Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:19:13.139Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Benefit-Cost Analysis: Distributional Considerations under Producer Quota Buyouts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 January 2015

Andrew Schmitz  and
Troy G. Schmitz
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Benefit-cost (B/C) analysis must take into account the distributional effects from a policy or program change. To highlight this, we focus on the theory of production quota buyouts within a B/C framework. As an empirical application, we provide evidence on the distributional effects of the U.S. government buyout of the peanut program in 2002, where production quotas were key ingredients. Two approaches to producer compensation under the buyout are discussed: (1) value of quota approach and (2) gains from quota approach. In the peanut quota program buyout, the U.S. government chose the value of quota approach. Both consumers and producers were made better off as a result of the buyout, and there was a net gain in efficiency. If the government had chosen the gains from quota approach instead, government expenditures and producer gains would have been lower, and consumer benefits would have remained unchanged. Under either approach, the B/C ratios calculated for the government quota buyout are almost identical.

Keywords

benefit-cost analysisdistributional effectsproduction quota buyoutsU.S.peanut quota programvalue of quota approachgains from quota approach
Type
Article
Information
Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , 14 July 2010 , pp. 1 - 15
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis 2011

References

Bergtold, J., Akobundu, E., and Peterson, E.B.. 2004. The FAST Method: Estimating unconditional demand elasticities for processed foods in the presence of fixed effects. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 29(2): 276-295 Google Scholar
Dohlman, E.L., Hoffman, L., Young, E., and McBride, W.. 2004. Peanut Policy Change and Adjustment under the 2002 Farm Act. Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/OCS/Jul04/OCS04G01/ocs04G01.pdf">http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/OCS/Jul04/OCS04G01/ocs04G01.pdf.http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/OCS/Jul04/OCS04G01/ocs04G01.pdf.>Google Scholar
Dohlman, E., Foreman, L., and Da Pra, M.. 2009a. The Post-buyout Experience: Peanut and Tobacco Sectors Adapt to Policy Reform. Economic Information Bulletin No. EIB-60, USDA/ERS, Washington, D.C. (November). http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib60/.Google Scholar
Dohlman, E., Foreman, L., and Da Pra, M.. 2009b. Removal of government controls opens peanut and tobacco sectors to market forces. Amber Waves, USDA/ERS, Washington, D.C. (December). http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/December09/Features/PeanutRobacco.htm.Google Scholar
Haynes, D., and Schmitz, A.. 2010. U.S. peanut supply response. FRE Working Paper, Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL (March).Google Scholar
Johnson, P.R. 1965. The social cost of the tobacco program. Journal of Farm Economics. 47(2): 242-255.Google Scholar
Just, R.E., Hueth, D.L., and Schmitz, A.. 2004. The Welfare Economics of Public Policy: A Practical Approach to Project and Policy Evaluation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Schmitz, A., Furtan, H., and Baylis, K.. 2002. Agriculture Policy, Agribusiness, and Rent-Seeking Behaviour. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Schmitz, A., Schmitz, T. G., Rossi, F. 2006. Agricultural subsidies in developed countries: Impact on global welfare. Review of Agricultural Economics 28 (3): 416-425.Google Scholar
Schmitz, A., and Zerbe, R.O. Jr. 2008. Applied Benefit-Cost Analysis. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Vercammen, J.A., and Schmitz, A.. 1992. Supply management and import concessions. Canadian Journal of Economics 25(4): 957–971.Google Scholar
Wallace, T.D. 1962. Measures of social costs of agricultural programs. Journal of Farm Economics 44(2): 580-99.Google Scholar