The science and art of promotion evaluation
AbstractOver the past two decades commodity checkoff programs have proliferated. In 1996 legislation was passed that requires these programs to be evaluated at least once every 5 years. Because of this legislation there are now potential legal and monetary implications associated with these evaluations. Consequently, for all parties concerned two questions naturally arise: what is the scientific status of promotion evaluations? How can promotion evaluations be improved?This article attempts to answer these questions by exploring the scientific and artistic aspects of the central activity involved in all promotion evaluations: modeling. Attention centers on the scientific assumption choice set that is available to modelers, the tradeoffs involved in making certain assumption choices, and how assumption choices may be improved in general. These ideas are discussed in the context of a sample of promotion evaluation studies. [Econ-Lit citations: B4, D6, Q13] © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Agribusiness.
Volume (Year): 15 (1999)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6297
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- George C. Davis, 1997. "Product Aggregation Bias as a Specification Error in Demand Systems," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(1), pages 100-109.
- Lewbel, Arthur, 1996. "Aggregation without Separability: A Generalized Composite Commodity Theorem," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 524-43, June.
- Stoker, Thomas M, 1993. "Empirical Approaches to the Problem of Aggregation Over Individuals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1827-74, December.
- Forni, Mario & Lippi, Marco, 1999. "Aggregation of linear dynamic microeconomic models," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 131-158, February.
- Musgrave, Alan, 1981. "'Unreal Assumptions' in Economic Theory: The F-Twist Untwisted," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 377-87.
- David L. Edgerton, 1997. "Weak Separability and the Estimation of Elasticities in Multistage Demand Systems," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(1), pages 62-79.
- Zhang, Mingxia & Sexton, Richard J., 2000. "Optimal Commodity Promotion In Imperfectly Competitive Markets," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21823, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- Shumway, C. Richard & Davis, George C., 2001.
"Does consistent aggregation really matter?,"
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics,
Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(2), June.
- Yeboah, Godfred & Maynard, Leigh J., 2004. "The Impact Of Bse, Fmd, And U.S. Export Promotion Expenditures On Japanese Meat Demand," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 19978, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.