The Impact of Pet Health Insurance on Dog Owners' Spending for Veterinary Services.

The U.S. pet population is increasing, but access to veterinary care continues to be a concern. One method of alleviating barriers that prevent access to care is the presence of pet health insurance for a pet. Dog owners were surveyed to see the impact of pet health insurance on dog owners' visits and expenditures at the veterinarian. Using several logit models, it was found that pet health insurance had a significant and positive impact on the amount spent at the veterinarian. Other dog and dog owner characteristics were found significant in impacting expenditures and visits at the veterinarian. Findings from this study can help address the accessibility issue facing Americans across the country in obtaining affordable pet care. This research is the first which seeks to identify the driving factors behind dog owners' choices regarding health care for their dogs.

Economic Assessment of FMDv Releases from the National Bio and Agro Defense Facility.

This study evaluates the economic consequences of hypothetical foot-and-mouth disease releases from the future National Bio and Agro Defense Facility in Manhattan, Kansas. Using an economic framework that estimates the impacts to agricultural firms and consumers, quantifies costs to non-agricultural activities in the epidemiologically impacted region, and assesses costs of response to the government, we find the distribution of economic impacts to be very significant. Furthermore, agricultural firms and consumers bear most of the impacts followed by the government and the regional non-agricultural firms.

Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant cropping systems in the United States. Part 6: Timeliness of economic decision-making in implementing weed resistance management strategies.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of glyphosate-resistant (GR) crops in the late 1990s made weed control in maize, cotton and soybean simple. With the rapid adoption of GR crops, many growers began to rely solely on glyphosate for weed control. This eventually led to the evolution of GR weeds. Growers are often reluctant to adopt a weed resistance best management practice (BMP) because of the added cost of additional herbicides to weed control programs which would reduce short-term revenue. This study was designed to evaluate when a grower that is risk neutral (profit maximizing) or risk averse should adopt a weed resistance BMP. RESULTS: Whether a grower is risk neutral or risk averse, the optimal decision would be to adopt a weed resistance BMP when the expected loss in revenue is greater than 30% and the probability of resistance evolution is 0.1 or greater. However, if the probability of developing resistance increases to 0.3, then the best decision would be to adopt a weed resistance BMP when the expected loss is 10% or greater. CONCLUSION: Given the scenarios analyzed, risk-neutral or risk-averse growers should implement a weed resistance BMP with confidence that they have made the right decision economically and avoided the risk of lost revenue from resistance. If the grower wants to continue to see the same level of return, adoption of BMP is required.

The value of site-specific information and the environment: technology adoption and pesticide use under uncertainty.

Remote sensing technology offers an opportunity to significantly increase the amount of site-specific information about field characteristics such as pest populations. Coupled with variable rate application technologies, this added information has the potential to provide environmental benefits through reduced pesticide applications. However, producers face a complicated adoption decision because output prices and crop yields are uncertain. A model is developed to examine the potential value of remote sensing information to pesticide applications in an option-value framework under uncertainty. Simulations suggest that remote sensing information could decrease pesticide use, but uncertainty and irreversibility are likely to limit technological adoption by farmers. Potential cost-share subsidies are discussed.