The objective of this research was to evaluate producers’ perspectives of four key precision agriculture technologies (variable rate fertilizer application, precision soil sampling, guidance and autosteer, and yield monitoring) in terms of the benefits they provide to their farms (increased yield, reduced production costs, and increased convenience) using a best-worst scaling choice experiment. Results indicate that farmers’ perceptions of the benefits derived from various precision agriculture technologies are heterogeneous. To better understand farmers’ adoption decisions, or lack thereof, it is important to first understand their perceptions of the benefits precision agriculture technologies provide.

Unsubstantiated economic returns are a major contributor to producers’ reluctance to adopt cover crops. The objective of this study is to evaluate the direct short‐run net returns to the producer of implementing a predominantly cereal rye (Secale cereal L.) cover crop mix into a Midwest corn (Zea mays L.)–soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] rotation. Experimental agronomic data from field experiments in Lexington, IL, are used to calibrate economic simulations of the costs and benefits of cover crop adoption. Results indicate that net returns to cover crops, including current cost‐share payments, were routinely negative. Returns to the soybean phase of the rotation were higher than corn given that the cover crop significantly reduced corn yield in 1 of 2 yr but did not significantly affect soybean yield. A scenario where cover crop biomass was hypothetically harvested and valued as a livestock feedstuff increased returns. However, further research is needed to validate the agronomic assumptions underlying this scenario. Finally, the breakeven subsidy that would make the producer indifferent to planting cover crops was estimated to be US$13–$23 kg^–1 of nitrate saved from leaving the field each year (or approximately $195–$345 ha^–1). This is higher than current cost‐share payments ($140 ha^–1). In the short‐run, incentivizing producers to adopt cover crops will likely require (i) improved recommendations for cover crop best management practices to eliminate current downside risk and (ii) higher cost‐share payments or established markets to internalize cover crop benefits that accrue to society.

Cheese is a widely consumed product in American diets and an important economic driver of US dairy markets. Given the widespread interest in credence attributes of fluid dairy products, the lack of knowledge of demand for animal welfare, environmental, and other credence attributes in cheeses is surprising. Increasing attention surrounding dairy cattle welfare has been placed on the disbudding or dehorning of dairy cattle, in addition to the longer term debates surrounding pasture access and antibiotic use. This work estimates willingness to pay for these attributes of dairy cattle management systems for Cheddar cheese in a nationally representative sample of 749 US household members. Ninety percent of respondents indicated they or someone in their household consumed cheese in the last year. Higher proportions of respondents with children in the household purchased cheese of any kind. Respondents had positive willingness to pay for Cheddar cheese that had the following attributes: USDA-, retailer-, and industry-verified antibiotic use not permitted, required pasture access, and dehorning with pain relief as well as polled (when compared with dehorning without pain relief). As dairy producers face tighter margins and shifting consumer preferences, increasing attention on consumer preferences for cheese may aid in increasing profitability if demanded attributes can be profitability provided.

This paper examines the costs and benefits of selecting for polled dairy heifers versus traditional dehorning practices. Stochastic budgets were developed to analyze the expected costs (EC) associated with polled dairy genetics. The economic assessment was expanded beyond on-farm cash costs by incorporating cost and benefit estimates to generate industry-wide discussion, and preliminary economic evaluations, surrounding the public acceptance and attitude toward polled genetics versus dehorning calves. Triangular distributions, commonly used to represent distributions with limited data, were used to represent labor costs for dehorning, the likelihood of treatment of calf, and the cost of veterinary treatment. In total, 10,000 iterations were run using @Risk v 6.0 (Palisade Corp., Newfield, NY). The EC of the 4 traditional dehorning methods evaluated in this study ranged from $6 to $25/head, with a mean EC around $12 to $13/head. The EC of incorporating polled genetics into a breeding program ranged from $0 to $26/head depending on the additional cost, or premium, associated with polled relative to horned genetics. Estimated breakeven premiums associated with polled genetics indicate that, on average, producers could spend up to $5.95/head and $11.90/head more for heterozygous and homozygous polled genetics, respectively, compared with conventional horned genetics (or $2.08 and $4.17/straw of semen at an assumed average conception rate of 35%). Given the parameters outlined, sensitivity to individual farm semen and dehorning costs are likely to swamp these differences. Beyond on-farm costs, industry-wide discussion may be warranted surrounding the public's acceptance and attitude toward polled genetics versus dehorning or disbudding of calves. The value of avoiding dehorning may be larger for the industry, and perhaps some individual farms, than initially suggested if additional value is put on calf comfort and possible worker aversion to dehorning. If public perception of dehorning influences market access, the EC of dehorning may be large but that cost is unknown at present.

Enthusiasm regarding the “digital agriculture” revolution is widespread, yet objective research on how commercial farms actually use data and data services remains limited. The purpose of this research is to better understand the current positioning of U.S. commercial corn and soybean farms within the farm data lifecycle, including the collection, use, and impact of farm data. Using survey data from a sample of 800 commercial-scale U.S. corn and soybean farms, the factors associated with progression within the farm data lifecycle are examined. Results indicate that the majority of commercial U.S. corn and soybean farms collect data, indicate that the data they collect influences their decisions, and perceive positive yield benefits as a result of their data-informed decisions. However, farms vary in intensity of their data usage. Investments in data management and analysis resources are associated with progression within the farm data lifecycle. These investments comprise software products that manage and analyze data, including creating GPS maps, layering different data sources, and generating recommendations. Investments in human capital, either in on-farm employees with designated data responsibilities or in trusted off-farm service providers, are also associated with progression within the farm data lifecycle. Farms that have not yet invested in these types of data management and data analysis resources may be forfeiting the potential benefits associated with using their farm’s data to improve on-farm decision making.