Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T13:28:35.858Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Producer Returns from Cotton Strength and Uniformity: An Hedonic Price Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Don E. Ethridge  and
Jarral T. Neeper
Don E. Ethridge
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas Tech University
Jarral T. Neeper
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas Tech University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Implicit (hedonic) producer prices for fiber strength uniformity were estimated for the southwest U.S. cotton market using seemingly unrelated regression and market sales data from 1983/84 and 1984/85. Fiber strength and length uniformity had significant effects on the price of cotton, but price was less responsive to both attributes than anticipated. Producer prices were most responsive to fiber length and micronaire and least responsive to color and strength. The market at the producer level appears to be making effective price adjustments with respect to factors such as fiber color, trash content, micronaire, fiber length, and location, but strength and length uniformity premiums and discounts are smaller than those paid by end users.

Keywords

hedonic pricescotton qualityseemingly unrelated regression
Type
Submitted Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , July 1987 , pp. 91 - 98
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

Brorsen, W. B., Grant, W. R., and Rister, M. E. “A Hedonic Price Model for Rice Bid/Acceptance Markets.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 66(1984):156–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carl, E. K., Kilmer, R. L., and Kenny, L. W. “Evaluating Implicit Prices for Intermediate Products.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 65(1983):592–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Court, A. T.“Hedonic Price Indexes with Automotive Examples.” The Dynamics of Automobile Demand, The General Motors Corporation, New York, 1939.Google Scholar
Duessen, H. “Some Thoughts on the Role of Cotton in New Spinning Technologies.” Paper presented at the 1985 Cotton Textile Conference, New Orleans, National Cotton Council, Jan. 1985.Google Scholar
Ethridge, D. E.“A Computerized Remote-Access Commodity Market; Telcot.” So. J. Agr. Econ., 10(1978):177–182.Google Scholar
Ethridge, D. E., and Davis, B.. “Hedonic Price Estimation for Commodities: An Application to Cotton.” West. J. Agr. Econ., 7(1982):156–163.Google Scholar
Ethridge, D. E., and Mathews, K. H. “Reliability of Spot Cotton Quotations for Price Discovery in the West Texas Cotton Market.” Texas Tech Univ. College of Agr. Sci.. Pub. No. T-1-212, Aug. 1983.Google Scholar
Ethridge, D. E., Shaw, D. L., and Ross, J. E. “An Evaluation of the Impact of Instrument Test Line Values on Cotton Marketing and Use: Progress Report.” Econ. Res. Serv., U.S. Department of Agriculture, Aug. 1977.Google Scholar
Glade, E. H. Jr., Collins, K. J., and Rogers, C. D. “Cotton Quality Evaluation: Testing Methods and Use.” U.S. Department of Agriculture, ERS-668, Nov. 1981.Google Scholar
Griliches, Z., ed. Price Indexes and Quality Change. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hembree, J. F., Ethridge, D. E., and Neeper, J. T. “Market Values of Fiber Properties at Southeastern Mill Points.” Textile Res. Jour., 56(1986):140–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, J. Econometric Methods. 2nd ed., New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1972.Google Scholar
Neeper, J. T.“Producer Values for Fiber Strength and Length Uniformity in the Southwestern U.S. Cotton Market.” Unpublished M.S. Thesis, Texas Tech Univ., Dec. 1985.Google Scholar
Taylor, F. “Relation Between Primary Market Prices and Qualities of Cotton.” U.S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin No. 457, Nov. 24, 1916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. “The Classification of Cotton.” Agricultural Marketing Service, Agriculture Handbook No. 566, Apr. 1980.Google Scholar
Wilson, W. W.“Hedonic Prices in the Malting Barley Market.” West. J. Agr. Econ., 9(1984):29–40.Google Scholar
Zellner, A. “An Efficient Method of Estimating Seemingly Unrelated Regression and Tests for Aggregation Bias.” J. Amer. Stat. Assn., 57(1962):348–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar