Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T20:20:29.186Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Supply Response to Technological Change and Regulation: The Case of Mechanically Deboned Poultry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Douglas W. McNiel ,
Clark R. Burbee  and
Howard R. Wetzel II
Douglas W. McNiel
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, University of Central Florida
Clark R. Burbee
Affiliation:
National Economic Analysis Division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Howard R. Wetzel II
Affiliation:
Dairy, Livestock and Poultry Division, Foreign Agricultural Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The supply of poultry meat is being augmented by hundreds of millions of pounds annually at little economic cost and no increase in the output of chickens or turkeys. The food-processing innovation responsible for boosting the utilization efficiency of our scarce food protein resources is mechanical deboning, a technique that separates the remaining meat from bones destined to be rendered into inedible products. The potential gains to society from further widespread adoption of this technology could be enormous. Therefore, it is important to have a clear understanding of the factors that affect the market supply response to this technology, as well as the impact of additional regulations governing its use.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , December 1983 , pp. 133 - 137
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1983

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

Bullock, J. B., and Ward, C. E.. “Economic Impacts of Regulations on Mechanically Deboned Red Meats.” Oklahoma State University Agr. Res. Exp. Sta., January 1981.Google Scholar
Fields, R. A. “Increased Animal Protein Production With Mechanical Deboners.” World Rev. of Animal Prod. 12(1976):61–73.Google Scholar
Gardner, B. L. “Futures Prices in Supply Analysis.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 58(1976):81–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malinvaud, E.Statistical Methods of Econometrics, Second Ed. New York: American Elesevier Publishing Co., 1980, pp. 641–644.Google Scholar
McNiel, D. W. “Economic Welfare and Food Safety Regulation: The Case of Mechanically Deboned Meat,” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 62(1980):1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morzuch, B. J., Weaver, R. D., and Helmberger, P. G.. “Wheat Acreage Supply Response Under Changing Farm Programs.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 62(1980):29–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nerlove, Marc. “Distributed Lags and Estimation of Long-Run Supply and Demand Elasticities: Theoretical Considerations.” J. Farm Econ. 40(1958):301–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poultry and Egg Institute of America. “Survey of MDP Production.” (Unpublished survey results) Arlington, Virginia, 1976.Google Scholar
Sun, T. Y. “Three Kinds of Frankfurters: Retail Demand.” Nat. Food Rev. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Econ. Stat. Serv., Winter, 1982, pp. 20–21.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Mechanically Deboned Poultry Survey Results. Memo from Wetzel, H. R., Econ. and Stat. Serv., October 7, 1980.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Poultry and Egg Outlook and Situation. Washington, D.C: Econ. Stat, and Coop. Serv., selected issues.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Poultry Market Statistics. Washington, D.C: Agr. Mktg. Serv., annual issues 1978 and 1979.Google Scholar
U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO). “Report to the Congress: Federal Regulation of Meat and Poultry Products—Increased Consumer Protection and Efficiencies Needed.” May 4, 1983.Google Scholar
U.S. General Services Administration (USGSA). “Standards and Labeling Requirements for Mechanically Separated (Species) and Products in Which It Is Used.” Federal Register, Vol. 47, part II, No. 125, 29 June 1982, pp. 28214–28258.Google Scholar
U.S. General Services Administration (USGSA). “Title 9—Animals and Animal Products.” Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).Google Scholar
Urner Barry's Price-Current. Toms River, N.J.: Urner Barry Publications, Inc., 1978-1979.Google Scholar
Williams, W. F. “Economic Evaluation of Potentials Through Mechanical Deboning of Red Mat.” TARA Inc., Lubbock, Texas, April 1979.Google Scholar