Search
Displaying 311 - 320 of 527
General Sessions
2012 Risk and Profit Conference
General … foodbillion. Spending on nutrition grew because of greater participation, higher food
prices, and because the stimulus bill that was passed in 2009 increased funding
for food stamps.
AGRICULTURE … 6%
(SNAP & Child
Nutrition)
82.0%
4.6%
Crop Insurance
& SURE
8.4%
Source: CBO, Senate Agriculture Committee
AGRICULTURE …
October 13, 2014
Commodity Program Papers
training.
Q: What is MYA price?
Marketing years correspond … years correspond to when the crop was harvested until the next … by the percentage of the crop that is marketed each month …
2021 Mini-Risk and Profit Conference Presentations
NFI
GREGG IBENDAHL
2021 Mini Risk & Prof i t – 2/3/21
Agricultural … fertilizer purchased before prices went downDiesel◦ Down 20 … paid for some fuel before price decreaseInterest – 4.5 …
October 1, 2022
2022 Crop Insurance Workshop Presentations
andDirector, North Central Extension Risk Management Education CenterUniversity … Energy• Horticulture• CropInsurance• Miscellaneous
From National … program supports with higher prices, but increasing costs• …
December 1, 2003
Leasing Papers
and Presentations
Kastens
Background
Crop producers rely heavily on … Furthermore, from 2000-2002, crop acres rented by Farm
Management … represented 68% of the total crop acres they farmed (KFMA …
April 14, 2025
Ag Law Issues
come in about how to report cropinsurance proceeds on the tax return … post.
Proper Reporting of CropInsurance Proceeds
Many farmers have …
April 17, 2023
Recent Videos
providingrelevant examples for pricing increments, targets and decision … Incremental Sales. How many pricing decisions?•Price Targets. Set at incrementally … take action, regardless of price. Aim for seasonal highs.• …
September 11, 2023
Farm Profitability
better estimate of grain prices, cost of inputs, government … was first presented at the Risk and Profit conference in
August.
At … like for the spring planted crops. In addition, there are more …
September 1, 2015
KFMA Newsletters
2015 E‐Newsletter
http://www.agmanager.info/kfma/ September 2015 E‐newsletter 2
long‐running Purdue CropLife survey reports on the perceptions of agricultural input suppliers and retailers (Erickson
and Widmar, 2015). They indicated that GPS guidance was nearly ubiquitous for service providers but analogous
technologies were not adopted by a critical mass of farmers. Given the lack of information on the profitability of
precision agricultural technologies, the KFMA databank has a unique opportunity to fill this gap.
How KFMA will collaborate
No studies have adequately reported the whole‐farm benefits of precision agriculture based on empirical data. The
KFMA precision agriculture study will be the first study capable of assessing 1) the whole‐farm profitability of before and
after adoption of precision agriculture, 2) the whole‐farm profitability differences between adopters and non‐adopters,
and 3) the probability of transitioning from one bundle of technologies to another bundle of technologies.
This study relies upon KFMA farms being “tagged” for each level of precision agriculture technology for the specific years
that the technology was used. During the enrollment process, the KFMA farmer will complete a worksheet grid
regarding what technologies and years the technology was used; then the KFMA economist will transpose the farmer’s
response onto another sheet that the KFMA office staff will enter into the computerized database. In subsequent years,
the KFMA member and KFMA economist would simply verify that the ‘tagging’ is still relevant or update it accordingly.
The true ‘tagging’ occurs with the computerized database. It is anticipated that the total time for the KFMA farmer and
KFMA economist to complete the forms will be less than 20 minutes; and during the time that the KFMA farmer is
completing their form, the KFMA economist is likely performing some other task.
Each KFMA farm will eventually be tagged for adoption of each precision technology as 1) adopted, 2) not adopted, or 3)
null/unknown. Initially, the list of technologies will be limited to the most common with additional technologies added
once a critical mass of farmers have adopted. The year that the farm began using each technology, and the year that
they ceased using it in the event the technology became obsolete or abandoned, will be noted. This simple tagging of
each farm by KFMA economists allows further analysis.
KFMA allows unique assessment of precision agriculture profitability
KFMA will be the first to report actual whole‐farm profitability from adoption and use of precision agricultural
technology. In addition to being able to assess the impact of precision agricultural technologies across farms, the KFMA
databank allows the evaluation of the technology before and after adoption. In analytical terms, this means that both
cross‐sectional and time‐series analysis can be conducted in a panel dataset. The panel databank also allows us to
determine how farms transition from one bundle of technologies to another bundle; and how whole‐farm
characteristics influence and are influenced by these changes.
Expected Outcomes
Where statistically valid and confidential results are available (i.e. a large enough sample of both adopters and non‐
adopters such that no individual farms can be identified), reports will be made to several audiences. Results of this
study will first be made available to KFMA members and staff, then posted to the AgManager.info website as
newsletters and Extension publications, and submitted for peer reviewed in scientific publications. The results are
expected to be useful for KFMA farmer members who are considering the adoption of precision agricultural
technologies. In addition to the publications, results will be disseminated across Kansas at Extension events as well as at
national and international conferences. Since the Kansas results from KFMA are the only source of farm‐level
information on profitability of precision agriculture, the international community will be interested.
Background on Principal Investigator
The principal investigator, Terry Griffin, has a long track record of evaluating the profitability of precision agriculture. His
master’s thesis surveyed farmers and agricultural industry of the status of precision farming in Arkansas in 1999. His
http://www.agmanager.info/kfma/ September 2015 E‐newsletter 3
doctoral dissertation adapted spatial statistical techniques to analyze yield monitor data; and evaluated the farm
management implications in a series of case studies across North America. Griffin joined the K‐State Department of
Agricultural Economics February 2015 with a focus on cropping systems economics and specifically precision agriculture.
Using the KFMA databank, he will be able to provide even greater insights into the profitability of precision agricultural
technology.
The K‐State Precision Agriculture Team has been formed with members across the College of Agriculture. In addition to
Terry Griffin from the Department of Agricultural Economics, Ajay Sharda from the Deaprtment of Biological and
Agricultural Engineering, Lucas Haag and Ignacio Ciampitti from the Department of Agronomy have led this effort. This
team will disseminate the results of this KFMA study across Kansas and to precision agriculture meetings across the US
and internationally. For more information on this project, please email Terry Griffin at twgriffin@ksu.edu or call
501.249.6360.
References
Erickson, Bruce and Widmar, David. 2015 Precision Agricultural Services Dealership Survey Results. Sponsored By
CropLife Magazine And The Center For Food And Agricultural Business. Purdue University. July 2015.
Schimmelpfennig, David and Ebel, Robert. 2011. On the Doorstep of the Information Age: Recent Adoption of Precision
Agriculture. Economic Information Bulletin No. (EIB‐80) 31 pp, August 2011. Available at:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib‐economic‐information‐bulletin/eib80.aspx#.U7LuLfldXbA
Comparison …