Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5cfd469876-mjnjv Total loading time: 0.936 Render date: 2021-06-24T20:54:52.418Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Impact of Mandatory Price Reporting on Hog Market Integration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2015

Jason R.V. Franken
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
Joe L. Parcell
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
Glynn T. Tonsor
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas
Get access

Abstract

This research examines whether mandatory price reporting (MPR) impacted price relationships among U.S. hog markets. Markets are cointegrated before and after MPR enactment, but not fully integrated in either period. Terminal markets adjust to shocks in the Iowa-Southern Minnesota market more quickly and Iowa-Southern Minnesota prices adjust to shocks in terminal markets more slowly following MPR enactment. Granger causality tests indicate a causal flow from terminal markets to Iowa-Southern Minnesota prices before MPR and a causal reversal after MPR enactment. These results likely reflect decreases in volume of negotiated sales, particularly in terminal markets, and greater reliance on mandatorily reported prices for market information.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Azzam, A.Market Transparency and Market Structure: The Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act of 1999.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85,2(2003):387–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, D., and Brorsen, B.W.Dynamics of Regional Fed Cattle Prices.” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 10,1(1985):126–33.Google Scholar
Barrett, C.B., and Li, J.R.Distinguishing Between Equilibrium and Integration in Spatial Price Analysis.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 84,2(2002):292307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benson, B.L., Faminow, M.D., Marquis, M.H., and Sauer, D.G.Intra-national Effects of a Countervailing Duty on the United States/Canadian Hog Market.” Review of Agricultural Economics 16(1994): 187201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bessler, D.A., and Covey, T.On the Search for Econometric Structure in Agriculture.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75(1993): 4147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brester, G.W., and Goodwin, B.K.Vertical and Horizontal Price Linkages and Market Concentration of the U.S. Wheat Milling Industry.” Review of Agricultural Economics 15,3(1993): 507–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, C.A., and Mohapatra, S.How Reliable are Hog Futures as Forecasts?American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90,2(2008): 367–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, P.-F., and Lee, C.-C.Nonlinear Adjustments in Deviations from the Law of One Price for Wholesale Hog Prices.” Agricultural Economics 39,1(2008): 123–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enders, W. Applied Econometric Time Series. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1995.Google Scholar
Engle, R.F., and Granger, C.W.J.Co-integration and Error Correction: Representation, Estimation, and Testing.” Econometrica 55(1987):251–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faminow, M., and Benson, B.Integration of Spatial Markets.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 72,1(1990):4962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Federal Register. Part V, Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Livestock and Grain Market News Branch: Livestock Mandatory Reporting; Final Rule. National Archives and Records Administration. Friday, December 1, 2000.Google Scholar
Fausti, S.W., and Diersen, M.A.The Voluntary Reporting System's Ability to Provide Price Transparency in the Cash Market for Dressed Steers: Evidence from South Dakota.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 29,3 (2004):553–66.Google Scholar
Fausti, S.W., Qasmi, B.A., Li, J., and Diersen, M.A.The Effect of the Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act on Market Transparency and Grid Price Dispersion.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 39,3(2010):457–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, J., Gómez, M., Kunda, E., and Garcia, P. “Cash Settlement of Lean Hog Futures Contracts Reexamined.” Paper presented at the NCCC-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting, and Market Risk Management, St. Louis, Missouri, April 21-22, 2008.Google Scholar
Franken, J.R.V., Parcell, J.L., Sykuta, M.E., and Fulcher, C.F.Market Integration: Case Studies of Structural Change.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 43,2(2005): 163–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, B.Multivariate Cointegration Tests and the Law of One Price in International Wheat Markets.” Review of Agricultural Economics 14,1(1992a):117–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, B.Forecasting Cattle Prices in the Presence of Structural Change.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 24,2(1992b):1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, B., and Piggott, N.Spatial Market Integration in the Presence of Threshold Effects.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 83,2(2001):302–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, B.K., and Schroeder, T.C.Cointegration Tests and Spatial Price Linkages in Regional Cattle Markets.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73(1991):453–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, A.W., and Hansen, B.E.Residual-Based Tests for Cointegration in Models with Regime Shifts.” Journal of Econometrics 70(1996):99126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimes, G., and Plain, R. U.S. Hog Marketing Contract Study. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Department of Agricultural Economics, 2005.Google Scholar
Grimes, G., and Plain, R. U.S. Hog Marketing Contract Study. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Department of Agricultural Economics, 2007.Google Scholar
Gujarati, D. Basic Econometrics, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1995.Google Scholar
Johansen, S.Statistical Analysis of Cointegration Vectors.” Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control 12(1988):213–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koontz, S.R., Garcia, P., and Hudson, M.A.Dominant-Satellite Relationships between Live Cattle Cash and Futures Markets.” Journal of Futures Markets 10,2(1990): 123–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Y., Ward, C.E., and Brorsen, B.W.Relationships among Prices across Alternative Marketing Arrangements for Fed Cattle and Hogs.” Paper presented at the Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Orlando, FL, February 6–9, 2010.Google Scholar
McNew, K., and Fackler, P.L.Testing Market Equilibrium: Is Cointegration Informative.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 22,2(1997): 191207.Google Scholar
Osterwald-Lenum, M.A Note with Quantiles of the Asymptotic Distribution of the Maximum Likelihood Cointegration Rank Test Statistics.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 54(1992):461–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pendell, D.L., and Schroeder, T.C.Impact of Mandatory Price Reporting on Fed Cattle Market Integration.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 31,3(2006):568–79.Google Scholar
Plain, R. Personal Communication. Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Missouri, February 15, 2010.Google Scholar
Schroeder, T.C.Fed Cattle Spatial Transactions Price Relationships.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 29,2(1997):347–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schroeder, T.C., and Goodwin, B.K.Regional Fed Cattle Price Dynamics.” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 15,1(1990):111–22.Google Scholar
Schroeder, T.C., and Goodwin, B.K.Price Discovery and Cointegration for Live Hogs.” Journal of Futures Markets 11,6 (1991):685–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spirtes, P., Glymour, C., and Scheines, R. Causality, Prediction, and Search. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000.Google Scholar
Stockton, M.C., Bessler, D.A., and Wilson, R.K.Price Discovery in Nebraska Cattle Markets.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 42,1(2010): 114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, D., and Tomek, W.G.Commodity Prices and Unit Root Tests.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 89,4(2007):873–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, C.E. “Preferential Cattle and Hog Pricing by Packers: Evidence from Mandatory Price Reports.” Paper presented at the Western Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Big Sky, MT, June 23-24, 2008. Internet site: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/37989/2/AMAPrefP%27gWAEA.pdf (Accessed February 22, 2010).Google Scholar
Wellman, A. Highlights of the New Chicago Mercantile Exchange Lean Hogs Futures Contract. University of Nebraska Extension Publication NF96-261, 1996. Internet site: http://digital commons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article= 1392&context=extensionhist (Accessed March 22, 2010).Google Scholar
Working, H.Note on the Correlation of First Differences of Averages in a Random Chain.” Econometrica 28,4(1960):916–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, J., Bessler, D.A., and Leatham, D.J.Asset Storability and Price Discovery in Commodity Futures Markets: A New Look.” Journal of Futures Markets 21,3(2001):279300.3.0.CO;2-L>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Impact of Mandatory Price Reporting on Hog Market Integration
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Impact of Mandatory Price Reporting on Hog Market Integration
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Impact of Mandatory Price Reporting on Hog Market Integration
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *