Income Stabilization Through Government Payments: How Is Farm Household Consumption Affected?
We estimate the impacts of various types of government payments to U.S. agriculture on different components of farm household consumption. Using 2003 to 2005 data from the Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS), we show that marginal rates of consumption differ by consumption category and income source, including different types of farm program payments. The results suggest that farm households treat income from different sources as imperfect substitutes and may reserve income from specific sources for specific types of consumption. Implications for the effects of different types of government payments on the farm household are considered.
Volume (Year): 38 (2009)
Issue (Month): 1 (April)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.narea.org/|
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Peter Kooreman, 2000. "The Labeling Effect of a Child Benefit System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(3), pages 571-583, June.
- Richard H. Thaler, 2008.
"Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice,"
INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 15-25, 01-02.
- Mishra, Ashok K. & El-Osta, Hisham S. & Morehart, Mitchell J. & Johnson, James D. & Hopkins, Jeffrey W., 2002. "Income, Wealth, And The Economic Well-Being Of Farm Households," Agricultural Economics Reports 33967, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
- Westcott, Paul C. & Young, C. Edwin & Price, J. Michael, 2002. "The 2002 Farm Act: Provisions And Implications For Commodity Markets," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33745, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
- Anonymous & Hopkins, Jeffrey W., 2003. "Decoupled Payments: Household Income Transfers In Contemporary U.S. Agriculture," Agricultural Economics Reports 34057, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
- Westcott, Paul C., 2005. "Counter-Cyclical Payments Under the 2002 Farm Act: Production Effects Likely to be Limited," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(3).
- Holbrook, Robert & Stafford, Frank P, 1971. "The Propensity to Consume Separate Types of Income: A Generalized Permanent Income Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 39(1), pages 1-21, January.
- James B. Whitaker, 2007. "The Varying Impacts of Agricultural Support Programs on U.S. Farm Household Consumption," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(3), pages 569-580.
- Hung-Hao Chang & Dayton M. Lambert & Ashok K. Mishra, 2008. "Does participation in the conservation reserve program impact the economic well-being of farm households?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 38(2), pages 201-212, 03.
- del Boca, D. & Flinn, C.J., 1992.
"Expenditure Decisions of Divorced Mothers and Income Composition,"
92-40, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
- Daniela Del Boca & Christopher J. Flinn, 1994. "Expenditure Decisions of Divorced Mothers and Income Composition," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 29(3), pages 742-761.
- Edmonds, Eric, 2002. "Reconsidering the labeling effect for child benefits: evidence from a transition economy," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 303-309, August.
- Malcolm Baker & Stefan Nagel & Jeffrey Wurgler, 2007.
"The Effect of Dividends on Consumption,"
Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,
Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 38(1), pages 231-292.
- McKenzie, D.J.David J., 2004. "Asymptotic theory for heterogeneous dynamic pseudo-panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 235-262, June.
- Chang-Tai Hsieh, 2003. "Do Consumers React to Anticipated Income Changes? Evidence from the Alaska Permanent Fund," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 397-405, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:arerjl:49863. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.