Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-swr86 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-24T15:19:50.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Responsiveness of U.S. Rice Acreage to Price and Production Costs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Michael E. Salassi
Michael E. Salassi*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ordinary least squares and seemingly unrelated regression procedures were used to analyze the impacts of changes in rice prices and production costs on U.S. rice planted acreage. National and regional response models were estimated over the 1970-92 period. Supply-inducing prices of rice were estimated as a function of effective rice support prices and seasonal average market prices. Expected production costs per acre were estimated using lagged actual total variable cash production expenses per acre adjusted by the previous 3-year average annual change in variable expenses. Estimated short-run price and production cost elasticities were found to be inelastic at the national level. However, the magnitude of the production cost elasticities were found to be greater than the price elasticities. Estimated long-run elasticities at the U.S. level were inelastic for changes in price but elastic for changes in production costs. Although acreage response varied across regions, similar relationships were found between price and production cost elasticities.

Keywords

Riceacreage response functionprice elasticityproduction cost elasticity
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , December 1995 , pp. 386 - 399
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1995

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

Bailey, Kenneth W. and Abner, W. Womack. “Wheat Acreage Response: A Regional Econometric Investigation.” S. J. Agr. Econ. 17(1985): 171–180.Google Scholar
Broussard, Kathryn A. “Assessment of the 50/92 Provision and the U.S. Rice Program.” Rice Situation and Outlook Report. Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, RS-63 (1992): 29–30.Google Scholar
Childs Nathan, W. and Lin, William. Rice: Background for 1990 Farm Legislation. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Staff Report No. AGES 89–49 (1989).Google Scholar
Dismukes, Robert. U.S. Rice Farms: A Regional Comparison., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Staff Report No. AGES880119 (1988).Google Scholar
Duffy Patricia, A., Richardson, James W., and Wohlgenant, Michael K.. “Regional Cotton Acreage Response.” S. J. Agr. Econ. 19(1987):99–109.Google Scholar
Gallagher, Paul. “The Effectiveness of Price Support Policy - Some Evidence for U.S. Corn Acreage Response.” Agricultural Economics Research. 30,4 (1978): 8–14.Google Scholar
Grant, Warren R. and Leath, Mack W.. Factors Affecting Supply, Demand, and Prices of U.S. Rice. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service, ESCS-47 (1979).Google Scholar
Grant, Warren R., Beach, John, and Lin, William. Factors Affecting Supply, Demand, and Prices of U.S. Rice. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Staff Report No. AGES840803 (1984).Google Scholar
Holder, Shelby H. Jr. and Grant, Warren R.. U.S. Rice Industry. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service, Agricultural Economic Report No. 433 (1979).Google Scholar
Houck, James P. and Subotnik, Abraham. “The U.S. Supply of Soybeans: Regional Acreage Functions.” Agricultural Economics Research. 21,4(1969): 99–108.Google Scholar
Kincannon, John A.Statistical Analysis of Rice Supply and Demand Before and During Government Programs. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Misc. Pub. 273 (1958).Google Scholar
Kmenta, Jan.Elements of Econometrics. Second edition, New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Co., (1986).Google Scholar
Lee, David R. and Helmberger, Peter G.. “Estimating Supply Response in the Presence of Farm Programs.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 67(1985): 193–203.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
Orazem, P. and Miranowski, J.. “An Indirect Test for the Specification of Expectation Regimes.” Rev. Econ. and Stat. 68(1986):603–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romain, R. F. “A Commodity Specific Simulation Model for U.S. Agriculture.” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station (1983).Google Scholar
Salassi, Michael E.U.S. Rice Production Practices and Costs, 1988. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Statistical Bulletin No. 837 (1992).Google Scholar
Shideed, Kamil H. and White, Fred C.. “Alternative Forms of Price Expectations in Supply Analysis For U.S. Corn and Soybean Acreages.” W. J. Agr. Econ. 14(1989):281–292.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Prices, various issues.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Crop Production, various issues.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Economic Indicators of the Farm Sector: Costs of Production—Major Field Crops, 1990. Economic Research Service, ECIFS 10-4 (1992).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Rice Situation and Outlook Report, various issues.Google Scholar
Watanabe, Satoko, Stanton, B.F., and Willett, Lois S.. Potential Effect of Decoupling on the U.S. Rice Industry. Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, Department of Agricultural Economics, A.E. Res. 90-5 (1990).Google Scholar
Zellner, A. “An Efficient Method of Estimating Seemingly Unrelated Regressions and Tests for Aggregation Bias.” J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 57(1962):348–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar