Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-01T01:30:24.918Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effects of an Export Subsidy on the U.S. Cotton Industry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2016

Patricia A. Duffy
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology and the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station atAuburn University
Michael K. Wohlgenant
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics atNorth Carolina State University

Abstract

In this study, the effects of an export subsidy for cotton are analyzed using a linear elasticity model. The study explicitly addresses the interaction of current domestic policies with the proposed export subsidy. An export subsidy may be a successful method of reducing the government costs of the cotton program.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1991

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

Bailey, K.W. and Womack, A.W.. “Wheat Acreage Response: A Regional Econometric InvestigationSo. J. Agr. Ecoru, 17.2(1986):I71180.Google Scholar
Buse, R.C.Total Elasticities—a Predictive Device.Am. J. Agr. Econ., 40.4(1958):881891.Google Scholar
Duffy, P.A., Wohlgenant, M.K., and Richardson, J.W.. “The Elasticity of Export Demand for U.S. Cotton.Am. J. Agr. Econ., 72.2(1990):468473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duffy, P.A., Richardson, J.W., and Wohlgenant, M.K..“Regional Cotton Acreage Response.” So. J. Agr. Econ 19.1(1987):99109.Google Scholar
Gardiner, W.H. and Dixit, P.M.. Price Elasticity of Export Demand. Washington, D.C.: USDA ERS Staff Report No. AGES860408, 1986.Google Scholar
Gardner, B.L.Futures Prices in Supply Analysis.Am. J. Agr. Econ., 58.1(1976):8184.Google Scholar
Houck, J.P. Elements of Agricultural Trade Policies, Chapter 10. New York: McMillan Publishing Company, 1986.Google Scholar
Houck, J P., Abel, M.E., Ryan, M.E., Gallagher, P.W., Hoff, R.G., and Penn, J. B.. “Summit Review.” Consensus and Conflict in U.S. Agriculture, Chapter 6. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
Johnson, P.R.The Elasticity of Foreign Demand for U.S. Agricultural Products.Am. J. Agr. Econ., 59(1977): 735736.Google Scholar
Just, R.E., Hueth, D.L., and Schmitz, A.. Applied Welfare Economics and Public Policy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990.Google Scholar
Knutson, R.D., Penn, J.B., and Boehm, W.T.. Agricultural and Food Policy. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990.Google Scholar
Lee, D.R. and Helmberger, P.. “Estimating Supply Response in the Presence of Farm Programs.Am. J. Agr. Econ., 67.2(1985): 193202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemieux, C.L. and Wohlgenant, M.K.. “Ex ante evaluation of the Economic Impact of Agricultural Biotechnology: The Case of Porcine Somatotropin.Am. J. Agr. Econ., 71.4 (1989): 903914.Google Scholar
Lowenstien, F.Factors Affecting the Domestic Mill Consumption of Cotton.Agr. Econ. Res., 4(1952): 4451.Google Scholar
Shumway, R.C.Supply, Demand, and Technology in a Multiproduct Industry: Texas Field Crops.Am. J. Agr. Econ., 65.3(1983):748760.Google Scholar
Sissoko, M.M.Economic Analysis of Factors Affecting U.S. Cotton Trade with the European Community.” Ph.D. dissertation, Auburn University, 1991.Google Scholar
Sumner, D.A. and Wohlgenant, M.K..”Effects of an Increase in the Federal Excise Tax on Cigarettes.” Am. J. Agr. Econ., 67.2(1985):235242.Google Scholar
Taylor, R. and Collins, G.. ;A Description of the Econometric Simulation Model Used to Evaluate Alternative Boll-Weevil Control Programs.Washington, D.C.: USDA ERS. Unpublished paper, 1981.Google Scholar
Wohlgenant, M.K.Impact of an Export Subsidy on the Domestic Cotton Industry.Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin B-1529, April, 1986.Google Scholar