The name is absent

distribution to dominate another, not only for sto-
chastic dominance analysis but for all risk efficiency
criteria, is expected value analysis, where a compari-
son of the first moment of the decision density
functions is performed. Necessary and sufficient
condition for stochastic dominance analysis involves
the comparison of the cumulative probability distri-
butions for alternative insecticides. Specifically, sec-
ond degree stochastic dominance (SSD) requires
that the area below the cumulative probability distri-
bution of the dominant insecticide must be less than
or equal to the area below the cumulative distribution
of the insecticide it dominates.

RESULTS

Summary statistics for profit, yield, and damage,
aggregated for years 1988 and 1989, are listed in
Tables 4,5, and 6, respectively. Disaggregated sum-
mary statistics by year and state are in Chyen. For
years 1988 and 1989, profit per acre fluctuated be-
tween $-119.87 and $132.65. Generally, among the
three states, Louisiana had the highest mean profits
resulting from higher yields (Tables 4 and 5) and
lower soybean stink bug damage (Table 6). Among
the states, profits in Georgia fluctuated the most,
because of high variations in both yield and damage.
Georgia experienced dry spells in 1988, and 1989
was, overall, a dry year. Water was also a limiting
factor in Florida. Compared with Florida, Louisi-
ana, and Georgia soybean yields in the 1980s, as
reported by the USDA, the field experiment average
yield below 21 bu∕acre in Florida is low, over 38

Table 4. Profit Summary Statistics for Florida, Georgia, and Louisiana, Years 1988 and 1989

Chemical________	Number of Observations³	Mean	Variance_________	Minimum	Maximum
			.............doɪɪars-	—---------
All Regions^b
Scout	40	-5.10	4,077.91	-102.50	88.20
Karate	36	-5.28	5,632.48	-117.33	132.65
Orthene	36	-11.22	4,971.04	-108.60	98.27
Penncap M	48	-13.16	5,260.69	-113.11	106.56
Baythroid	36	-3.91	5,498.78	-115.50	116.39
Control	36	-14.85	5,160.18	-119.87	111.34
Florida
Scout	8	-72.75	560.46	-102.50	-18.03
Karate	8	-60.65	911.84	-103.77	-13.09
Orthene	8	-85.07	335.27	-108.60	-50.14
Penncap M	8	-74.19	220.17	-103.90	-48.38
Baythroid	8	-75.05	404.82	-100.59	-27.49
Ambush	8	-70.90	903.05	-113.05	-22.46
Control	8	-65.14	780.60	-115.27	-22.84
Georgia
Scout	12	-52.72	1,250.55	-95.38	29.14
Karate	12	-53.12	4,496.62	-117.33	132.65
Orthene	12	-58.32	1,199.27	-100.72	21.69
Penncap M	16	-75.16	1,660.92	-113.11	55.71
Baythroid	12	-45.28	3,374.41	-115.50	106.55
Control	12	-77.33	1,166.19	-119.87	-13.54
Louisiana
Scout	20	50.53	895.61	-18.63	88.20
Karate	16	58.30	1,553.24	-45.94	104.95
Orthene	16	61.03	507.34	19.57	98.27
Penncap M	24	48.53	1,730.82	-60.39	106.56
Baythroid	16	62.68	1,390.93	-11.37	116.39
Control________	________16________	57.17	966.20________	■8.23	111,34

^aTwo test sites were conducted in Louisiana and Georgia in 1989 and two in Louisiana in 1988. This accounts for
different number of observations across states. At the second test sites, alternative rates of Penncap M and Scout were
included. These alternative rates of were as effective as the standard rates and thus were included in the overall
analysis.

^bAII regions denotes the three states Florida, Georgia, and Louisiana.

More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. Passing the burden: corporate tax incidence in open economies
3. The name is absent
4. The name is absent
5. Internationalization of Universities as Internationalization of Bildung
6. Infrastructure Investment in Network Industries: The Role of Incentive Regulation and Regulatory Independence
7. Credit Market Competition and Capital Regulation
8. THE CO-EVOLUTION OF MATTER AND CONSCIOUSNESS1
9. Existentialism: a Philosophy of Hope or Despair?
10. The name is absent