Measuring risk attitude of agricultural producers using a mail survey: How consistent are the methods?

30Citations
Citations of this article
49Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

A mail survey is used to examine the consistency of alternative risk preference elicitation procedures using five commonly used methods. These elicitation procedures have been used in previous studies to characterise risk preference. Results show little consistency across procedures, supporting strength-of-preference studies. A general recommendation for mail surveys is the development of relatively easy-to-understand risk-preference elicitation procedures that are framed according to the situational construct in question. © Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society Inc. and Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2006.

References Powered by Scopus

Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice

2155Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Preference parameters and behavioral heterogeneity: An experimental approach in the health and retirement study

1285Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Perceived risk attitudes: Relating risk perception to risky choice

533Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Motivations, risk perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers

290Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Determinants of risk behaviour: Effects of perceived risks and risk attitude on farmers adoption of risk management strategies

122Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Understanding producers' motives for adopting sustainable practices: The role of expected rewards, risk perception and risk tolerance

98Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fausti, S., & Gillespie, J. M. (2006). Measuring risk attitude of agricultural producers using a mail survey: How consistent are the methods? Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 50(2), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8489.2006.00328.x

Readers over time

‘10‘11‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘2402468

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 27

73%

Researcher 6

16%

Professor / Associate Prof. 3

8%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Economics, Econometrics and Finance 19

63%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5

17%

Social Sciences 3

10%

Environmental Science 3

10%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0