No abstract

Choice experiments have been extensively used in many stated preference studies and disciplines. In order to give external validity to stated preferences, participants must behave the same in an experiment setting as they do in reality. The difference between a decision made in a real experiment and a hypothetical experiment is commonly attributed to "hypothetical bias." In this paper, we investigate whether virtual reality can reduce hypothetical bias in choice experiments. We conducted a set of experiments using the Food and Drug Administration's new Nutrition Facts Label for yogurts. Participants were randomly assigned to non-hypothetical and hypothetical experiments, which differed in terms of visual presentations of the product in question: text, picture, and a virtual grocery store. Given the absence of real markets for the new label at the time of the research, we approximate the real market with a binding choice in our non-hypothetical experiments. Our results suggest that although the hypothetical bias with virtual reality is not statistically significantly different from those using text or picture, it is the smallest. Among participants who did not exhibit high simulator discomfort, results suggest that virtual reality can significantly reduce hypothetical bias in choice experiments.

Producers often contemplate expanding or contracting production to take advantage of cyclical cattle price trends. This study quantifies profitability and risk implications of (1) constant herd size, (2) dollar cost averaging, and (3) price signal-based, anticipatory countercyclical expansion/contraction strategies. Weather simulation on forages with different calving season and land use intensity showed fall calving herds with added hay sales from greater fertilizer use and the countercyclical herd size management strategy to be most profitable regardless of weather or time period analyzed. Income risk was comparable to least fertilizer use. Overall, holding herd size constant led to little regret.

We examine how much on-farm reservoirs can increase groundwater quantity and improve surface water quality using a spatial-dynamic model of farm profit maximization in the Arkansas Delta. Sensitivity analysis of the farm profit objective by including the value of surface water quality and the groundwater buffer value evaluates how accounting for environmental value affects the optimal crop mix, water use, and farm profits. The best policy for a critical water resource area is to have the government cost share construction of on-farm reservoirs because groundwater conservation and surface water quality goals are achieved efficiently for a modest redistribution of income.

Irrigated row-crop agriculture is contributing to declining groundwater in areas such as the Mississippi Delta region of eastern Arkansas. There is a need to move toward sustainable levels of groundwater withdrawal. Recent improvements in remote monitoring technologies such as wireless soil moisture sensors and unmanned aerial vehicles offer the potential for farmers to effectively practice site-specific variable-rate irrigation management for the purpose of applying water more efficiently, reducing pumping costs, and retaining groundwater. Soil moisture sensors and unmanned aerial vehicles are compared here in terms of their net returns per acre-foot and cost-effectiveness of aquifer retention. Soil moisture sensors ($9.09 per acre-foot) offer slightly more net returns to producers than unmanned aerial vehicles ($7.69 per acre-foot), though costs associated with unmanned aerial vehicles continue to drop as more manufacturers enter the market and regulations become clear.