Two seemingly unrelated topics are discussed—an outlook for biofuels in the southern United States, along with an overview of the important role that information technology is playing in the fuel ethanol industry. The outlook discussion is limited to issues involving the two principal biofuels, fuel ethanol and biodiesel, and their respective feed stocks, corn and soybean oil. The two topics are linked with a description of how information technology (IT) has enabled the development of the fuel ethanol franchise and a discussion of how IT is changing the very nature of biofuel operations.

This study examines the rapidly expanding biofuels industry and identifies challenges for producer-owned biofuel projects. The U.S. ethanol industry has been growing rapidly, and biodiesel production is poised for similar growth. Producer involvement is driven by the desire to add value to farm commodities and the impact of biofuel projects on local grain prices. Local state and federal incentives have also stimulated producer interest. The long-run profitability of biofuel projects is driven by feedstock availability, access to market centers for biofuels, access to markets for coproducts, and utility costs and availability. The rapidly increasing size and scale of ethanol and biodiesel plants make it difficult for producers to fund these projects. Additionally, the development and adoption of new non-grain biofuel technologies may negate some comparative advantages of producers, such as feedstock cost and availability. The geographic expansion of biofuel projects into grain deficit regions will also create additional challenges.

This study summarizes research on farm-, local-, regional-, and macro-level economic effects of ethanol production. Given current production levels, the ethanol production industry annually employees approximately 3,500 workers, pays out nearly $132 million in worker salaries, generates over $110 million in local taxes, and takes in some $2 billion in government incentive payments. Projections for a 60 million gallon per year ethanol plant indicate an annual increase in corn usage of 21 million bushels, a one-time capitalization of $75 million, an increase in local corn prices of between $0.06/bushel and $0.12/bushel, a 54 direct and a 210 indirect jobs created, an increase in local tax revenues of $1.2 million, a decrease in federal commodity program outlays of $30 million, and an increase in ethanol production incentives (federal only) of around $30.5 million.

The economic competitiveness of biobased industries is discussed by comparing the South relative to other regions of the United States and biomass as a feedstock source relative to fossil fuels such as coal and petroleum. An estimate of the biomass resource base is provided. Estimated changes in the agricultural sector over time resulting from the development of a large-scale biobased industry are reported, and a study on the potential to produce electricity from biomass compared with coal in the southern United States is reviewed. A biobased industry can increase net farm income and enhance economic development and job creation.

Highly turbulent environments require firms to act entrepreneurially. The returns to entrepreneurial activities are known as entrepreneurial rents. Following the payments perspective, these rents are allocated to the entrepreneurial resources of the firm as factor payments. However, unlike other factor payments, little is known about how to value these types of rents. An analysis of the economics and management literature reveals that entrepreneurial rents are a return to alertness, subjective judgment, asset control, and uncertainty bearing. Furthermore, entrepreneurial rents are noncontractible and temporary. This paper introduces two complementary valuation models that capture these characteristics and that explicitly impute value to various entrepreneurial activities.

This paper introduces and defines the concept of collective entrepreneurship. A review of the defensive single-level rent-seeking objective of traditional agricultural cooperatives is introduced followed by an analysis of recent studies documenting a shift in the objective functions of producers jointly integrating toward more multiple-level rent-seeking entities. This process of shifting from market failure-ameliorating collective action mechanisms toward rent-seeking group action organizations is labeled collective entrepreneurship. The justification for introducing this concept is based on the Olsonian premise that rational, self-interested individuals will not act to achieve their common or group interests without coercion or selective incentives.

Is entrepreneurship an innate ability or an acquired skill? Can entrepreneurial acumen be achieved and enhanced through education and training, or are certain people “born” to be entrepreneurs or to act entrepreneurially? Economists and management theorists give widely divergent answers to these questions. This paper reviews the major approaches to teaching entrepreneurship, primarily at the undergraduate level, and relates them to economic theories of entrepreneurship. Surprisingly, we find little connection between the leading approaches to entrepreneurship education and economists' understanding of the entrepreneurial function. We assess likely explanations for the lack of contact between these two groups of scholars and suggest possible improvements.

Two of the three papers presented in this session illustrate the challenges of defining the boundaries of entrepreneurship, and the other extends our perceptions about the concept to encompass interorganizational relationships. Together, they provide a reason to hope that entrepreneurship can enter the language and thinking of agricultural economists and influence our research, teaching, and outreach activities. The work presented by Ross and Westgren and Klein and Bullock provide good reference material for students and scholars interested in the evolution of economists' thinking about entrepreneurship. Unfortunately, they, like many before them, fail to address the pertinent gap in the literature: the boundary of entrepreneurship. But they can be forgiven because they make an implicit assumption about the absence of a clear boundary and proceed to address their core questions: i.e., can we teach entrepreneurship and what are an entrepreneur's rewards?

The main forces of trade agreements and budgets will certainly play a strong role in driving the 2007 farm bill debate. Other factors ranging from the political makeup of Congress to the growing level of rhetoric calling for reform, from the cost-price squeeze facing producers to the emergence of nonprogram commodities at the table will also play, at this time, uncertain roles in the development of the final legislation. These various forces and factors are assessed and projections as to the final outcome of the debate hesitatingly provided.