IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea13/149835.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does Government Sponsored Advertising Increase Social Welfare? A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Carpio, Carlos E.
  • Isengildina-Massa, Olga

Abstract

The main objective of this study was to analyze the effect of advertising on social welfare in a perfectly competitive market where the level of advertising is chosen by a social planner. The theoretical model revealed that social planner sponsored advertising that increases the equilibrium price of the advertised good can increase society’s welfare if the effect of advertising in consumers’ utility is higher than the consumer welfare reducing price effect (producer welfare is increased by the same amount as the reduction in consumer welfare). The empirical illustration focuses on the U.S. state of South Carolina “buy local” food products campaign. The findings suggest that this government sponsored advertising campaign increases total welfare.

Suggested Citation

  • Carpio, Carlos E. & Isengildina-Massa, Olga, 2013. "Does Government Sponsored Advertising Increase Social Welfare? A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149835, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea13:149835
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/149835
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, January.
    2. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1993. "A Simple Theory of Advertising as a Good or Bad," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(4), pages 941-964.
    3. Cardon, James H. & Pope, Rulon D., 2003. "Agricultural Market Structure, Generic Advertising, and Welfare," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(02), August.
    4. Cameron, Trudy Ann & James, Michelle D, 1987. "Efficient Estimation Methods for "Closed-ended' Contingent Valuation Surveys," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(2), pages 269-276, May.
    5. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 1988. "A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 355-379, September.
    6. Eastwood, David B. & Brooker, John R. & Orr, Robert H., 1987. "Consumer Preferences for Local Versus Out-Of-State Grown Selected Fresh Produce: The Case of Knoxville, Tennessee," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(02), pages 183-194, December.
    7. Eastwood, David B. & Brooker, John R. & Orr, Robert H., 1987. "Consumer Preferences For Local Versus Out-Of-State Grown Selected Fresh Produce: The Case Of Knoxville, Tennessee," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 19(02), December.
    8. Carpio, Carlos E. & Isengildina-Massa, Olga, 2010. "To Fund or Not to Fund: Assessment of the Potential Impact of a Regional Promotion Campaign," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 35(2), August.
    9. Nicholas E. Piggott, 2000. "The Incidence of the Costs and Benefits of Generic Advertising," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(3), pages 665-671.
    10. John Bergstrom & Kevin Boyle & Mitsuyasu Yabe, 2004. "Trading Taxes vs. Paying Taxes to Value and Finance Public Environmental Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 28(4), pages 533-549, August.
    11. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    12. Cornes,Richard, 1992. "Duality and Modern Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521336017, March.
    13. Onken, Kathryn A. & Bernard, John C., 2010. "Catching the "Local" Bug: A Look at State Agricultural Marketing Programs," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(1).
    14. Lester G. Telser, 1964. "Advertising and Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 72, pages 537-537.
    15. Carol Horton Tremblay & Victor J. Tremblay, 1995. "The Impact Of Cigarette Advertising On Consumer Surplus, Profit, And Social Welfare," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 13(1), pages 113-124, January.
    16. Stephen Farr & Carol Horton Tremblay & Victor Tremblay, 2001. "The Welfare Effect of Advertising Restrictions in the U.S. Cigarette Industry," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 18(2), pages 147-160, March.
    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. Dobbs, Leah Moore & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Leffew, Megan Bruch & English, Burton C. & Lambert, Dayton M. & Clark, Christopher D., 2016. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Tennessee Beef," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 47(2), July.
    2. Dobbs, Leah & Jensen, Kimberly & Leffew, Megan & English, Burton & Lambert, Dayton & Clark, Christopher, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Tennessee Beef among Tennessee Consumers," 2015 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2015, Atlanta, Georgia 196672, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; Consumer/Household Economics; Demand and Price Analysis; Marketing; D11; D12;

    JEL classification:

    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aaea13:149835. 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://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.