Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T06:04:00.131Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The U.S. Wheat And Corn Programs: Some Domestic Welfare And International Trade Implications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2016

Kathleen Carey
Kathleen Carey*
Affiliation:
Management Science Group, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper explores changes in traditional commodity programs from the perspective of domestic welfare. A theoretical model was developed which describes domestic welfare changes that follow from policies consistent with reductions in international price distortions. The model was applied to the 1985 Farm Bill. This provided an historical example of a policy change that simultaneously improves domestic welfare and reduces protectionism.

Keywords

decouplingwelfarewheatcorn
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , July 1992 , pp. 179 - 186
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1992

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

Blanford, D., deGorter, H., and Harvey, D.. “Production Entitlement Guarantees (PEGs): A Minimally Distorting Method of Farm Income Support.” Paper prepared for the International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium Symposium, Annapolis Maryland, August 18-19, 1988.Google Scholar
Burt, O.R., and Worthington, Y.E.. “Wheat Acreage Supply Response in the United States.” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, 13(1988):100–111.Google Scholar
deGorter, H. “Analyzing Agricultural Policies and Trade Distortions.” Dept. of Agri. Econ., Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 1988.Google Scholar
Gardner, B. “Efficient Redistribution through Commodity Markets.” Am. J. Agr. Econ., 65(l983):225–34.Google Scholar
Gardner, B. The Economics of Agricultural Policies. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987.Google Scholar
Grennes, T. “Farm-support Policies Compatible with Trade Liberalization.” World Economy, 11 (1988): 109–17.Google Scholar
Lichtenberg, E., and Zilberman, D.. “The Welfare Economics of Price Supports in U.S. Agriculture.” Am. Econ. Rev., 76(1986):1135–1141.Google Scholar
McDowell, H., Kramer, R.A., and Price, J.M.. “An Analysis of U.S. Farm Income Policies: Historical, Market-Determined, and Sector-Wide Stabilization.” So. J. Agr. Econ., 21(1989):1–11.Google Scholar
McIntosh, C.S., and Shideed, K.H.. “The Effect of GovernmentPrograms on Acreage Response over Time: The Case of Com Production in Iowa.” West. J. Agr. Econ., 14(1989):38–44.Google Scholar
Shideed, K.H., White, F.C., and Brannen, S.J.. “The Responsive-ness of U.S. Com and Soybean Acreages to Conditional Price Expectations: An Application to the 1985 Farm Bill.” So. J. Agr. Econ., 19(1987):153–161.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Outlook. Various Issues. Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Feed: Outlook and Situation Report. Various Issues. Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Wheat: Outlook and Situation Report. Various Issues. Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Wallace, T.D. “Measures of Social Costs of Agricultural Programs.” J. Farm Econ., XLIV(1962):580–594.Google Scholar