Spatial Economics Decision-Making Guide for Conservation Reserve Program Enrollment

2015 ◽  
pp. 245-258
Author(s):  
Carl Dillon ◽  
Jordan Shockley ◽  
Joe Luck
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Conservation Reserve Program ◽  
Spatial Economics ◽  
Program Enrollment

Conservation Reserve Program enrollment decisions in the Prairie Pothole Region

2018 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 337-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Wachenheim ◽  
D.C. Roberts ◽  
N. Dhingra ◽  
W. Lesch ◽  
J. Devney
Keyword(s):  
Prairie Pothole Region ◽  
Conservation Reserve Program ◽  
Prairie Pothole ◽  
Enrollment Decisions ◽  
Program Enrollment

scholarly journals Simulated impact of the renewable fuels standard on US Conservation Reserve Program enrollment and conversion

GCB Bioenergy ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 245-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chad Hellwinckel ◽  
Christopher Clark ◽  
Matthew Langholtz ◽  
Laurence Eaton
Keyword(s):  
Conservation Reserve Program ◽  
Renewable Fuels ◽  
Program Enrollment ◽  
Renewable Fuels Standard

Discarding optimality: Throwing out the baby with the bathwater?

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Simen ◽  
Fuat Balcı
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Reward Rate ◽  
Perceptual Decision ◽  
Standard Observer ◽  
Rate Maximization ◽  
Reward Rate Maximization ◽  
Descriptive Standard ◽  
Observer Model

AbstractRahnev & Denison (R&D) argue against normative theories and in favor of a more descriptive “standard observer model” of perceptual decision making. We agree with the authors in many respects, but we argue that optimality (specifically, reward-rate maximization) has proved demonstrably useful as a hypothesis, contrary to the authors’ claims.

LPCD framework: Analytical tool or psychological model?

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Danks
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytical Tool ◽  
Mathematical Framework ◽  
Bayesian Decision ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Psychological Model ◽  
Psychological Reality ◽  
Psychological Theories ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Bayesian Decision Making

AbstractThe target article uses a mathematical framework derived from Bayesian decision making to demonstrate suboptimal decision making but then attributes psychological reality to the framework components. Rahnev & Denison's (R&D) positive proposal thus risks ignoring plausible psychological theories that could implement complex perceptual decision making. We must be careful not to slide from success with an analytical tool to the reality of the tool components.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document