IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/auagre/126556.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Can a Generic Advertising Program Increase Farmer Returns?

Author

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

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Freebairn, John W. & Goddard, Ellen W. & Griffith, Garry R., 2005. "When Can a Generic Advertising Program Increase Farmer Returns?," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Melbourne School of Land and Environment, vol. 13.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:auagre:126556
    as

    Download full text from publisher

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. T. F. Funk & Karl D. Meilke & H. Bruce Huff, 1977. "Effects of Retail Pricing and Advertising on Fresh Beef Sales," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 59(3), pages 533-537.
    2. 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 109-137, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Helen H. Jensen & John R. Schroeter, 1992. "Television Advertising and Beef Demand: An Econometric Analysis of “Split-Cable” Household Panel Scanner Data," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 40(2), pages 271-294, July.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Kinnucan, Henry W., 1999. "Advertising Traded Goods," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(01), July.
    8. 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.
    9. 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, March.
    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. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mounter, Stuart W. & Griffith, Garry R. & Piggott, Roley R. & Mullen, John D., 2005. "The Relative Payoffs From R&D and Generic Advertising Expenditure by the Australian Pig Industry," Working Papers 12943, University of New England, School of Economics.
    2. Mounter, Stuart W. & Griffith, Garry R. & Piggott, Roley R. & Mullen, John D., 2005. "The Payoff from Generic Advertising by the Australian Pig Industry: Further Results Relative to the Payoff from R&D," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Melbourne School of Land and Environment, vol. 13.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. 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). General contact details of provider: http://www.agrifood.info/review/ .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.