Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T02:15:20.278Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Farming Exit Decision by Age Group: Analysis of Tobacco Buyout Impact in Kentucky

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2015

Helen Pushkarskaya  and
Dmitry Vedenov
Helen Pushkarskaya
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
Dmitry Vedenov
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Get access

Abstract

This article analyzes factors that affected the decision to exit tobacco production in the wake of the tobacco buyout program using the data collected through a survey of Kentucky tobacco farmers. Using the Heuristic logistic regression model, we find that the decision to exit tobacco growing was affected by efficiency considerations, availability of off-farm employment, and exit barriers. Availability of off-farm employment had the strongest effect on farmers younger than 46, while the effect of variables measuring efficiency and exit barriers seemed to be more uniform across age groups. Based on the results we suggest several policy interventions.

Keywords

age groupindustry exittobacco buyouttobacco farmingC25D21E24J00J11J24J43Q18R23
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , December 2009 , pp. 653 - 662
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2009

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

Beach, R.H., Richmond, D.W., Austin, W.D., and Jones., A.S. “How Will Tobacco Farmers Respond to the Quota Buyout? Findings from a Survey of North Carolina Tobacco Farmers.” Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Orlando, Florida, February 5–8, 2006.Google Scholar
Boehlje, M. “Alternative Models of Structural Change in Agriculture and Related Industries.” Agribusiness 8,3(1992):219–31.Google Scholar
Bragg, L.A., and Dalton., T.J. “Factors Affecting the Decision to Exit Dairy Farming: A Two-Stage Regression Analysis.” Journal of Dairy Science 87(2004):3092–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Local Area Unemployment Statistics.” Online Database, 2008. Internet site: http://www.bls.gov/LAU(Accessed September 2008).Google Scholar
Dixit, A.K., and Pindyck., R.S. Investment under Uncertainty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
Ehrensaft, P., LaRamee, P., Bollman, R.D., and Buttel., F.H. “The Microdynamics of Farm Structural Change: The Canadian Experience and Canada—USA Comparisons.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66,5(1984):823—8.Google Scholar
Foltz, J.D. “Entry, Exit, and Farm Size: Accessing an Experiment in Dairy Price Policy.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86,3(2004):594–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foreman, L. “Production Costs and Returns for Tobacco in 2003.” Electronic Outlook Report TBS-258–01. Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2005. Internet site: http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/ers/TBS//2000s/2005/TBS-05-13-2005_Special_Report.pdf.Google Scholar
Foreman, L. “Production Costs and Returns for Tobacco in 2004.” Electronic Outlook Report TBS-260–01. Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2006. Internet site: http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/ers/TBS//2000s/2006/TBS-08-04-2006_Special_Report.pdf.Google Scholar
Gale, H.F. Jr. “Economic Analysis of Farmer Participation in the Dairy Termination Program in North Carolina and Virginia.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 22,1(1990):123–31.Google Scholar
Gale, H.F. Jr. “Longitudinal Analysis of Farm Size Over Farmer's Life Cycle.” Review of Agricultural Economics 16,1(1994): 113–23.Google Scholar
Gale, H.F. Jr., Foreman, L., and Capehart., T. “Tobacco and the Economy: Farms, Jobs, and Communities.” Agricultural Economic Report No. 789. Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2000.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H. Econometric Analysis, 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 2000.Google Scholar
Karakaya, F. “Market Exit and Barriers to Exit: Theory and Practice.” Psychology and Marketing 17,8(2000):651–68.Google Scholar
Nargundkar, S.V., Karakaya, F., and Stahl., M.J. “Barriers to Exit Market.” Journal of Managerial Issues 8(1996):239–59.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, D., and Lamort., F. “Entry Barriers, Exit and Sunk Costs: An Analysis.” Applied Economics 24(1992):297–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuelson, P.A. “A Note on Measurement of Utility.” The Review of Economic Studies 4,2(1937): 155–61.Google Scholar
Snell, W. The Buyout: Short-Run Observations and Implications for Kentucky's Tobacco Industry. University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension Services, Lexington, KY, 2005.Google Scholar
Tirole, J. The Theory of Industrial Organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1988.Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture Census of Agriculture. “National Agricultural Statistics Service.” Online Database, 2002. Internet site: http://www.ers.usda.gOv/StateFacts/KY.HTM#FC (Accessed December 2007).Google Scholar
U.S. Labor Force data. Internet site: http://www. economagic.com/blslf.htm (Accessed December 2007).Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. “Tobacco Outlook.” Electronic Outlook Report TBS-263, 2007. Internet site: http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/ usda/ers/TBS//2000s/2007/TBS-10-24-2007.pdf.Google Scholar