Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T05:20:08.967Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Regional Comparison of Risk-Efficient Soybean Marketing Strategies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2016

Cathy S. McKinnell ,
Kandice H. Kahl  and
Charles E. Curtis Jr
Cathy S. McKinnell
Affiliation:
Economic Research Service, USDA
Kandice H. Kahl
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology at Clemson University
Charles E. Curtis Jr
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology at Clemson University
Get access

Abstract

Risk-efficient portfolios from a subset of marketing strategies were identified using Target MOTAD. Portfolios were generated for Illinois, Arkansas, and South Carolina to determine whether regional price and yield characteristics affected the optimal marketing strategy selection during 1972-1985. The results support previous conclusions that the risk borne when following a combination of marketing strategies was less than the risk of any single marketing strategy examined. The results also show that the marketing strategies representing efficient risk-return combinations for a producer in one region were different from the efficient risk-return combinations for a producer in another region. Therefore, generic marketing advice would have produced results less preferred in one region than in another.

Keywords

Target MOTADrisk-efficient portfoliofutures and options contractshedging
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , July 1990 , pp. 167 - 176
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1990

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.)

References

Black, F. “The Pricing of Commodity Contracts.” J. Financial Econ., 3(1976): 167–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolen, K.R. Baker, C.B., and Hinton, R.A.. “Marketing Corn and Soybeans Under Conditions of Market Risk.” Illinois Ag. Econ. 18(1978): 12–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chicago Board of Trade. Options on Agricultural Futures: A Home Study Course, Chicago, 1985:31–32.Google Scholar
Chicago Board of Trade. Statistical Annual Cash and Futures Data: Grains, Forest Products, Energy. Chicago (1972-1985 issues).Google Scholar
Clemson University Cooperative Extension Service. Enterprise Budgets. Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Clemson University, 1985.Google Scholar
Curtis, CE., Pfeiffer, G.H., Lutgen, L.L., and Frank, S.D.. “A Target MOTAD Approach to Marketing Strategy Selection for Soybeans.” N. Central J. Agr. Econ., 9(1987): 195–206.Google Scholar
Economic Report of the President, 1986. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1986.Google Scholar
Farmer, C.M. “Economies of Storage.” In Grain Marketing: A Handbook For the South Carolina Producer, Harris, H.M. and Curtis, C.E., eds., Clemson, SC: Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Clemson University, 1987.Google Scholar
Hinton, R.A. “Cost of Growing Corn and Soybeans, 1985.” Farm Economics, Facts and Opinions. Cooperative Extension Service, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Illinois, 1986.Google Scholar
Holland, D. Purcell, W.D., and Hague, T.. “Mean-Variance Analysis of Alternative Hedging Strategies.” So. J. Agr. Econ., 4(1972): 123–128.Google Scholar
Klinefelter, D.A. Sonka, S.T., and Baker, C.B.. “Selection and Screening of Marketing Options for Risk Evaluation.” Proceedings of the Western Regional Research Project W-149, An Economic Evaluation of Managing Market Risk in Agriculture. Tucson, Arizona, 1980.Google Scholar
Markowitz, H.M. Portfolio Selection: Efficient Diversification of Investments. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1959.Google Scholar
Persuad, T. and Mapp, H.P. Jr. “Analysis of Alternative Production and Marketing Strategies in South Western Oklahoma: A MOTAD Approach.” Proceedings of the Western Regional Research Project W-149, An Economic Evaluation of Managing Market Risk in Agriculture. Tucson, Arizona, 1980.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, George H. “MPS-PC: A Linear Programming System for the IBM Personal Computer: Version 2.1.” Tucson: Research Corporation/Research Software, 1983.Google Scholar
Tauer, Loren W. “Target MOTAD.” Am. J. Agr. Econ., 65(1983):606–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Prices. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, (various issues).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Resources: Agricultural Land Values and Markets, Situation and Outlook Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, (June, 1986).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, (various issues).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Crop Production. Crop Reporting Board, Statistical Reporting Service, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1985.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Usual Planting and Harvesting Dates for U.S. Field Crops. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1984.Google Scholar
University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service. 1985 Soybean Production Cost Estimates. MP244, 1985.Google Scholar
Watts, J. Miles, Held, L., and Helmers, G.. “A Comparison of Target MOTAD to MOTAD.” Canadian J. Agr.Econ., 32(1984):175–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, William W. “Option Price Behavior in Grain Futures Markets.” Proceedings of the NCR-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting and Market Risk Management. Chicago, IL, 1987.Google Scholar
Wolf, A. “Fundamentals of Commodity Options on Futures.” J. Fu. Markets, 2(1982):391–408.Google Scholar