Search results

Several farm safety net strategies are available to farmers as a source of financial protection against losses due to price instability, government policies, weather fluctuations and global market changes. Producers can employ these strategies combining crop insurance policies with countercyclical policies for several crops and production areas; however, less is known about the efficiency of these strategies in enhancing profit and reducing its variability. In this study, we examine the efficiency of these strategies at minimizing inter crop year farm profit variability.

We utilized relative mean of profit and coefficient of variation, to compare counterfactually calculated farm safety net strategies for a sample of 28,615 observations across 2,486 farms and four dryland crops (corn, soybean, sorghum and wheat) in Kansas spanning nine crop years (2014–2022). A no farm safety net strategy is used as the benchmark for every alternative strategy to ascertain whether a policy customization is statistically different from a no farm safety case.

The general pattern of the results suggests that program combination strategies that have a high-profit enhancement potential necessarily have low profit risk for dryland wheat and sorghum production. On the contrary, such a connection is absent for dryland corn and soybeans production. Low-cost farm safety net strategies that enhance corn and soybeans profits do not necessarily lower profit risks.

This paper is one of the first to use a large sample of actual farm-level observations to evaluate how combinations of safety net programs offered under the Title I (PLC, ARCCO and ARCIC) and XI (FCIP) of the U.S. Farm Bill rank in terms of profit level enhancement and profit risk reduction.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an understanding of the “Kyocera approach” to business, i.e. the relationship between the Kyocera philosophy, the amoeba management system (AMS) and the associated management accounting system.

Utilising a variety of secondary sources, including semi-autobiographical works written by Inamori, the architect of AMS, the authors examine in detail the links between the underlying Kyocera philosophy and the management and accounting principles derived therefrom. These sources are used to examine the historical origins of these principles, their influence on both the AMS and the management accounting system, and how these have developed over time.

Both the AMS and the associated management accounting system can be shown to contain a mixture of influences, including traditional Asian/Japanese factors, but also Inamori/Kyocera-specific factors linked to Inamori's underlying philosophical approach to life and specific life experiences encountered by him. This suggests that while the Kyocera approach may be applicable more widely in Japan or Asia, outside of this context, the conflicts between Western and Asian cultures, although not necessarily insurmountable, may provide barriers leading to incomplete applications of the Kyocera approach

This study adds to the understanding of the interrelationship between management philosophy and management accounting practices, and the ability of individuals to determine culture within organisations. It illustrates the importance of historical research in obtaining a detailed understanding of the philosophical, cultural and religious underpinnings of current management and accounting practices.