Little Rock, Arkansas, February 5-9, 2005.Google Scholar
Knowler, D., and Bradshaw, B.Farmer's Adoption of Conservation Agriculture: A Review and Synthesis of Recent Research.” Food Policy 32,1(2007):2548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambert, D., Sullivan, P., Claassen, R., and Foreman, L. “Conservation-Compatible Practices and Programs: Who Participates?” Report No. 14. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, February 2006.Google Scholar
Liu, Y., Zhang, J., and Jiang, D. “Factors Affecting Reduction of Fertilizer Application by Farmers: Empirical Study with Data from Jianghan Plain in Hubei Province.” Paper presented at the International Association of Agricultural Economists Conference, Beijing, China, August 16-22, 2009.Google Scholar
Lory, J.Personal Communication. University of Missouri-Columbia, January 2012.Google Scholar
Lory, J.A., and Kallenbach, R.Managing High Fertilizer Prices on Pastures.” Integrated Pest and Crop Management 18,1(2008):2.Google Scholar
Lynne, G.D., Shonkwiler, J.S., and Rola, L.R.Attitudes and Farmer Conservation Behavior.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 70,1(1988):1219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Motavalli, P.Personal Communication. University of Missouri-Columbia, June 2011.Google Scholar
Norwood, F., Luter, R., and Massey, R.Asymmetric Willingness-to-Pay Distributions for Livestock Manure.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 30,3(2005):431–48.Google Scholar
Nowak, P., Shepard, R., and Madison, F.Farmers and Manure Management: A Critical Analysis.” Animal Waste Utilization: Effective Use of Manure as a Soil Resource. Hatfield, J.L. and Stewart, B.A., eds. Chelsea, MI: Ann Arbor Press, 1998.Google Scholar
Nunez, J., and McCann, L.Determinants of Manure Application by Crop Farmers.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 63,5(2008):312–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Donoghue, E., MacDonald, J., and Nehring, R. “At What Rate Do Farmers Substitute Manure for Commercial Fertilizers?” Paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Providence, Rhode Island, July 24-27, 2005.Google Scholar
Pannell, D.J., Marshall, G.R., Barr, N., Curtis, A., Vanclay, F., and Wilkinson, R.Understanding and Promoting Adoption of Conservation Practices by Rural Landholders.” Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46,11(2006):1407–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prokopy, L.S., Floress, K., Klotthor-Weinkauf, D., and Baumgart-Getz, A.Determinants of Agricultural Best Management Practice Adoption: Evidence from the Literature.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 63,5(2008):300–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rieck-Hinz, A.Personal Communication. Iowa State University, March 2012.Google Scholar
Ribaudo, M., Delgado, J., Hansen, L., Livingston, M., Mosheim, R., and Williamson, J. “Nitrogen in Agricultural Systems: Implications for Conservation Policy.” Economic Research Report No. 127. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, 2011.Google Scholar
Ribaudo, M., Gollehon, N., Aillery, M., Kaplan, J., Johansson, R., Agapoff, J., Christensen, L., Breneman, V., and Peters, M. “Manure Management for Water Quality: Costs to Animal Feeding Operations of Applying Manure Nutrients to Lands.” Pub. No. (AER-824). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, 2003.Google Scholar
Ribaudo, M., and Johansson, R. “2.2 Water Quality: Impacts of Agriculture.” In: Agricultural Resources and Environmental Indicators, 2006 Edition Keith Wiebe and Noel Gollehon, Editors. Economic Information Bulletin No. (EIB-16) U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, 2006.Google Scholar
Rogers, E.M.Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed. New York: Free Press, 2003.Google Scholar
Schnitkey, G., and Miranda, M.The Impact of Pollution Controls on Livestock-Crop Producers.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 18,1(1993):2536.Google Scholar
Shelanski, H.A., and Klein, P.G.Empirical Research in Transaction Cost Economics: A Review and Assessment.” Journal of Law Economics and Organization 11,2(1995):335–61.Google Scholar
Sheriff, G.Efficient Waste? Why Farmers Over-Apply Nutrients and the Implications for Policy Design.” Review of Agricultural Economics 27,4(2005):542–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R.A., Schwarz, G.E., and Alexander, R.B.SPARROW Surface Water-Quality Modeling Nutrients in Watersheds of the Conterminous United States: Model Predictions for Total Nitrogen (TN) and Total Phosphorous (TP). 1997. Internet site: http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/sparrow/wrr97/results.html (Accessed June 27, 2004).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture National Resources Conservation Service. Costs Associated with Development and Implementation of Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans: Part 1—Nutrient Management, Land Treatment, Manure and Wastewater Handling and Storage, and Recordkeeping. Washington, DC: National Resources Conservation Service, 2003.Google Scholar
Van Dyke, L.S., Pease, J.W., Bosch, D.J., and Baker, J.C.Nutrient Management Planning on Four Virginia Livestock Farms: Impacts on Net Income and Nutrient Losses.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 54,2(1999):499505.Google Scholar
Van Horn, H.H.Factors Affecting Manure Quantity, Quality, and Use.” Proceedings of the Mid-South Ruminant Nutrition Conference, Texas Animal Nutrition Council Dallas-Ft. Worth, May 7-8, 1998, pp. 920.Google Scholar
Walton, J.C., Lambert, D.M., Roberts, R.K., Larson, J.A., English, B.C., Larkin, S.L., Martin, S.W., Marra, M.C., Paxton, K.W., and Reeves, J.M.Adoption and Abandonment of Precision Soil Sampling in Cotton Production.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 33,3(2008):428–48.Google Scholar
Wang, E., and Sparling, E.Economics of Widespread Manure Application to Irrigated Crops: Raw and Composted Feedlot Manure in Eastern Colorado.” American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 10,4(1995):167–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, R.D.Prosocial Behavior: Private Contributions to Agriculture's Impact on the Environment.” Land Economics 72,2(1996):231–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, O.E.Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations.” The Journal of Law & Economics 22,2(1979):233–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wooldridge, J.M.Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2002.Google Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 29 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 23rd January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-76cb886bbf-pdn9z Total loading time: 0.277 Render date: 2021-01-23T15:29:13.601Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Manure Transfers in the Midwest and Factors Affecting Adoption of Manure Testing
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Manure Transfers in the Midwest and Factors Affecting Adoption of Manure Testing
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Manure Transfers in the Midwest and Factors Affecting Adoption of Manure Testing
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *