AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS' WILLINGNESS TO PAY FOR REAL-TIME MESOSCALE WEATHER INFORMATION

Real-Time Weather Information 369

planting dates. It is possible that their willingness to pay would increase if the value-added
products were developed and the savings demonstrated.

The willingness to pay estimates obtained in this study are considerably lower than those
reported by Vining, Pope, and Dugas. However, their study was not designed as a CV study.
In addition, they asked producers about their willingness to pay for weather information
assuming current weather information was not available. Respondents in this study made
their willingness-to-pay decisions in the context of existing sources of weather information.

The study results do provide some encouragement in identifying subgroups of producers
to whom initial subscription efforts could be targeted. Irrigators and producers with higher
gross farm income appear to be the best initial target audiences for Mesonet. The high level
of significance of past weather losses also suggests that promotional efforts focusing on
weather-related losses are likely to be effective in encouraging producers to invest in the
improved weather information. Any attempt to develop a network for education on Mesonet
and its benefits could likely benefit from capitalizing on the apparent willingness of these
producers to integrate mesoscale weather data into their farm and ranch management plans.

The results also demonstrate that product developers can obtain useful information from
the application of the CV method despite limited time and resources for the research.
Developers of the Mesonet system can conclude from the results of this study that agricul-
tural user fees cannot be relied upon to recover costs of developing and operating the system.
Even with the optimistic assumption that nonrespondents would be willing to pay for
Mesonet access at the level of the responding sample, results indicate that user fees would
provide less than one-third of the funds needed for development and support of agricultural
decision aids based on Mesonet weather data.

In summary, agricultural producers give a high usefulness rating to basic weather
information (particularly precipitation and temperature), weather forecasts, and weather-
related decision aids which relate to their farming situation. Advances in technology make
it possible to provide these agricultural decision makers with much more current and locally
specific weather information on a near real-time basis. An on-going project in Oklahoma
demonstrates that making this improved information available through the development of
a real-time mesoscale weather network will require a substantial investment. This research
suggests that supporting a substantial portion of the operating funds through collection of
agricultural user fees may be difficult.

[Received May 1994, final version received October 1995.}

References

Bishop, R. C., and T. A. Hebcrlein. “Measuring Values OfExtramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?”
Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 61(1979):926-30.

-------. “Simulated Markets, Hypothetical Markets, and Travel Cost Analysis: Alternative Methods of Estimat-
ing Outdoor Recreation Demand.” Bull. No. 197, Agr. Exp. Sta., University of Wisconsin, 1980.

Brookshire, D. S., and D. L. Coursey. “Measuring the Value of a Public Good: An Empirical Comparison of
Elicitation Procedures.” Amer. Econ. Rev. 77(1987):554-65.

Brookshire, D. S., M. A, Thayer, W. D. Schulze, and R. C. d’Arge. “Valuing Public Goods: A Comparison of
Survey and Hedonic Approaches.” Amer. Econ. Rev. 72(1982):165-77.

Cameron, T A., and D. D. Huppert. “OLS versus ML Estimation OfNon-Market Resource Values with Payment
Card Interval Data.” J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 17(1989):230-46.

Carlson, J. D. “The Importance of Agricultural Weather Information: A Michigan Survey.” Bull. Amer. Meteoro-
logical. Soc. 70(1989):366-79.

<<   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   >>

More intriguing information