Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T17:11:46.052Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Economic Surpluses in the U.S. Sugar Market

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Rigoberto A. Lopez*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing, Cook College, Rutgers University
Get access

Abstract

The objective of this article is to estimate historical economic surpluses for the subsectors involved in the U.S. sugar market. Annual producer and consumer surpluses were computed based on a five-equation model and 1958–87 data. In the last decade, the welfare position of cane- and beet-sugar producers has been roughly maintained, the domestic consumer surplus and the export quasi-rents to foreign countries have both declined, and quasi-rents of the corn-sweetener industry now surpass those that accrue to the cane industry and are about the same as those of the beet-sugar industry. Some policy implications are discussed.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

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.)

Footnotes

The author is grateful to Miriam Stuart for research assistance, to two anonymous referees and Loren Tauer for their helpful comments, to John Hannon for editorial comments, and to Claire Kuncewitch for secretarial assistance. The content of the article, however, is the sole responsibility of the author.

New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station Publication No. D-02261-1-90, supported by state and U.S. Hatch Act funds, and by the Rutgers University Research Council.

References

Barry, R. D., Angelo, L., Buzzanell, P. J., and Gray, F. Sugar: Background for 1990 Farm Legislation. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. Staff Report no. AGES 9006. February 1990.Google Scholar
Borrell, B., Sturgiss, R., and Wong, G.U.S. Sugar Policy: Its Effects on the World Sugar Market.” Paper presented at the International Sweetener Symposium, Palm Springs, CA, February 22–25, 1987.Google Scholar
Carman, H. F., and Thor, P. K.High Fructose Corn Sweeteners: Economic Aspects of a Sugar Substitute.” University of California, Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics, Information Series 79–2. 1979.Google Scholar
Connell Commodities Co. Corn Sweeteners. Econometric Series. April 16, 1984.Google Scholar
Dardis, R., and Young, C.The Welfare Loss from the New Sugar Program.” Journal of Consumer Affairs 19(Summer 1985): 163–76.Google Scholar
Gemmill, G.The World Sugar Economy: An Econometric Analysis of Production and Policies.” Agricultural Economics Report 313. Michigan State University, 1976.Google Scholar
International Monetary Fund. International Financial Statistics. Washington, DC, 1987.Google Scholar
Jabara, C. L.Effects of Agricultural Protection on Food Manufacturing: The U.S. Sugar Program.” Selected paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association Meetings, Knoxville, TN, July 31-August 3, 1988.Google Scholar
Jesse, E. V., and Zepp, G. A. Sugar Policy Options for the United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Economic Report no. 351. 1977.Google Scholar
Just, R. E., Hueth, D. T., and Schmitz, A. Applied Welfare Economics and Public Policy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1982.Google Scholar
Leu, G. J., Schmitz, A., and Knutson, R. D.Gain and Losses of Sugar Policy Options.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 69 (1987): 591602.Google Scholar
Lopez, R. A.Political Economy of U.S. Sugar Policies.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71 (1989): 2031.Google Scholar
Lopez, R. A., and Sepulveda, J. S.Changes in the Demand for Sugar and Implications for Import Policies.” Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 14 (1985): 177–82.Google Scholar
McCallum, B. T.Rational Expectations and the Estimation of Econometric Models: An Alternative Procedure.” International Economic Review 17 (1976): 484–90.Google Scholar
Nuttall, J. Evaluation of Sugar Import Policies and Programs: 1981–88. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Foreign Agricultural Service. Staff Report no. 8. November 1988.Google Scholar
Roe, T., Shane, M. D., and Vo, D. H. Price Responsiveness of World Grain Markets: The Influence of Government Intervention on Import Price Elasticity. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Technical Bulletin 1720. 1986.Google Scholar
Stallings, J. L.Weather Indexes.” Journal of Farm Economics 42 (1960): 180–86.Google Scholar
Valdes, A., and Zeitz, J.Agricultural Protection in OECD Countries: Its Cost to Less Developed Countries.” International Food Policy Research Institute. Washington, DC, 1980.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. Sugar and Sweetener Outlook and Situation Report. Various issues.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. World Sugar Supply and Distribution. Foreign Agricultural Series. 1955/56–1979/80. FS-380. 1980.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States. Various issues.Google Scholar
Womach, J. Sugar Policy: Current Issues. The Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service. IB88091. 1988.Google Scholar