Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:04:47.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Assessment of Dynamic Behavior in the U.S. Catfish Market: An Application of the Generalized Dynamic Rotterdam Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2015

Andrew Muhammad  and
Keithly G. Jones
Andrew Muhammad
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS
Keithly G. Jones
Affiliation:
Animal Products, Grains, and Oilseeds Branch, Markets and Trade Economics Division, Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The generalized dynamic Rotterdam model was used in estimating U.S. demand for disaggregated catfish. The overall goal was to examine habit persistence in consumption and to determine the adjustment process in demand. Results indicated that it took up to 1 month for catfish-product demand to fully adjust to changes in expenditures and prices. Additionally, habit persistence played a role in demand where present consumption of a given product was positively affected by past consumption of that product. Consequently, U.S. catfish demand was significantly more elastic in the long-ran.

Keywords

catfishdemanddynamicspartial adjustmentRotterdam modelC51O11Q13Q17
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , December 2009 , pp. 745 - 759
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, G., and Blundell., R. “Testing Restrictions in a Flexible Dynamic Demand System: An Application to Consumers' Expenditure in Canada.” The Review of Economic Studies 50(1983):397–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnade, C., Pick, D., and Vasavada., U. “Testing Dynamic Specification for Import Demand Models: The Case of Cotton.” Applied Economics 26(1994): 375–80.Google Scholar
Asche, F., Bjørndal, T., and Salvanes., K.G. “The Demand for Salmon in the European Union: The Importance of Product Form and Origin.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 46(1998):69–81.Google Scholar
Balcombe, K.G., and Davis., J.R. “An Application of Cointegration Theory in the Estimation of the Almost Ideal Demand System for Food Consumption in Bulgaria.” Journal of Agricultural Economics 15(1996):47—60.Google Scholar
Barten, A.P. “Maximum Likelihood Estimation of a Complete System of Demand Equations.” European Economic Review 1,1(1969):7—73.Google Scholar
Blanciforti, L., and Green., R. “An Almost Ideal Demand System Incorporating Habits: An Analysis of Expenditures on Food and Aggregate Commodity Groups.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 65(1983):511–15.Google Scholar
Boyer, M. “Rational Demand and Expenditures Patterns under Habit Formation.” Journal of Economic Theory 31(1983):27–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, M.G., and Lee., J.Y. “A Dynamic Differential Demand System: An Application of Translation.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 24,2(1992): 1–10.Google Scholar
Bushehri, M.A.M. “Dynamic Generalization of the Rotterdam Model.” Applied Economics Letters 10(2003):303–6.Google Scholar
Chiang, F.S., Lee, J.Y., and Brown., M.G. “The Impact of Inventory on Tuna Price: An Application of Scaling in the Rotterdam Inverse Demand System.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 33(2001):403–11.Google Scholar
Duffy, M. “Advertising and Alcoholic Drink Demand in the UK: Some Further Rotterdam Model Estimates.” International Journal of Advertising 9(1990):247–58.Google Scholar
Gempesaw, C.M., Bacon, J.R., Wessells, C.R., and Manalo., A. “Consumer Perceptions of Aqua-culture Products.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 77(1995):1306—12.Google Scholar
Gordon, D.V., and Hannesson., R. “On Prices of Fresh and Frozen Cod Fish in European and U.S. Markets.” Marine Resource Economics 11,4(1996):223–38.Google Scholar
Hall, B.H., and Cummins, C. TSP International Reference Manual Version 5.0. Palo Alto, CA: TSP International, 2005.Google Scholar
Hanson, G.D., Rauniyar, G.P., and Herrmann., R.O. “Using Consumer Profiles to Increase the U.S. Market for Seafood: Implications for Aquaculture.” Aquaculture (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 127(1994):303–16.Google Scholar
Hanson, T., Hite, D., and Bosworth., B.A. “A Translog Demand Model for Inherited Traits in Aquacultured Catfish.” Aquaculture Economics and Management 5(2001):3—13.Google Scholar
Hanson, T., and Sites., D. “2006 U.S. Catfish Database.” Mississippi State University, Dept. of Agricultural Economics Information Report 2007-1, March 2007.Google Scholar
Harvey, D., and Blayney., D. Imports and Lackluster Demand Pressure Catfish Prices. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Agricultural Outlook, No. 290. Washington, D.C., 2002.Google Scholar
Holt, M.T., and Goodwin., B.K. “Generalized Habit Formation in an Inverse Almost Ideal Demand System: An Application to Meat Expenditures in the U.S.” Empirical Economics 22(1997):293–320.Google Scholar
Houston, J.E., and Ermita., I. “Dynamic Factors Influencing U.S. and Regional Catfish Demand.” Journal of Food Distribution Research 23,2(1992):9–22.Google Scholar
Houthakker, H.S., and Taylor., L.D. Consumer Demand in the United States: Analysis and Projections, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
Jones, K., Harvey, D.J., Hahn, W.E., and Muhammad., A. “U.S. Demand for Source-Differentiated Shrimp: A Differential Approach.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 40(2008):609–21.Google Scholar
Karagiannis, G., Katranidis, S., and Velentzas., K. “An Error Correction Almost Ideal Demand System for Greece.” Agricultural Economics 22(2000):29–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinnucan, H.W., Nelson, R.G., and Hiariay., J. “U.S. Preferences for Fish and Seafood: An Evoked Set Analysis.” Marine Resource Economics 8(1993):273–91.Google Scholar
Kumar, G., Quagrainie, K., and Engle., C. “Factors That Influence Frequency of Purchase of Catfish by U.S. Households in Selected Cities.” Aquaculture Economics and Management 12(2008):252–67.Google Scholar
Ladewig, K.F., and Logan., D.W. You Can Do Catfish. L-5091 SRAC Publication No. 501, College Station, TX: Southern Regional Aqua-culture Center, November 1992.Google Scholar
Lee, J.C. “Nested Rotterdam Model Applications to Marketing Research with Special Reference to Telecommunications Demand.” International Journal of Forecasting 4(1988):193–206.Google Scholar
National Fisheries Institute. Top 10 U.S. Consumption by Species Chart. Internet site: http://www.aboutseafood.com/about/about-seafood/Top;-10-Consumed-Seafoods (Accessed March 30, 2009).Google Scholar
Pollak, R.A. “Habit Formation and Dynamic Demand Functions.” The Journal of Political Economy 78(1970):745–63.Google Scholar
Pollak, R.A., and Wales., T.J. Demand System Specification & Estimation. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollak, R.A., and Wales., T.J. “Estimation of the Linear Expenditure System.” Econometrica 37(1969):611–28.Google Scholar
Przybylski, L.A., Finert, M.W., Grodner, R.M., and Gerdes., D.L. “Extension of Shelf-Life of Iced Fresh Channel Catfish Fillets Using Modified Atmospheric Packaging and Low Dose Irradiation.” Journal of Food Science 54(2006): 269–73.Google Scholar
Quagrainie, K.K. “A Dynamic Almost Ideal Demand Model for US Catfish.” Aquaculture Economics and Management 7(2003):263–71.Google Scholar
Quagrainie, K.K., and Engle, C.R. “A Latent Class Model For Analyzing Preferences For Catfish.” Aquaculture Economics and Management 10(2006): 1–14.Google Scholar
Seale, J.L., Marchant, M.A., and Basso., A. “Imports Versus Domestic Production: A Demand System Analysis of the U.S. Red Wine Market.” Review of Agricultural Economics 25(2003): 187–202.Google Scholar
Seale, J.L., Sparks, A.L., and Buxton., B.M. “A Rotterdam Application to International Trade in Fresh Apples: A Differential Approach.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 17(1992): 138–49.Google Scholar
Sexauer, B. “The Role of Habits and Stocks in Consumer Expenditure.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 91(1977): 127–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theil, H. The System-Wide Approach to Microeconomics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Theil, H., and Clements., K.W. Applied Demand Analysis: Results from System-Wide Approaches. Cambridge: Ballinger Publishing Company, 1987.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). Catfish Production. Washington, D.C.: Agricultural Statistics Board, January 2009.Google Scholar
Wohlgenant, M.K., and Hahn., W.F. “Dynamic Adjustments in Monthly Consumer Demands.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 64(1982):553–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar