Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T22:04:10.440Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Correction of Measurement Error in Monthly USDA Pig Crop: Generating Alternative Data Series

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2015

In-Seck Kim
Affiliation:
Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute at the University of Missouri and is now with the Department of Agricultural and Food Economics, Agri-Food & Biosciences Institute, Belfast, Northern Ireland
Ronald L. Plain
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Missouri
J. Bruce Bullock
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Missouri
Sang Young Jei
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Missouri

Abstract

The imputed pig death loss contained in the reported monthly U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) pig crop data over the December 1995-June 2006 period ranged from —4.93% to 12.75%. Clearly, there are substantial measurement errors in the USDA monthly pig crop data. In this paper, we present alternative monthly U.S. pig crop data using the biological production process, which is compatible with prior knowledge of the U.S. hog industry. Alternative pig crop data are applied to a slaughter hog model and tested comparatively to USDA pig crop. Test results reject the validity of USDA pig crop data in favor of the alternative data.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2008

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

Aadland, D., and Bailey, D.. “Short-Run Supply Responses in the U.S. Beef-Cattle Industry.American Journal of Agricultural Economics 83(November 2001):826–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chavas, J.-P.On the Economic Rationality of Market Participants: The Case of Expectations in the U.S. Pork Market.Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 24(1999):1937.Google Scholar
Davidson, R., and Mackinnon, J.G.. “Several Tests for Model Specification in the Presence of Alternative Hypotheses.Econometrica 49(May 1981):781–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griliches, Z.Economic Data Issues.” Handbook of Econometrics, Volume 3. Griliches, Z. and Intriligator, M.D., eds. Amsterdam, New York, and Oxford: North-Holland, 1986.Google Scholar
Hausman, J.A.Mismeasured Variables in Econometric Analysis: Problems from the Right and Problems from the Left.Journal of Economic Perspectives 15(Autumn 2001):5767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISU (Iowa State University), University Extension. Iowa Livestock Enterprise Summaries. Ames, Iowa: Various issues, 19901999.Google Scholar
Livestock Marketing Information Center. Monthly Commercial Hog Slaughter, Monthly Federally Inspected Hog Slaughter by Classification (Hogs, Barrow & Gilts, Sows, and Boars). Lakewood, Colorado, Internet site: http://www.lmic.info (Accessed July 2007).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing News. Livestock and Grain Market News, Canadian Live Animal Imports by States of Entry. Internet site: http://www.ams.usda.gov (Accessed July 2007).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Livestock and Poultry Situation and Outlook Report, Hog Imports and Exports. Various issues.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, NASS (National Agricultural Statistics Service). US & State—Hogs & Pigs, Number of Pigs per Litter, Pig Crop, and Sows Farrowed. Internet site: http://www.nass.usda.gov/QuickStats/ (Accessed July 2007).Google Scholar