MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Effectiveness of Alternative Marketing Strategies for Ontario Corn and Soybean Producers

2012· article· en· W2137729284 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Richard J. Vyn

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomics of Agriculture and Food Markets
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreharvestFutures contractDownside riskEconomicsMarketingWelfare economicsBusinessFinancial economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marketing decisions can be some of the most difficult decisions facing grain and oilseed producers. There is a lack of information about the marketing strategies that are most effective, and there is also a lack of consensus in the literature about whether some types of marketing strategies can consistently perform better than others. This paper uses a simulation model based on daily cash and futures prices to compare returns and risk over time from specific marketing strategies for corn and soybean producers in Ontario. This paper also examines whether there are differences in the relative effectiveness of strategies between higher‐price years and lower‐price years. The results indicate that preharvest marketing strategies for both corn and soybeans tend to generate prices that are much higher than selling everything at harvest (the baseline strategy), particularly for the higher‐price years; however, these differences are not always statistically significant. Preharvest strategies are also found to reduce downside risk relative to the baseline. Les décisions commerciales peuvent représenter certaines des décisions les plus difficiles auxquelles les producteurs de céréales et d’oléagineux sont confrontés. Il existe un manque d’information sur les stratégies commerciales les plus efficaces et un manque de consensus dans la littérature quant à l’existence ou non de stratégies commerciales capables de donner régulièrement de meilleurs résultats que d’autres. Dans le présent article, nous avons utilisé un modèle de simulation fondé sur les prix au comptant et les prix à terme quotidiens afin de comparer, au fil du temps, les rendements et les risques des stratégies commerciales qui sont spécifiques aux producteurs de maïs et de soja de l’Ontario. Nous avons aussi tenté de déterminer s’il existe ou non des écarts d’efficacité relative des stratégies entre les années où les prix sont élevés et les années où les prix sont faibles. Nos résultats indiquent que, dans le cas du maïs et du soja, la stratégie commerciale qui consiste à vendre la production avant la récolte tend à dégager des prix plus élevés que la stratégie commerciale qui consiste à vendre toute la production au moment de la récolte (stratégie de base), particulièrement dans le cas des années où les prix sont élevés. Cependant, ces écarts ne sont pas toujours statistiquement significatifs. Les stratégies de vente avant récolte contribueraient également à réduire le risque de perte en cas de baisse comparativement à la stratégie de base.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.147 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicEconomics of Agriculture and Food MarketsFrench-language works237,207