Producer perceptions of US livestock indemnity policy

被引:1
|
作者
Campbell, Victoria L. [1 ]
Thompson, Jada M. [2 ]
Apriesnig, Jenny L. [3 ]
Tonsor, Glynn T. [4 ]
Pendell, Dustin L. [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tennessee, Dept Agr & Resource Econ, Knoxville, TN 37996 USA
[2] Univ Arkansas, Dept Agr Econ & Agribusiness, Fayetteville, AR 72701 USA
[3] Michigan Technol Univ, Coll Business, Houghton, MI 49931 USA
[4] Kansas State Univ, Dept Agr Econ, Manhattan, KS 66506 USA
来源
APPLIED ANIMAL SCIENCE | 2024年 / 40卷 / 04期
关键词
agricultural policy; indemnity; livestock dis-; ease; producer preferences;
D O I
10.15232/aas.2024-02543
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
Objective: Livestock disease management is crucial for producers. To control and eradicate disease, the US government has a duty to depopulate infected or potentially infected animals, and current indemnity policy dictates that producers must receive fair market compensation for depopulated animals. This study surveys producers' preferences regarding livestock indemnity policy to better understand ordered preferences for any changes in the future. Materials and Methods: Through a ranked-ordered probit model, we analyzed producers' rankings of 4 different types of indemnity from an online producer survey. Results and Discussion: Based on the responding producers, the most preferred method of livestock indemnity is fair market value for the animal, and the second most preferred indemnity policy is government-subsidized livestock insurance. Implications and Applications: The results indicate heterogeneity in preference rankings across producers and by producer characteristics. Our findings provide policymakers with information on producers' opinions for compensation after a disease outbreak. These insights allow legislators to consider producers' preferences when updatmanagement in the future.
引用
收藏
页码:542 / 548
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Will an incentive-compatible indemnity policy please stand up? Livestock producer willingness to self-protect
    Tonsor, Glynn T.
    Schulz, Lee L.
    TRANSBOUNDARY AND EMERGING DISEASES, 2020, 67 (06) : 2713 - 2730
  • [2] Cattle farmers' perceptions about livestock policy
    Diez, J. G.
    Saraiva, C.
    Coelho, A. C.
    LARGE ANIMAL REVIEW, 2015, 21 (03): : 115 - 123
  • [3] US livestock producer interest in alternatives to compensation programs for wolf depredation
    Nickerson, Rae
    Hoag, Dana
    Evangelista, Paul H.
    Niemiec, Rebecca
    Few, Alex
    Breck, Stewart W.
    HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE, 2024,
  • [4] Implementation of Blockchain Technologies in the US Sheep Industry: Producer and Industry Perceptions
    Newman, Courtney
    Gifford, Cody
    Stewart, Whit C.
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2023, 101 : 659 - 660
  • [5] Implementation of Blockchain Technologies in the US Sheep Industry: Producer and Industry Perceptions
    Newman, Courtney
    Gifford, Cody
    Stewart, Whit C.
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2023, 101
  • [6] Livestock producer pilot program
    不详
    JOURNAL OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION, 2002, 57 (02) : 33A - 33A
  • [7] ENERGY MANAGEMENT FOR THE LIVESTOCK PRODUCER
    ROSE, WT
    STOUT, B
    MICHIGAN COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE EXTENSION BULLETIN, 1981, (NE-14): : 1 - 4
  • [8] DIRECTORS' INDEMNITY: CORPORATE POLICY OR PUBLIC POLICY?
    Bates, George E.
    Zuckert, Eugene M.
    HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW, 1942, 20 (02) : 244 - 264
  • [9] Perceptions of Palestine: US Middle East policy
    Christian, K
    PALESTINIAN-ISRAELI IMPASSE: HAS U.S. POLICY RUN ITS COURSE?, 2002, : 9 - 17
  • [10] US consumer perceptions of insects as livestock feed: ethical considerations for insects
    Fukuda, E. P.
    Carrasco, M. N.
    Perez, A. J.
    Fischer, B.
    Drewery, M. L.
    JOURNAL OF INSECTS AS FOOD AND FEED, 2024, 10 (01) : 125 - 139