Möchten Sie über diese Zeitschrift informiert bleiben? Klicken Sie bitte auf die Buttons, um unsere Alerts zu abonnieren.
Möchten Sie über diese Zeitschrift informiert bleiben? Klicken Sie bitte auf die Buttons, um unsere Alerts zu abonnieren.
Can machine learning improve prediction â an application with farm survey data
in International Food and Agribusiness Management ReviewSearch for other papers by Jennifer Ifft in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Ryan Kuhns in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Kevin Patrick in
Current site
Google Scholar
Businesses, researchers, and policymakers in the agricultural and food sector regularly make use of large public, private, and administrative datasets for prediction, including forecasting, public policy targeting, and management research. Machine learning has the potential to substantially improve prediction with these datasets. In this study we demonstrate and evaluate several machine learning models for predicting demand for new credit with the 2014 Agricultural Resource Management Survey. Many, but not all, of the machine learning models used are shown to have stronger predictive power than standard econometric approaches. We provide a cost based model evaluation approach for managers to analyze returns to machine learning methods relative to standard econometric approaches. While there are potentially significant returns to machine learning methods, research objectives and firm-level costs are important considerations that in some cases may favor standard econometric approaches.
-
Bajari, P., D. Nekipelov, S.P. Ryan and M. Yang. 2015. Machine learning methods for demand estimation. American Economic Review 105(5): 481-85.
'Machine learning methods for demand estimation ' () 105 American Economic Review : 481 -85.
-
Bates, J. and C. Granger. 1969. The combination of forecasts. Operations Research 20(4).
'The combination of forecasts ' () 20 Operations Research .
-
Coble, K.H., A.K. Mishra, S. Ferrell and T. Griffin, T. 2018. Big data in agriculture: a challenge for the future. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 40(1): 79-96.
'Big data in agriculture: a challenge for the future ' () 40 Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy : 79 -96.
-
Cui, G., M.L. Wong and H.-K. Lui. 2006. Machine learning for direct marketing response models: Bayesian networks with evolutionary programming. Management Science 52(4): 597-612.
'Machine learning for direct marketing response models: Bayesian networks with evolutionary programming ' () 52 Management Science : 597 -612.
-
Dzyabura, D. and J. R. Hauser. 2011. Active machine learning for consideration heuristics. Marketing Science 30(5): 801-819.
'Active machine learning for consideration heuristics ' () 30 Marketing Science : 801 -819.
-
Einav, L. and J. Levin. 2014. The data revolution and economic analysis. Innovation Policy and the Economy 14(1): 1-24.
'The data revolution and economic analysis ' () 14 Innovation Policy and the Economy : 1 -24.
-
Fecke, W., J.-H. Feil and O. Musshoff. 2016. Determinants of loan demand in agriculture: empirical evidence from Germany. Agricultural Finance Review 76(4): 462-476.
'Determinants of loan demand in agriculture: empirical evidence from Germany ' () 76 Agricultural Finance Review : 462 -476.
-
Foster, I., R. Ghani, R. Jarmin, F. Kreuter and J. Lane. 2016. Big data and social science, a practical guide to methods and tools. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
Big data and social science, a practical guide to methods and tools , ().
-
George, G., M.R. Haas and A. Pentland. 2014. Big data and management. Academy of Management Journal 57(2): 321-326.
'Big data and management ' () 57 Academy of Management Journal : 321 -326.
-
Graham, K. 2017. John Deere advancing machine learning in agriculture sector. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/y7d9z5n8.
-
Hastie, T., R. Tibshirani and J. Friedman. 2009. The elements of statistical learning data mining, inference and prediction. Springer, New York, NY, USA.
The elements of statistical learning data mining, inference and prediction , ().
-
Howley, P. and E. Dillon. 2012. Modelling the effect of farming attitudes on farm credit use: a case study from Ireland. Agricultural Finance Review 72(3): 456-470.
'Modelling the effect of farming attitudes on farm credit use: a case study from Ireland ' () 72 Agricultural Finance Review : 456 -470.
-
Ifft, J., K. Patrick and A. Novini. 2014. Debt use by us farm businesses, 1992-2011. Technical report, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington, DC, USA.
'Debt use by us farm businesses, 1992-2011', ().
-
James, G., D. Witten, T. Hastie and R. Tibshirani. 2013. An introduction to statistical learning with applications in R. Springer, New York, NY, USA.
An introduction to statistical learning with applications in R , ().
-
Katchova, A.L. 2005. Factors affecting farm credit use. Agricultural Finance Review 65(2): 17-29.
'Factors affecting farm credit use ' () 65 Agricultural Finance Review : 17 -29.
-
Kuhn, M. and K. Johnson. 2013. Applied predictive modeling. Springer, New York, NY, USA.
Applied predictive modeling , ().
-
MacDonald, J.M., E. OâDonoghue, W. McBride, R.F. Nehring, C.L. Sandretto and R. Mosheim. 2007. Profits, costs, and the changing structure of dairy farming. Technical report, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington, DC, USA.
'Profits, costs, and the changing structure of dairy farming', ().
-
Morehart, M., D. Milkove, Y. Xu. 2014. Multivariate farm debt imputation in the agricultural resource management survey (ARMS). In 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Agricultural and Applied Economics Association. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/yb6xlsf2.
-
Mullainathan, S. and J. Spiess. 2017. Machine learning: an applied econometric approach. Journal of Economic Perspectives 31(2): 87-106.
'Machine learning: an applied econometric approach ' () 31 Journal of Economic Perspectives : 87 -106.
-
Musani, P. 2018. Eden: the tech thatâs bringing fresher groceries to you. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/y9kxxn6p.
-
Sonka, S. 2014. Big data and the ag sector: more than lots of numbers. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 17(1): 1-20.
'Big data and the ag sector: more than lots of numbers ' () 17 International Food and Agribusiness Management Review : 1 -20.
-
Sparapani, T. 2017. How big data and tech will improve agriculture, from farm to table. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/ycgb9j97.
-
Sykuta, M.E. 2016. Big data in agriculture: property rights, privacy and competition in ag data services. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 19(A).
'Big data in agriculture: property rights, privacy and competition in ag data services ' () 19 International Food and Agribusiness Management Review .
-
Tack, J., K.H. Coble, R. Johansson, A. Harri and B. Barnett. 2018. The potential implications of âbig ag dataâ for USDA forecasts. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/yasdvthj.
-
Wager, S. and S. Athey. In press. Estimation and inference of heterogeneous treatment effects using random forests. Journal of the American Statistical Association, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2017.1319839.
-
Weber, J.G. and D.M. Clay. 2013. Who does not respond to the agricultural resource management survey and does it matter? American journal of agricultural economics 95(3): 755-771.
'Who does not respond to the agricultural resource management survey and does it matter? ' () 95 American journal of agricultural economics : 755 -771.
-
Wellers, D., T. Elliott and M. Noga. 2017. 8 ways machine learning is improving companiesâ work processes. Harvard Business Review. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/y92n5hhm.
-
Woodard, J.D. 2016. Data science and management for large scale empirical applications in agricultural and applied economics research. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 38(3): 373-388.
'Data science and management for large scale empirical applications in agricultural and applied economics research ' () 38 Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy : 373 -388.
Supplementary Materials
| Insgesamt | Letzte 365 Tage | In den letzten 30 Tagen | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aufrufe von Kurzbeschreibungen | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gesamttextansichten | 588 | 199 | 16 |
| PDF-Downloads | 636 | 235 | 16 |
Can machine learning improve prediction â an application with farm survey data
in International Food and Agribusiness Management ReviewSearch for other papers by Jennifer Ifft in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ryan Kuhns in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Kevin Patrick in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Businesses, researchers, and policymakers in the agricultural and food sector regularly make use of large public, private, and administrative datasets for prediction, including forecasting, public policy targeting, and management research. Machine learning has the potential to substantially improve prediction with these datasets. In this study we demonstrate and evaluate several machine learning models for predicting demand for new credit with the 2014 Agricultural Resource Management Survey. Many, but not all, of the machine learning models used are shown to have stronger predictive power than standard econometric approaches. We provide a cost based model evaluation approach for managers to analyze returns to machine learning methods relative to standard econometric approaches. While there are potentially significant returns to machine learning methods, research objectives and firm-level costs are important considerations that in some cases may favor standard econometric approaches.
| Insgesamt | Letzte 365 Tage | In den letzten 30 Tagen | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aufrufe von Kurzbeschreibungen | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gesamttextansichten | 588 | 199 | 16 |
| PDF-Downloads | 636 | 235 | 16 |
