Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Steven C. Turner is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Steven C. Turner.


Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy | 1993

Reputation Selling in Feeder Cattle Teleauctions

Steven C. Turner; John C. McKissick; Nancy Dykes

Recent research to identify significant factors that influence feeder cattle prices has focused on cattle and market characteristics. The research reported here used data from Georgia teleauctions during the 1977 to 1988 period to determine the possible impact of sellers reputation on price. Both significant premium and discount sellers were identified for two of the three teleauction organizers. The teleauction organization that transferred the least amount of information about the cattle had the greatest number of reputation sellers while the organization with the most information about sellers cattle given to buyers registered no significant seller reputations. Reputations can help buyers estimate quality in the absence of complete information.


Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics | 1999

Leading Indicators Of Regional Cotton Acreage Response: Structural And Time Series Modeling Results

Jack E. Houston; Christopher S. McIntosh; Paul A. Stavriotis; Steven C. Turner

Resurgent cotton production compels better acreage forecasts for planning seed, chemical, and other input requirements. Structural models describe leading acreage response indicators, and forecasts are compared to time-series models. Cotton price, loan rate, deficiency payments, lagged corn acreage, the PIK program, and previous cotton yield significantly influence cotton acreage response.


Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy | 1995

Remembering the Role of Research in Developing a University Student

Steven C. Turner

Beattie and Watts recently asserted that a distinguishing characteristic of university professors should be a continuing commitment to active participation in research in support of their principal function, teaching (p. 95). This statement was made in support of the argument that parent disciplines and learned societies are appropriate guides to intellectual progress. Their argument countered the malaise observed by Bonnen and Schuh that land-grant universities have lost their way (p. 6). This debate is also important to undergraduate education. Climates and incentives external and internal to the university view teaching and research as substitutes, rather than complements. This perspective underscores a deficiency in undergraduate education that has resulted from a system of teaching that lacks an appreciation for curiosity, investigation, and the mystery behind most knowledge. Rather, much of the current teaching system relies heavily on memorization and theory. Though not debilitating in and of itself, theory and memorization must be means to an end (i.e., analysis). Historically, agricultural economics has had a strong record of applying economic reasoning to a rich host of problems (Leontief). The argument here is that this tradition must now be extended to


Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics | 1993

MORALE AND FACULTY DEVELOPMENT IN AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS: DISCUSSION

Steven C. Turner

Dr. Purcell’s observations on faculty success within agricultural economics deal primarily with comparative advantage and respect for diversity. His arguments are similar in nature to Houck’s AAAE presidential address of 1992. I would suggest that someone interested in this topic read Ladd, Skees, McDowell, Hite, Bonnen, Paarlberg, Debertin, and Bromely for further context. A crucial contribution of Purcell is his defense of the traditional linkages (clientele) of agricultural economists. As an assistant professor speaking to this body I feel a little like Luke Skywalker. To confront and succeed in the fhture I must somehow (rediscover my past. The reality of the past is that without the Merrill, Hatch, and Smith-Lever Acts none of us would be sitting here today. Furthermore, it is the uncertainty that surrounds these historical acts that threatens us today. So it is important that we listen carefully to Purcell and his talk of constituency, clientele, and credibility. But it is also (most) important that we remember our university mission.


Agribusiness | 1995

Transactions methods among US wholesale nurseries

Roger A. Hinson; Steven C. Turner; John R. Brooker

Change of product ownership in competitive agricultural industries is a critical event, yet little research has examined the transaction methods used by firms and the corresponding factors that influence the choice of transaction method. A sample of landscape plant nurseries across the United States provided data to model this decision. Transaction methods included sales by telephone, personal visits, mail order, and at trade shows. In addition, factors that influenced negotiated sales were investigated. Influential factors included age of the business, size (as measured by gross sales), location, market channel use, ownership structure, and perspective on competitive situation. Using a tobit estimation procedure, profiles of nursery firms more likely to use a particular transaction method were developed.


Agribusiness | 1993

Computerization in the US ornamental nursery industry

Lewell F. Gunter; Steven C. Turner

This research analyzes the determinants of computer application adoption by US nurseries. A loglinear model, commonly used for the analysis of contingency tables, was adapted to the problem. This approach allowed the computer adoption and application adoption decisions to be considered together, and permitted the modeling of the effect of adopting a given computerized application on the probability of adopting another. The effects of firm size, age, retail sales percentage, and the number of permanent employees on the computerization of accounting, word processing, inventory, and marketing are analyzed.


Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing | 2003

Price Risk Management for Peanut Meal

Ecio de Farias Costa; Steven C. Turner

Abstract Peanut meal is cross-hedged with soybean meal using peanut meal cash prices and soybean meal futures prices. Hedge ratios are obtained for a 3-year and a 6-year period model. The data is from 1993 to 2000, with the 2000 data used for evaluation. All hedge ratios are significant and the 3-year period models results suggest that long term data sets have less explanatory power than short-term hedge ratios. Evaluation results indicate positive gains for cross-hedged poultry producers and/or peanut producers. The empirical analyses suggest that soybean meal futures can be used as a potential cross-hedging vehicle for peanut meal.


Journal of Agribusiness | 2001

CROSS-HEDGING COTTONSEED MEAL

Shaikh Mahfuzur Rahman; Steven C. Turner; Ecio de Farias Costa


Journal of Futures Markets | 1992

Supplementary information and markov processes in Soybean futures trading

Steven C. Turner; Jack E. Houston; Tommie L. Shepherd


Faculty Series | 2001

MANAGING PRICE RISK IN COTTON PRODUCTION USING STRATEGIC ROLLOVER HEDGING

Steven C. Turner; Vahe Heboyan

Collaboration


Dive into the Steven C. Turner's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Roger A. Hinson

Louisiana State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge