Search
Displaying 191 - 200 of 206
April 16, 2020
Land Buying and Valuing
full-service bank with locations in
communities throughout Kansas, and we’re …
May 1, 2014
Production Publications
Because of its importance at the individual farm level and at the policy‐making level, farm
profitability is a topic widely discussed in both the agricultural community and in Washington D.C.
Uncontrollable macroeconomic factors such as interest rates, trade policies, and government
programs/policies impact overall farm profitability. In addition to macroeconomic factors, weather
can have a big impact on farm profitability – a factor all too many Kansas producers are very aware
of in recent years. However, individual producers do have some control of profitability at the farm
level relative to other producers. That is, while numerous factors beyond the producer’s control
impact the absolute level of profitability, producers’ management abilities impact their relative
profitability. In a competitive, consolidating industry such as agriculture, relative profitability
dictates which producers remain in business in the long run.
For long‐term business sustainability it is important to recognize which management and
farm characteristics determine relative farm profitability among producers. Do profitable farms
get higher yields? Do profitable farms receive higher prices for their commodities? Do they have
lower costs? If they have lower costs, in what areas are their costs lower? To consider these
questions, crop enterprise budgets from the Kansas Farm Management Association (KFMA)
Enterprise Analysis for the years 2011‐2013 were divided into three profitability groups, high,
middle, and low, based on the 3‐year average per acre return to management.1 The enterprises
(number of farms) included in this analysis were alfalfa (34), corn (88), irrigated corn (33), grain
sorghum (76), full‐season soybean (102), double‐crop soybean (31), and wheat (139).
Enterprise analyses completed at the regional level (NW, SW, NC, SC, NE, and SE) were
aggregated for the entire state for this analysis. Enterprises also were aggregated by tillage
method where applicable – i.e., no‐till enterprises were analyzed jointly with those including
tillage (same was done for center pivot and flood irrigation in the case of irrigated corn). For a
farm to be included in a specific enterprise analysis, KFMA must have had data for that enterprise
each year over the 3‐year period. Producer returns over a multi‐year period better characterize
profitability differences due to management abilities than would returns from a single year, which
would be expected to be more random due to uncontrollable events (e.g., weather).2 However, …
September 14, 2016
Mandatory Price Reporting
international commerce,
and to rural communities was made most obvious by …
February 9, 2017
Land Use Value Research
report from the agricultural community. We appreciate this
feedback …
May 14, 2024
International Grain Markets
supported by the business communities of all BRICS countries.
Still … – Much of the speculative community’s position in the
agriculture …
May 13, 2022
Farm Machinery Papers, Land Use Value Research
report from the agricultural community. We appreciate this
feedback …
April 1, 2005
Industry Economics & Trade
by all in the
scientif ic community.
However, it was f irst …