Distributional issues in check-off funded programs
AbstractAgricultural commodity taxes, called check-offs, are used to finance promotion, research, and other activities that can be regarded as industry collective goods. The collection of the check-offs and the programs they are used to fund have implications for the welfare of consumers, other producers, and taxpayers in addition to their effects on those producers who are allowed to vote in the procedures for authorizing the programs. As well as simple fairness or equity considerations, such shifting of the incidence of benefits and costs to others can lead to a divergence between producer and national optimal choices, and hence efficiency losses. From a public policy perspective, then, the implications for others ought to be considered in the design of the enabling legislation, in the evaluation of the specific programs, and in the rules governing the behavior of the agricultural producer groups engaged in commodity check-off programs. [EconLit citations: Q180, Q130, H420]. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Agribusiness 19: 277-287, 2003.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Agribusiness.
Volume (Year): 19 (2003)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
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.:
- Freebairn, John W. & Alston, Julian M., 2001. "Generic advertising without supply control: implications of funding mechanisms for advertising intensities in competitive industries," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(1), March.
- Julian M. Alston & John W. Freebairn & Jennifer S. James, 2001. "Beggar-Thy-Neighbor Advertising: Theory and Application to Generic Commodity Promotion Programs," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(4), pages 888-902.
- Charles L. Ballard & Don Fullerton, 1993.
"Distortionary Taxes and the Provision of Public Goods,"
NBER Working Papers
3506, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Charles L. Ballard & Don Fullerton, 1992. "Distortionary Taxes and the Provision of Public Goods," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 117-131, Summer.
- Hill, D. J. & Piggott, R. R. & Griffith, G. R., 2001. "Profitability of incremental generic promotion of Australian dairy products," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 253-266, December.
- Parke Wilde, . "Federal Communication about Obesity in the Dietary Guidelines and Checkoff Programs," Working Papers in Food Policy and Nutrition 27, Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, revised May 2005.
- Alston, Julian M. & Pardey, Philip G., 2007. "Public Funding for Research into Specialty Crops," Staff Papers 7312, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
- Pardey, Philip G. & James, Jennifer S. & Alston, Julian M. & Wood, Stanley & Koo, Bonwoo & Binenbaum, Eran & Hurley, Terrance M. & Glewwe, Paul & Mayer, Jorge & Jones, Richard & De Groote, Hugo & Kana, 2007. "Science, Technology and Skills," Reports 136256, University of Minnesota, International Science and Technology Practice and Policy.
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.