Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublications
System disruptions
There are recurring service disruptions on some of the search portals due to high traffic. We are working to resolve the issue, you may temporarily encounter an error message.
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
On the market‐consistent valuation of fish farms: using the real option approach and salmon futures
University ofGlasgow, Adam Smith Business School - Economics, Glasgow,United Kingdom; School of Mathematics and Statistics University of Sydney Australia.
University of Glasgow Adam Smith Business School ‐ Economics.
Macquarie University Sydney Australia.
2016 (English)In: American Journal of Agricultural Economics, ISSN 0002-9092, E-ISSN 1467-8276, Vol. 99, no 1, p. 207-224Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

We consider the optimal harvesting problem for a fish farmer in a model that accounts for stochastic prices featuring Schwartz (1997) two-factor price dynamics. Unlike any other literature in this context, we take account of the existence of a newly-established market in salmon futures, which determines risk premia and other relevant variables, that influence risk-averse fish farmers in their harvesting decision. We consider the cases of single and infinite rotations. The value function of the harvesting problem determined in our arbitrage-free setup constitutes the fair values of lease and ownership of the fish farm when correctly accounting for price risk. The data set used for this analysis contains a large set of futures contracts with different maturities traded at the Fish Pool market between June 12, 2006 and March 22, 2012. We assess the optimal strategy, harvesting time, and value against two alternative setups. The first alternative involves simple strategies that lack managerial flexibility; the second alternative allows for managerial flexibility and risk aversion as modeled by a constant relative risk aversion utility function, but without access to the salmon futures market. In both cases, the loss in project value can be very significant, and in the second case is only negligible for extremely low levels of risk aversion. As a consequence, for a risk-averse fish farmer, the presence of a salmon futures market as well as managerial flexibility are highly important.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford University Press, 2016. Vol. 99, no 1, p. 207-224
National Category
Economics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-238880DOI: 10.1093/ajae/aaw052ISI: 000397070000011Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85014856357OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-238880DiVA, id: diva2:1958790
Available from: 2025-05-16 Created: 2025-05-16 Last updated: 2025-05-21Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Ewald, Christian Oliver

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ewald, Christian Oliver
In the same journal
American Journal of Agricultural Economics
Economics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 55 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf