IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v50y1968i4p868-878..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Toward Effective Standardization of Hams

Author

Listed:
  • J. G. Kendrick
  • J. B. Hassler

Abstract

Orderly marketing requires standardized products. Current USDA inspection criteria prevent the packer from completely standardizing cured hams on the basis of protein and moisture content. It is argued that changes in the current cured meat inspection procedures might result in (1) a more standardized product for consumers and (2) more accurate price signals for farmers, which could increase the reward to those swine producers whose product is of high quality. If the inspection criteria were changed so that cured hams could be standardized on the basis of a moisture-protein ratio of 3.79∶1, a simultaneous equation model indicates that the gross live-weight price differential between swine producing high-protein hams and those producing low-protein hams could widen to $2.42 per hundredweight.

Suggested Citation

  • J. G. Kendrick & J. B. Hassler, 1968. "Toward Effective Standardization of Hams," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 50(4), pages 868-878.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:50:y:1968:i:4:p:868-878.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1237624
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:ajagec:v:50:y:1968:i:4:p:868-878.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.