IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

When Can a Generic Advertising Program Increase Farmer Returns?

  • Freebairn, John W.
  • Goddard, Ellen W.
  • Griffith, Garry R.

Generic advertising has been a widely-used marketing tool of many agricultural industries. The strategy has come under increasing scrutiny lately, especially by levy-paying producers who fund the advertising. Also, for many food products, supermarket chains have developed and advertised their own “store†or “private label†brands in competition with both processor brands and generic advertising of those products. In such an environment, the issue is whether generic promotion will increase producer returns? Farmers gain from a generic advertising program only if the net farm price rises, where the net farm price is inclusive of the levy collected to fund the generic advertising program. A higher net price to farmers increases producer surplus, or the returns on farmer-owned land, management, labour and other resources which are in limited supply. The aim of this research is to examine the conditions under which such an increase in the net farm price is likely to occur. In undertaking this task, two main areas of research are reported. First, the literature is reviewed and theoretical models are developed to assess the conditions under which farmers would gain from a generic advertising program funded by a levy on production. Second, a general model is applied across the range of Australian agricultural products to assess the minimum increase in domestic sales from advertising required if the program is to increase farmer returns. In particular, the assessment distinguishes products by their exposure to international trade.

If 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.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/126556
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by University of Melbourne, Melbourne School of Land and Environment in its journal Australasian Agribusiness Review.

Volume (Year): 13 (2005)
Issue (Month): ()
Pages:

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:ags:auagre:126556
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.agrifood.info/review/

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.:

as in new window
  1. Cotterill, Ronald W & Putsis, William P, Jr & Dhar, Ravi, 2000. "Assessing the Competitive Interaction between Private Labels and National Brands," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 73(1), pages 109-37, January.
  2. Richard J. Sexton, 2000. "Industrialization and Consolidation in the U.S. Food Sector: Implications for Competition and Welfare," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1087-1104.
  3. Kinnucan, Henry W., 2003. "Optimal generic advertising in an imperfectly competitive food industry with variable proportions," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 29(2), October.
  4. Mingxia Zhang & Richard J. Sexton, 2002. "Optimal Commodity Promotion when Downstream Markets are Imperfectly Competitive," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(2), pages 352-365.
  5. Xueyan Zhao & John Mullen & Garry Griffith & Roley Piggott & William Griffiths, 2003. "The incidence of gains and taxes associated with R&D and promotion in the Australian beef industry," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(3), pages 333-344.
  6. R. W. Ward & C. Lambert, 1993. "Generic Promotion Of Beef: Measuring The Impact Of The Us Beef Checkoff," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 456-465.
  7. Jensen, Helen H. & Schroeter, John R., 1992. "Television Advertising and Beef Demand: An Econometric Analysis of 'Split-Cable' Household Panel Scanner Data," Staff General Research Papers 521, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  8. Kinnucan, Henry W., 1998. "Advertising Traded Goods," 1998 Annual meeting, August 2-5, Salt Lake City, UT 20965, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  9. Nicholas E. Piggott & James A. Chalfant & Julian M. Alston & Garry R. Griffith, 1996. "Demand Response to Advertising in the Australian Meat Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(2), pages 268-279.
  10. Mingxia Zhang, 1997. "The Effects of Imperfect Competition on the Size and Distribution of Research Benefits," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1252-1265.
  11. Mary K. Muth & Michael K. Wohlgenant, 1999. "A Test for Market Power Using Marginal Input and Output Prices With Application to the U.S. Beef Processing Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(3), pages 638-643.
  12. John A. L. Cranfield & Ellen W. Goddard, 1999. "Open Economy and Processor Oligopoly Power Effects of Beef Advertising in Canada," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 47(1), pages 1-19, 03.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:auagre:126556. 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.