Farmers’ risk preferences and degree of risk aversion affect their production and management decisions. According to Just-Pope stochastic production function model, we get the expression of the single element risk-aversion coefficients that include input element and hog slaughter absolute price, compared with the expression of relative price mean risk-aversion coefficients, it can directly observe the influence of the element and output price on single element risk-aversion coefficients. Based on the regression procedures and the calculation method of the average value of the element risk-aversion coefficients, mean risk-aversion coefficients of per household medium-scale hog producers are calculated in 76 households, 11 counties, Heilongjiang province. The results show that medium-scale hog producers are risk-averse, accounting for 96%; newborn animal weight and feed consumption affect hog producers’ degree of risk aversion. The former is the risk-reducing input element, while the latter is the risk-increasing input element.
MohamedE., The Relation of Artificial Intelligence with Internet Of Things: A survey, Journal of Cybersecurity and Information Management1(1) (2020), 30–24.
3.
PenningsJ.M.E. and GarciaP., Measuring producers’ risk preferences: A global risk-attitude construct, American Journal of Agricultural Economics83(4) (2001), 993–1009.
4.
MohamedM., A comparative study on Internet of Things (IoT): Frameworks, Tools, Applications and Future directions, Journal of Intelligent Systems and Internet of Things1(1) (2020), 13–39.
5.
AlhabibR. and SalamaA.A., Using Moving Averages To Pave The Neutrosophic Time Series, International Journal of Neutrosophic Science3(1) (2020), 14–20.
6.
MaX. and LvS., Financial credit risk prediction in internet finance driven by machine learning, Neural Comput & Applic31 (2019), 8359–8367.
7.
GunjalK. and LegaultB., Risk preferences of dairy and hog producers in Quebce, Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics43(1) (1995), 23–35.
8.
BwalaM.A. and BilaY., Analysis of farmers’ risk aversion in southern Borno, Nigeria, Global Journal of Agricultural Sciences8(1) (2009), 7–11.
9.
LienG., StørdalS., HardakerJ.B. and AsheimL.J., Risk aversion and optimal forest replanting: A stochastic efficiency study, European Journal of Operational Research181(3) (2007), 1584–1592.
10.
BrennanD., Savings and technology choice for risk averse farmers, Agricultural and Resource Economics46(4) (2002), 501–513.
11.
El-NazerT. and McCarlB.A., The choice of crop rotation: A modeling approach and case study, American Journal of Agricultural Economics68(1) (1986), 127–136.
12.
JiangF.zh. and LiuQ.ch., The elastic analysis on influence factors of medium-scale hog supply: ased on the grouping results of panel data of 10 provinces and cities, Agricultural Economy9 (2016), 22–24.
13.
JustR. and PopeR., Stochastic specification of production functions and economic implications, Journal of Econometrics7(1) (1978), 67–86.
14.
Picazo-TadeoA.J. and WallA., Production risk, risk aversion and the determination of risk attitudes among Spanish rice producers, Agricultural Economics42(4) (2011), 451–464.
15.
HarveyA.C., Estimating regression models with multiplicative heteroskedasticity, Econometrica44(5) (1976), 461–465.
16.
GardebroekC., ChavezM.D. and LansinkA.O., Analysing production technology and risk in organic and conventional Dutch Arable Farming using panel data, Agricultural Economics61(1) (2010), 60–75.
17.
HurdB.H., Yield response and production risk: An analysis of integrated pest management in cotton, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics19(2) (1994), 313–326.
18.
EggertH. and TveterasR., Stochastic production and heterogeneous risk preference: Commercial fisher’s gear choices, American Journal of Agricultural Economics86(1) (2004), 199–212.
19.
GriffithsW.E. and AndersonJ.R., Using time-series and cross-section data to estimate a production function with positive and negative marginal risks, Journal of the American Statistical Association77(379) (1982), 529–536.
20.
SerraT., ZilbermanD. and GilJ.M., Differential uncertainties and risk attitudes between conventional and organic producers: The case of Spanish arable crop farmers, Agricultural Economics39(2) (2008), 219–229.
21.
KumbhakarS.C. and TsionasE.G., Estimation of production risk and risk preference function: A nonparametric approach, Annals of Operations Research176(1) (2010), 369–378.
22.
KumbhakarS.C., Risk preferences under price uncertainties and production risk, Part A: Theory and Methods30(8&9) (2001), 1715–1735.
23.
ArrowK.J., Essays in the theory of risk bearing, Chicago: Markham Publishing 2 (1971), 12–15.
24.
PrattJ.W., Risk aversion in the small and in the large, Econometrica32(1-2) (1964), 122–136.
25.
ChambersR.C., Scale and productivity measurement under risk, American Economic Review73(4) (1983), 802–805.
26.
SerraT., ZilbermanD., GoodwinB.K. and FeatherstoneA., Effects of decoupling on the mean and variability of output, European Review of Agricultural Economics33(3) (2006), 269–288.
27.
KoundouriP., LaukkanenM., MyyraS. and NaugesC., The effects of EU agricultural policy changes on farmers’ risk attitudes, European Review of Agricultural Economics36(1) (2009), 53–77.
28.
YinCh.y. and WangG.x., Influencing factors of hog scale production profit in Jilin province, Chinese Journal of Animal Science50(6) (2014), 31–35.
29.
JiangH.m. and WangZh.h., Hog supply fluctuation: Short period decomposition and economics explanation, Chinese Journal of Animal Science48(18) (2012), 17–20+24.
30.
VillanoR.A. and FlemingE.M., Technical inefficiency and production risk in rice farming: Evidence from Central Luzon Philippines, Asian Economic Journal20(1) (2006), 29–46.
31.
StuartW.B., GraceL.A. and GralaR.K., Returns to scale in the Eastern United States logging industry, Forest Policy and Economics12(6) (2010), 451–456.
32.
ZuhairS.M.M., TaylorD.B. and RandallA.K., Choice of utility function form: Its effect on classification of risk preferences and the prediction of farmer decisions, Agricultural Economics6(4) (1992), 333–344.
33.
WangN. and ZhaiY.l., The analysis of ecological forest scale effect individual managers’ degree of risk aversion, Journal of Agrotechnical Economics (4) (2013), 102–107.
