IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea01/20557.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Peanut Quota Markets And Peanut Production After Fair

Author

Listed:
  • Chvosta, Jan
  • Rucker, Randal R.
  • Thurman, Walter N.

Abstract

The U.S. peanut program has limited peanut production since 1949. Unlike the programs for grains, cotton, and rice, the 1996 FAIR Act left the peanut program largely intact. As before FAIR (and since 1977) the right to grow peanuts for the domestic edible market is embodied in marketing quota, which can be leased and sold. The FAIR Act for the first time allowed quota movement across county lines. We now have four years of experience with peanut quota markets post-FAIR. In some parts of the country, quota has moved as much as the regulatory caps allow. But in most of the traditional peanut-growing areas of the Southeast there has been little cross-county movement. In this paper we analyze a large county-level panel of pre- and post-FAIR data to assess the effects of these changes in policy. We have compiled from USDA-FSA sources data on quota movements for virtually every peanut-producing county in the seven major peanut-producing states. We use these data to test microeconomic predictions of the effects of the loosening of transfer restrictions. Analysis of the data shows large quota movements in areas where observations on additionals production and lease rates would have predicted such. We find that movements in production, as distinct from movements in quota, cannot be explained entirely by FAIR, but can reasonably be attributed to changes in the profitability of growing competing crops such as cotton. The reduced profitability of the latter might itself be attributed in part to the elimination of cotton deficiency payments.

Suggested Citation

  • Chvosta, Jan & Rucker, Randal R. & Thurman, Walter N., 2001. "Peanut Quota Markets And Peanut Production After Fair," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20557, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea01:20557
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.20557
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/20557/files/sp01ch02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.20557?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruce A. Babcock & William E. Foster, 1992. "Economic Rents Under Supply Controls with Marketable Quota," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(3), pages 630-637.
    2. Rucker, Randal R & Thurman, Walter N & Sumner, Daniel A, 1995. "Restricting the Market for Quota: An Analysis of Tobacco Production Rights with Corroboration from Congressional Testimony," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(1), pages 142-175, February.
    3. Rucker, Randal R & Thurman, Walter N, 1990. "The Economic Effects of Supply Controls: The Simple Analytics of the U.S. Peanut Program," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(2), pages 483-515, October.
    4. Hoover, Dale M. & Efstratoglou Todoulos, Sophia I., 1973. "Economic Effects Of Intercounty Transfer Of Flue-Cured Tobacco Quota," Department of Economics and Business - Archive 259736, North Carolina State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Robert B. Borges & Walter N. Thurman, 1994. "Marketing Quotas and Random Yields: Marginal Effects of Inframarginal Subsidies on Peanut Supply," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(4), pages 809-817.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Devkota, Shankar & Holcomb, Rodney B. & Taylor, Merritt J. & Epplin, Francis M., 2006. "Economically Feasible Crop Production Alternatives to Peanuts in Southwestern Oklahoma," 2006 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2006, Orlando, Florida 35377, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    2. Pease, James W. & Lehman, John & Orden, David, 2001. "Proposed End Of Peanut Quota Program: Economic Effects On Virginia Producers," Report Papers 14845, Virginia Tech, Rural Economic Analysis Program (REAP).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rucker, Randal R & Thurman, Walter N & Sumner, Daniel A, 1995. "Restricting the Market for Quota: An Analysis of Tobacco Production Rights with Corroboration from Congressional Testimony," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(1), pages 142-175, February.
    2. Ramsey, Austin F. & Goodwin, Barry K., 2024. "A Different 'Law of One Price:' Missouri's Livestock Marketing Law of 1999," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 343679, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Peckham, Janet G. & Kropp, Jaclyn D., 2012. "Decoupled Direct Payments under Base Acreage and Yield Updating Uncertainty: An Investigation of Agricultural Chemical Use," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 41(2), pages 1-17, August.
    4. Just, David R. & Kropp, Jaclyn D., 2009. "Production Incentives from Static Decoupling: Entry, Exit and Use Exclusion Restrictions," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49158, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Nancy H. Chau & Harry de Gorter, 2005. "Disentangling the Consequences of Direct Payment Schemes in Agriculture on Fixed Costs, Exit Decisions, and Output," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1174-1181.
    6. Pavel Ciaian & d’Artis Kancs & Johan Swinnen, 2010. "EU Land Markets and the Common Agricultural Policy," Journal of Economics and Econometrics, Economics and Econometrics Society, vol. 53(3), pages 1-31.
    7. Pavel Ciaian & d'Artis Kancs & Jo Swinnen, 2008. "Static and Dynamic Distributional Effects of Decoupled Payments," Journal of Economics and Econometrics, Economics and Econometrics Society, vol. 51(2), pages 20-47.
    8. Jaclyn D. Kropp & Ani L. Katchova, 2011. "The effects of direct payments on liquidity and repayment capacity of beginning farmers," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 71(3), pages 347-365, November.
    9. Kropp, Jaclyn D. & Whitaker, James B., 2009. "The Impact of Decoupled Payments on the Cost of Operating Capital," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49311, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. repec:lic:licosd:20708 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Jaclyn D. Kropp & James B. Whitaker, 2011. "The impact of decoupled payments on the cost of operating capital," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 71(1), pages 25-40, May.
    12. Muth, Mary K & Rucker, Randal R & Thurman, Walter N & Chuang, Ching-Ta, 2003. "The Fable of the Bees Revisited: Causes and Consequences of the U.S. Honey Program," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 46(2), pages 479-516, October.
    13. Ekaterina Vorotnikova & Serhat Asci & James L. Seale, 2018. "Joint production, land allocation, and the effects of the production flexibility program," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 1121-1143, November.
    14. Raper, Kellie Curry & Love, H. Alan, 1999. "MONOPSONY POWER IN MULTIPLE INPUT MARKETS: A Nonparametric Approach," Staff Paper Series 11656, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    15. Elizabeth Hoffman & Gary D. Libecap, 1994. "Political Bargaining and Cartelization in the New Deal: Orange Marketing Orders," NBER Chapters, in: The Regulated Economy: A Historical Approach to Political Economy, pages 189-222, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. María Bielza & Alberto Garrido & José M. Sumpsi, 2004. "Revenue insurance as an income stabilization policy: an application to the Spanish olive oil sector," Post-Print hal-01201063, HAL.
    17. Fraser, Rob W., 1995. "A Note: A Clarification Of The Role Of Yield Uncertainty In Influencing Over-Quota Production," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 39(2), pages 1-5, August.
    18. Louis-Pascal Mahé & Carole Ropars, 1998. "Régulation de l'exploitation d'une ressource renouvelable : inefficacité d'un rationnement d'input et efficacité des quotas individuels transférables (QIT)," Post-Print hal-02349927, HAL.
    19. Lee, Dae-Seob & Kennedy, P. Lynn & Fletcher, Stanley M., 2006. "An Analysis of Latin American Peanut Trade," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(1), pages 1-16, April.
    20. Thurman, Walter N. & Chvosta, Jan & Brown, Blake A. & Rucker, Randal R., 2003. "The End Of Supply Controls: The Economic Effects Of Recent Change In Federal Peanut Policy," 2003 Annual Meeting, February 1-5, 2003, Mobile, Alabama 35041, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    21. Walter N. Thurman, 1993. "The Welfare Significance and Nonsignificance of General Equilibrium Demand and Supply Curves," Public Finance Review, , vol. 21(4), pages 449-469, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea01:20557. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.