Brian Briggeman, Luke Byers, Jennifer Ifft, Ryan Kuhns, Noah Miller, Jisang Yu
{"title":"Is US farm sector debt underestimated? Evidence from equipment lending","authors":"Brian Briggeman, Luke Byers, Jennifer Ifft, Ryan Kuhns, Noah Miller, Jisang Yu","doi":"10.1108/afr-12-2023-0168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The growth of lending from nontraditional lenders may pose challenges for official US Department of Agriculture (USDA) farm sector debt estimates, but it is difficult to find data to assess official estimates. The purpose of this study is to examine whether debt provided by nontraditional lenders is accurately accounted for in official estimates.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>We compare traditional and nontraditional lending data from farm equipment lien collateral values and the USDA Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS). After analyzing trends in equipment lending implied by farm equipment lien data and ARMS, we estimate whether changes in farm equipment lien values predict changes in equipment debt reported in ARMS and whether lender type influences that relationship.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>We find that credit provided by nontraditional lenders is likely underreported in ARMS. Our econometric model shows that equipment debt volumes for nontraditional lenders are consistently lower than traditional loan volumes in ARMS across a variety of model specifications. We also find that an increase in lien values for nontraditional lenders is less likely to predict an increase in ARMS equipment debt volumes than an increase for traditional lenders.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>Official farm sector debt estimates may not fully account for nontraditional lenders.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This study demonstrates how the growth of nontraditional lending poses challenges for estimating US farm sector debt. We evaluate farm sector debt estimates and advance knowledge of the role of nontraditional lenders in farm equipment credit provision. The farm equipment lien dataset provides a rich source of novel data for research on local and national equipment debt and investment.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":46748,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Finance Review","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Finance Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/afr-12-2023-0168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
The growth of lending from nontraditional lenders may pose challenges for official US Department of Agriculture (USDA) farm sector debt estimates, but it is difficult to find data to assess official estimates. The purpose of this study is to examine whether debt provided by nontraditional lenders is accurately accounted for in official estimates.
Design/methodology/approach
We compare traditional and nontraditional lending data from farm equipment lien collateral values and the USDA Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS). After analyzing trends in equipment lending implied by farm equipment lien data and ARMS, we estimate whether changes in farm equipment lien values predict changes in equipment debt reported in ARMS and whether lender type influences that relationship.
Findings
We find that credit provided by nontraditional lenders is likely underreported in ARMS. Our econometric model shows that equipment debt volumes for nontraditional lenders are consistently lower than traditional loan volumes in ARMS across a variety of model specifications. We also find that an increase in lien values for nontraditional lenders is less likely to predict an increase in ARMS equipment debt volumes than an increase for traditional lenders.
Practical implications
Official farm sector debt estimates may not fully account for nontraditional lenders.
Originality/value
This study demonstrates how the growth of nontraditional lending poses challenges for estimating US farm sector debt. We evaluate farm sector debt estimates and advance knowledge of the role of nontraditional lenders in farm equipment credit provision. The farm equipment lien dataset provides a rich source of novel data for research on local and national equipment debt and investment.
期刊介绍:
Agricultural Finance Review provides a rigorous forum for the publication of theory and empirical work related solely to issues in agricultural and agribusiness finance. Contributions come from academic and industry experts across the world and address a wide range of topics including: Agricultural finance, Agricultural policy related to agricultural finance and risk issues, Agricultural lending and credit issues, Farm credit, Businesses and financial risks affecting agriculture and agribusiness, Agricultural policies affecting farm or agribusiness risks and profitability, Risk management strategies including the use of futures and options, Rural credit in developing economies, Microfinance and microcredit applied to agriculture and rural development, Financial efficiency, Agriculture insurance and reinsurance. Agricultural Finance Review is committed to research addressing (1) factors affecting or influencing the financing of agriculture and agribusiness in both developed and developing nations; (2) the broadest aspect of risk assessment and risk management strategies affecting agriculture; and (3) government policies affecting farm profitability, liquidity, and access to credit.