Some Issues in Dealing with Risk in Agriculture

Risk and Uncertainty,

Inclusion and the relevance of culturally responsive teaching in U.K. Business schools

Inequality, lack of learning, and poor academic achievement are firmly linked (Nieto 1999). Our research explores the British Muslim experience in the context of inclusive pedagogy practice in Business Schools. It is the aim of this paper to explore the relevance of culturally responsive teaching (Gay 2000) in supporting individual student learning differences in increasingly international Business Schools. Law (2004) argues that Universities are expected to be the interrogators of complex ethical problems, as servant and preserver of deeper democratic practices. To fulfil this role effectively universities need to shift away from what (Allen 1998) describes a ‘White Syllabus’. The need to demand from students the ability to adapt to the approach of the institution without the institution making an effort to adapt to the student is an outdated concept which puts many universities at a disadvantage when trying to attract International students to UK business Schools. This paper will look at the relevance of 'culturally responsive teaching' and how this pedagogical method utilises student’s cultural knowledge, prior experiences, and cultural differences to make learning more appropriate and effective for them. Such an approach teaches through the strengths of the students (Gay 2000) and the responsiveness of the educators. Our research adopts a culturally responsive framework (Villegas and Lucas, 2002) that looks at 5 salient characteristics and how they can be used to bridge the gap between learner and tutor and organisation. It will be analysed and argued that culturally responsive teaching can be used to develop inclusion and minimise prejudice within UK Business Schools for minority groups and for this study British Muslims

Ag econ angst crisis revisited: a rejoinder

Poverty reduction has been an underlying goal of governments and the development community since the Second World War, but it was the 1973 Nairobi address of Robert S. McNamara, then President of the World Bank, that created a new commitment to directly address poverty reduction in the quest for development (McNamara 1973). More than half a century after the war and close to 30 years after Robert McNamara’s speech, poverty is still rampant in many parts of the globe. Reflections on why this scourge remains, and what we as agricultural economists can do about it, were the driving forces behind our paper with the late John L. Dillon entitled ‘Agricultural economists and world poverty: progress and prospects’ (Rola-Rubzen et al. 2001). The part of our paper that Johnson, Rossmiller and Sandiford-Rossmiller (JRS) have reacted to was deliberately provocative to stimulate thinking on ways to combat poverty. We are pleased that someone has taken the bait. As the two surviving authors, we find ourselves in agreement with much that JRS have written. However, in preparing this rejoinder we have sadly missed John Dillon, especially his broad international experience. We note that in several respects JRS amplify and support some of our points, as well as adding a new perspective of their own, dealing with the new institutional economics. We find it hard to work out just where they differ from us.Teaching/Communication/Extension/Profession,

Designs on the Web: A case study of online learning for design students

The De Montfort University Electronic Campus initiative started in September 1999. Web‐based learning resources and support have been provided for over 3,000 students via a portfolio of thirty projects ranging across all levels of the university and within every faculty. This paper focuses on one aspect of this initiative: the development of online teaching and learning materials to support first‐year IT modules for students of art and design. An undergraduate module has been converted from traditional, face‐to‐face, delivery to a hybrid combination of Web‐based and studio‐based work in accordance with Laurillard's conversational framework. In the first year of use all the new material has been made available on a pilot basis to a group of 440 students in parallel with conventional lectures and seminars. All the students have had access to the online resources; some students have used them, but some have not. Data on student expectations collected prior to starting on the module are compared with student feedback gathered at the end of the module and student performance data across the two mode's of presentation are compared to establish the relative effectiveness of each approach. In addition the paper reviews the resource implications of developing, delivering and supporting online learning and discusses some of the barriers to implementation that were encountered and overcome

Economic sustainability and risk efficiency of organic versus conventional cropping systems

Environmental, social and economic attributes are important for the sustainability of a farming system. Resilience is also important yet has seldom been directly considered in evaluations of economic sustainability. In economic terms, resilience has to do with the capacity of the farm business to survive various risks and other shocks. A whole-farm stochastic simulation model over a six-year planning horizon was used to analyse organic and conventional cropping systems using a model of a representative farm in Eastern Norway. The relative economic sustainability of alternative systems under changing assumptions about future technology and price regimes was examined in terms of financial survival to the end of the planning period. The same alternatives were also compared in terms of stochastic efficiency. The results illustrate possible confl icts between pursuit of risk efficiency and sustainability. The model developed could be useful in supporting farmers’ choices between farming systems as well as in helping policy makers to develop more sharply targeted policies

DETERMINANTS OF PART-TIME FARMING AND ITS EFFECT ON FARM PRODUCTIVITY AND EFFICIENCY

Little attention has been given in the agricultural economics literature to the impact of off-farm work on farm productivity and efficiency. More knowledge about what determines part-time farming and whether farm productivity and efficiency are affected by part-time farming could help policy makers introduce better targeted rural development policies. This paper aims to fill the above-mentioned gaps by first analysing factors that influence the choice of off-farm work; and then examining how off-farm work influences productivity and technical efficiency at the farm level. An unbalanced panel data set from 1991 to 2005 from Norwegian grain farms is used for this purpose. The results show that the likelihood of off-farm work and the share of time allocated to it increase with increasing age (up to 39 years), and with low relative yields (compared to others farms in the surrounding area/region). The level of support payments is not significantly associated with the extent of off-farm work. Large-scale farms and single farmers tend to have a lower likelihood of off-farm work. Average technical efficiency was found to be 79%. Farmers with low variability in farm revenue were found to be more technically efficient than farmers with high revenue variability. We did not find any evidence of off-farm work share affecting farm productivity − the predicted off-farm work share was not statistically significant. In other words, we did not find any systematic difference in farm productivity and technical efficiency between part-time and full-time farmers.off-farm work, productivity, efficiency, unobserved heterogeneity, panel data, Farm Management,

Risk programming analysis with imperfect information

A Monte Carlo procedure is used to demonstrate the dangers of basing (farm) risk programming on only a few states of nature and to study the impact of applying alternative risk programming methods. Two risk programming formulations are considered, namely mean-variance (E,V) programming and utility efficient (UE) programming. For the particular example of a Norwegian mixed livestock and crop farm, the programming solution is unstable with few states, although the cost of picking a sub-optimal plan declines with increases in number of states. Comparing the E,V results with the UE results shows that there were few discrepancies between the two and the differences which do occur are mainly trivial, thus both methods gave unreliable results in cases with small samples

Agricultural economists and world poverty: progress and prospects

New development paradigms come and go, seemingly with increasing rapidity, yet poverty remains the scourge of the developing nations. As we enter the new millennium, we fear that still more development fads and fancies will emerge, to be taken up and then dropped by the development community. These swings in fashion bring with them the danger that the ‘basics’ of effective development strategies for poverty reduction will be neglected. In this article, we advance some personal and perhaps controversial views about the virtues of getting agriculture moving as a means of reducing poverty, and about the role that agricultural economists can and should play in that endeavour.Food Security and Poverty,

Book reviews

Teaching/Communication/Extension/Profession,

Risk and economic sustainability of crop farming systems

Environmental, social and economic attributes are important for the sustainability of a farming system. Comparing farming systems by considering only expected profitability ignores differences in both sustainability and in the riskiness of system returns. Further, in choosing between farming systems, the ability to survive various risks and shocks and con-tinue in the future is important, i.e., system resilience and persistence are important aspects of sustainabil-ity. Yet resilience and persistence have seldom been directly considered in evaluations of economic sus-tainability. A whole-farm stochastic simulation model over a six-year planning horizon was used to compare organic and conventional cropping systems for a representative farm situation in Eastern Norway. The relative sustainability of alternative systems under changing assumptions about future technology and price regimes was examined in terms of terminal financial position. The risk efficiency of the same alternatives was also compared. The results illustrate possible conflicts between pursuit of risk efficiency versus sustainability. The model used could be useful in supporting farmers’ choice between farming sys-tems as well for policy makers to develop more sharply targeted policies