IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea01/20610.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Impacts Of Federal Support Programs For Sugar And Peanuts Compared To Corn And Wheat On U.S. And World Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Mohanty, Samarendu
  • Beghin, John C.
  • Kaus, Phillip J.

Abstract

This study examines the impacts of federal support programs for sugar, peanuts, corn and wheat on U.S. and world markets, using a multi-country, multi-commodity, partial equilibrium world agricultural model. A five-year baseline projection is developed assuming past policy will continue. Four policy reform scenarios are then conducted. Each scenario considers the removal of federal programs such as loan rate, loan deficiency payments and other trade restrictions for each commodity (sugar, peanuts, corn and wheat). A fifth, and last, scenario looks at the impact of jointly eliminating the wheat and corn support programs. Federal programs appear to have the maximum impacts on the sugar market, followed by the peanut market. As compared to sugar and peanuts, wheat and corn markets appear to be the least affected by federal support programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohanty, Samarendu & Beghin, John C. & Kaus, Phillip J., 2001. "Impacts Of Federal Support Programs For Sugar And Peanuts Compared To Corn And Wheat On U.S. And World Markets," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20610, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea01:20610
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.20610
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/20610/files/sp01mo02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.20610?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. Moschini, Giancarlo, 1991. "Economic issues in tariffication: an overview," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 101-120, June.
    2. Stephen Devadoss & Jurgen Kropf, 1996. "Impacts of trade liberalizations under the Uruguay Round on the world sugar market," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 15(2), pages 83-96, November.
    3. Rendleman, C. Matthew & Hertel, Thomas W., 1993. "Do Corn Farmers Have Too Much Faith In The Sugar Program?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 18(1), pages 1-10, July.
    4. Borges, Robert B., 1995. "Trade And The Political Economy Of Agricultural Policy: The Case Of The United States Peanut Program," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Haley, Stephen L., 1998. "Modeling The U.S. Sweetener Sector: An Application To The Analysis Of Policy Reform," Working Papers 14610, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    6. Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Borges, Robert B., 1995. "Trade and the Political Economy of Agricultural Policy: The Case of the United States Peanut Program," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 595-612, December.
    7. Devadoss, Stephen & Kropf, Jurgen, 1996. "Impacts of trade liberalizations under the Uruguay round on the world sugar market," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 83-96, November.
    8. Smith, Vincent H. & Glauber, Joseph W., 1997. "The Effects Of The 1996 Farm Bill On Food And Feed Grains," Policy Issues Papers 29170, Montana State University, Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics, Trade Research Center.
    9. Chen, Changping & Fletcher, Stanley M., 1997. "Economic Implications Of The Fair Act On U.S. Peanut Producers," Faculty Series 16698, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    10. 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.
    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. 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.

    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. John C. Beghin & Barbara El Osta & Jay R. Cherlow & Samarendu Mohanty, 2003. "The Cost Of The U.S. Sugar Program Revisited," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 21(1), pages 106-116, January.
    2. 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.
    3. Svatoš, M. & Maitah, Mansoor & Belova, Anna, 2013. "World Sugar Market – Basic Development Trends and Tendencies," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 5(2), pages 1-16, June.
    4. 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.
    5. Zhai, Fan, 2006. "Preferential Trade Agreements in Asia: Alternative Scenarios of "Hub and Spoke"," Conference papers 331509, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    6. Won W. Koo, 2002. "Alternative U.S. and EU Sugar Trade Liberalization Policies and their Implications," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(2), pages 336-352.
    7. Abhinav Narayanan & Shekhar Tomar, 2023. "Farm support and market distortion: Evidence from India," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(3), pages 966-993, May.
    8. Brockmeier, Martina & Sommer, Ulrich & Thomsen, Karin, 2005. "Sugar Policies: An Invincible Bastion for Modelers?," 89th Seminar, February 2-5, 2005, Parma, Italy 232588, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2001. "Welfare Effects Of Transgenic Sugarbeets In The European Union: A Theoretical Ex-Ante Framework," Working Papers 31852, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    10. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2001. "Ex-Ante Evaluation Of The Economic Impact Of Agricultural Biotechnology In The European Union: The Case Of Transgenic Sugarbeets," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20631, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Chen, Changping & Fletcher, Stanley M., 1997. "Economic Implications Of The Fair Act On U.S. Peanut Producers," Faculty Series 16698, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    12. Huan-Niemi, Ellen & Niemi, Jyrki S., 2003. "The Impact of Preferential, Regional and Multilateral Trade Agreements: A Case Study of the EU Sugar Regime," ENARPRI Working Papers 25134, European Network of Agricultural and Rural Policy Research Institutes (ENARPRI).
    13. Ellen Huan-Niemi & Jyrki Niemi, 2003. "The impact of preferential, regional and multilateral trade agreements: a case study of the EU sugar regime," ENARPRI Working Papers 001, ENARPRI (European Network of Agricultural and Rural Policy Research Institutes).
    14. Anania, Giovanni, 2001. "Modeling Agricultural Trade Liberalization. A Review," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20758, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2002. "The Euwab-Project: Discussion," Working Papers 31858, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    16. Huan-Niemi, Ellen & Kerkela, Leena, 2005. "Reform in the EU Sugar Regime: Impact on the Global Sugar Markets," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24733, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Gotor, Elisabetta & Tsigas, Marinos E., 2011. "The impact of the EU sugar trade reform on poor households in developing countries: A general equilibrium analysis," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 568-582, July.
    18. Nyanjong', Oyugi Johana & Lagat, Job, 2012. "Analysis of efficiency in sugarcane production: the case of men and women headed households in SONY sugar out -grower zone, Rongo and Trans-Mara districts, Kenya," MPRA Paper 40796, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Shunxiang Wu & Stephen Devadoss & Yaochi Lu, 2003. "Estimation and decomposition of technical efficiency for sugarbeet farms," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 471-484.
    20. Elobeid, Amani & Tokgoz, Simla, 2008. "AJAE Appendix for “Removing Distortions in the U.S. Ethanol Market: What Does It Imply for the United States and Brazil?”," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1-30, February.

    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:aaea01:20610. 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.