Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T05:11:07.375Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Application of Price Elasticities to Farm Policy Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

W. Lanny Bateman
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Mississippi State University
Earl A. Stennis
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Mississippi State University

Extract

Much dialogue has been devoted to the “farm problem” by both the public and private sectors in recent months. Expressions of concern about chronic low farm income because of low prices received have again become common. Numerous proposals have been offered as solutions to the problem.

It is of concern to the authors that many of these proposals emphasize production control as means of maintaining adequate farm price levels. Economists routinely receive training in the concepts of demand and supply response which, although difficult to quantify, offer easily understood market principles. For example, elasticity of demand can be used to show U. S. farmers how actions taken to reduce domestic production could be less than beneficial to the producer. Perhaps economists have failed to apply some of these concepts in the evaluation of policy alternatives or have not clearly demonstrated the effects (particularly long-run) of unilateral actions taken by the United States.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1978

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

[1]Agricultural Statistics, 1976, USDA. Washington, D.C: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1976.Google Scholar
[2]Donald, J. R., Lowenstein, Frank, and Martin, S. Simon. The Demand for Textile Fibers in the United States, Technical Bulletin No. 1301, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1965.Google Scholar
[3]Dudley, George E.Demand for Textile Fibers in the United States: Estimation of Price Elasticities in Major End-Use Markets, National Economics Analysis Division, Economic Research Service, 1965.Google Scholar
[4]Foote, Richard J.Analytical Tools for Studying Demand and Price Structures, Agriculture Handbook No. 146, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1958.Google Scholar
[5]Hauck, J. P. and Mann, J. S.. An Analysis of Domestic and Foreign Demand for U. S. Soybeans and Soybean Products, University of Minnesota, Agriculture Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 256, 1968.Google Scholar
[6]Johnson, Paul R.The Elasticity of Foreign Demand for U. S. Agricultural Products,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Volume 59, 1977, pp. 735736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Lowenstein, Frank. “Factors Affecting the Domestic Mill Consumption of Cotton,” Agricultural Economic Research, W-2, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1952.Google Scholar
[8]Stennis, Earl A.Development of Quantitative Models for Use in the Projection of Domestic Mill Consumption of Cotton Fiber, Department of Agricultural Economics, Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station AEC. Technical Publication No. 16, March 1977.Google Scholar
[9]Tweeten, Luther. “The Elasticity of Foreign Demand for U. S. Agricultural Products: Comment,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Volume 59, 1977, pp. 737738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Tweeten, Luther. Foundations of Farm Policy, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1970.Google Scholar
[11]Ward, Lionel and King, Gordon A.. Interfiber Competition with Emphasis on Cotton: Trends and Projections to 1980, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Bulletin No. 1487, 1973.Google Scholar
[12]Waugh, Fredrick V.Graphic Analysis: Applications in Agricultural Economics, Agriculture Handbook No. 326, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1966.Google Scholar
[13]Waugh, Frederick V.Demand and Price Analysis, Bulletin No. 1316, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1964.Google Scholar