Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-dwq4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-03T20:25:50.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Optimal Organization of a Statewide Livestock Auction Market System: The Case of Tennessee

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2016

Emily A. McClain  and
Dan L. McLemore
Emily A. McClain
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Tennessee
Dan L. McLemore
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Tennessee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Optimal sizes, number, and locations of Tennessee livestock auction markets were identified as those which minimize the combined costs of assembling and marketing livestock for the state using a separable programming model. The model includes transportation costs, economies of size in market operation, a proxy for reductions in buyers' operating costs attributable to increasing market volumes, and livestock production density, both in and around the state. The model is sufficiently comprehensive and descriptive to be of practical use by policy makers who influence industry change. Results indicate that a reduction in market numbers would lower combined costs.

Keywords

livestock auction marketsassembly costtransportation costeconomies of sizeoptimal sizelocation
Type
Submitted Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , December 1987 , pp. 121 - 131
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1987

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

Hicks, B. G., and Badenhop, M. B.. Optimum Number, Size, and Location of Livestock Auction Markets in Tennessee. University of Tennessee, Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 478, March 1971.Google Scholar
Clarkson, K. W., and Miller, R. L.. Industrial Organization: Theory, Evidence, and Public Policy. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1982.Google Scholar
Cobia, D. W., and Babb, E. M.. “An Application of Equilibrium Size of Plant Analysis of Fluid Milk Processing Distribution.” J. Farm Econ., 46(1964):109–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadley, G. Nonlinear and Dynamic Programming. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc., 1964.Google Scholar
Hicks, B. G., and Badenhop, M. B.. Optimum Number, Size and Location of Livestock Auction Markets in Tennessee. University of Tennessee, Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 478, March 1971.Google Scholar
Lindberg, R. C, and Judge, G. C.. Estimated Cost Functions for Oklahoma Livestock Auctions. Oklahoma State University, Experiment Station Bulletin B-502, January 1958.Google Scholar
McClain, E. A. “An Economic Analysis of the Optimum Sizes, Number, and Locations of Tennessee Livestock Auction Markets.” Unpublished M.S. Thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, August 1985.Google Scholar
McLemore, D. L., McClain, E. A., and Whipple, G. D.. “Characteristics of Livestock Transportation from Farm to Auction Market in Tennessee.” Tennessee Farm and Home Science. No. 135. University of Tennessee, Agricultural Experiment Station, July-September, 1985, pp. 6–8.Google Scholar
McLemore, D. L., Whipple, G. D., and Spielman, K.. “OLS and Frontier Function Estimates of Long Run Average Cost for Tennessee Livestock Auction Markets.” So. J. Agr. Econ., 15,2(1983):79–83.Google Scholar
Miller, C. E. “The Simplex Method for Local Separable Programming.” In Recent Advances in Mathematical Programming. Ed. Graves, R. L. and Wolfe, P.. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963. pp. 89–100.Google Scholar
Pindyck, R. S., and Rubinfeld, D. L.. Econometric Models and Economic Forecasts. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1981.Google Scholar
Purcell, W. D. “An Approach to Research on Vertical Coordination: The Beef System in Oklahoma.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 55, 1(1973):65–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spielman, K. A., McLemore, D. L., and Whipple, G. D.. Costs of Operation of Tennessee Livestock Auction Markets. University of Tennessee, Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 620, April 1983.Google Scholar
Spielman, K. A., McLemore, D. L., and Whipple, G. D.. Costs of Operation of Tennessee Livestock Auction Markets. University of Tennessee, Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 620, April 1983.Google Scholar
Stollsteimer, J. F. “A Working Model for Plant Numbers and Locations.” J. Farm Econ., 45(1963):631–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tennessee Department of Agriculture. Unpublished listing of livestock auction market volume of business, Nashville, 1983 and 1986.Google Scholar
Tennessee Department of Agriculture and USDA Statistical Reporting Service. Tennessee Agricultural Statistics. 1984 Annual Bulletin, Bulletin T-21, Nashville, October 1984.Google Scholar
Tennessee Department of Agriculture and USDA Statistical Reporting Service. Tennessee Agricultural Statistics. 1986 Annual Bulletin, Nashville, September, 1986.Google Scholar
Tramel, T. E., and Seale, A. D. Jr. “Estimation of Transfer Functions.” In Interregional Competition Research Methods. Ed. King, R. A., The Agricultural Policy Institute. Raleigh: North Carolina State University, 1963. pp. 175–177.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Statistics Board. Agricultural Prices. Washington D.C., various issues.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Packers and Stockyards Administration. Registrants, Posted Stockyards, and Bonded Packers. Memphis Area, September 30, 1983.Google Scholar