IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/jlaare/10149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Designing a Voluntary Beef Checkoff

Author

Listed:
  • Norwood, F. Bailey
  • Winn, Chris
  • Chung, Chanjin
  • Ward, Clement E.

Abstract

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether the mandatory fees imposed by the beef checkoff violates the First Amendment. As a precaution, many states began forming voluntary beef checkoffs, where funds would be raised through voluntary contributions. This study conducted a survey of Oklahoma cattle producers to determine what type ofvoluntary checkoff design would receive the greatest support. The most popular checkoff placed a large emphasis on advertising and a slightly lower checkoff fee. The survey also tested the ability of a provision point mechanism to limit free-riding. The mechanism was not as effective as in other studies which used laboratory experiments.

Suggested Citation

  • Norwood, F. Bailey & Winn, Chris & Chung, Chanjin & Ward, Clement E., 2006. "Designing a Voluntary Beef Checkoff," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 31(01), pages 1-19, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:jlaare:10149
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.10149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/10149/files/31010074.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.10149?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John A. List & David Lucking-Reiley, 2002. "The Effects of Seed Money and Refunds on Charitable Giving: Experimental Evidence from a University Capital Campaign," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(1), pages 215-233, February.
    2. Winn, Chris & Norwood, F. Bailey & Chung, Chanjin & Ward, Clement E., 2004. "Surveying the Feasibility of a Voluntary Beef Checkoff," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20385, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    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. Groothuis, Peter A. & Whitehead, John C., 2009. "The Provision Point Mechanism and Scenario Rejection in Contingent Valuation," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(2), pages 271-280, October.
    2. Schumacher, Tucker & Schroeder, Ted C. & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2012. "Willingness-to-Pay for Calf Health Programs and Certification Agents," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(2), pages 191-202, May.
    3. Lee L. Schulz & Glynn T. Tonsor, 2010. "Cow‐Calf Producer Preferences for Voluntary Traceability Systems," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 138-162, February.
    4. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Olynk Widmar, Nicole J. & Wu, Laping, 2014. "Reprint of “Chinese producer behavior: Aquaculture farmers in southern China”," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 540-547.
    5. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Olynk Widmar, Nicole J. & Wu, Laping, 2014. "Chinese producer behavior: Aquaculture farmers in southern China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 17-24.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Makowsky, Michael D. & Wang, Siyu, 2018. "Embezzlement, whistleblowing, and organizational architecture: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 58-75.
    2. Adena, Maja & Huck, Steffen, 2015. "Matching donations without crowding out? Some theoretical considerations and a field experiment," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 113209, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    3. Hugh-Jones, David & Reinstein, David, 2012. "Anonymous rituals," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 478-489.
    4. Philipp Dörrenberg & Christoph Feldhaus, 2022. "How Does Group-Decision Making Affect Subsequent Individual Behavior?," CESifo Working Paper Series 9513, CESifo.
    5. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    6. Garth Heutel, 2014. "Crowding Out and Crowding In of Private Donations and Government Grants," Public Finance Review, , vol. 42(2), pages 143-175, March.
    7. Erik Ansink & Mark Koetse & Jetske Bouma & Dominic Hauck & Daan van Soest, 2017. "Crowdfunding public goods: An experiment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 17-119/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    8. Björn Vollan & Karla Henning & Deniza Staewa, 2017. "Do campaigns featuring impact evaluations increase donations? Evidence from a survey experiment," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 500-518, October.
    9. Astrid Dannenberg & Andreas Lange & Bodo Sturm, 2010. "On the Formation of Coalitions to Provide Public Goods - Experimental Evidence from the Lab," NBER Working Papers 15967, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Lange, Andreas, 2006. "Providing public goods in two steps," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 173-178, May.
    11. Stefano DellaVigna & John A. List & Ulrike Malmendier, 2012. "Testing for Altruism and Social Pressure in Charitable Giving," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(1), pages 1-56.
    12. Jade Wong & Andreas Ortman, 2013. "Do Donors Care About the Price of Giving? A Review of the Evidence, with Some Theory to Organize It," Discussion Papers 2013-22, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    13. Stefano Barbieri & David Malueg & Iryna Topolyan, 2014. "The best-shot all-pay (group) auction with complete information," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 57(3), pages 603-640, November.
    14. Stephan Meier, 2005. "Does framing matter for conditional cooperation? Evidence from a natural field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00309, The Field Experiments Website.
    15. Bartels, Lara & Kesternich, Martin, 2022. "Motivate the crowd or crowd- them out? The impact of local government spending on the voluntary provision of a green public good," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Dean Karlan & John A List, 2012. "How Can Bill and Melinda Gates Increase Other People’s Donations to Fund Public Goods?," Working Papers id:4880, eSocialSciences.
    17. Hallsworth, Michael & List, John A. & Metcalfe, Robert D. & Vlaev, Ivo, 2017. "The behavioralist as tax collector: Using natural field experiments to enhance tax compliance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 14-31.
    18. John A. List, 2003. "Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 41-71.
    19. Gallier, Carlo & Goeschl, Timo & Kesternich, Martin & Lohse, Johannes & Reif, Christiane & Römer, Daniel, 2023. "Inter-charity competition under spatial differentiation: Sorting, crowding, and spillovers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 457-468.
    20. Adena, Maja, 2021. "How can we improve tax incentives for charitable giving? Lessons from field experiments in fundraising," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 344-353.

    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:jlaare:10149. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/waeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.