IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare00/123744.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Advertising and Australian Pig Producers Welfare

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Lin
  • Goddard, Ellen W.

Abstract

The pig meat market in Australia is characterized by generic (fresh pork, bacon etc.) advertising. These advertising expenditures are funded from collective levies from pig producers. At the same time, there are extensive brand advertising activities in the pig market. Impact of advertising on pig meat consumption has been a long-standing argument. So far, there have been several studies done on the effectiveness of generic pork advertising in Australia up to 1988. However, the previous studies only looked at generic advertising and didn’t account for other media information as brand advertising and fast food advertising effects on pork consumption. As well, the previous studies are contradictory about the effects of generic pork advertising. In this study the economic relationships in the consumption of pig meat are examined, the effectiveness of the advertising programs from 1985 to 1997 is evaluated and pig producers welfare is assessed. The whole system consists of a two-stage demand system derived from a translog indirect utility function for five meats: beef, lamb, chicken, pork and bacon and ham, a single supply equation and a single demand equation for pigs and a trade equation.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Lin & Goddard, Ellen W., 2000. "Advertising and Australian Pig Producers Welfare," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123744, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare00:123744
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/123744/files/Zhang%20L.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hoover, Sue & Hayenga, Marvin L. & Johnson, Stanley R., 1992. "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Generic Pork Advertising: The First Fifteen Months," Staff General Research Papers Archive 11587, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Hoover, Sue & Hayenga, Marvin L. & Johnson, Stanley R., 1992. "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Generic Pork Advertising: The First Fifteen Months," Staff General Research Papers Archive 586, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    3. Piggott, Nicholas E. & Griffith, Garry R., 1992. "Measuring the Demand Response to Advertising in the Australian Meat Industry," 1992 Conference (36th), February 10-13, 1992, Canberra, Australia 147250, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    4. Christensen, Laurits R & Jorgenson, Dale W & Lau, Lawrence J, 1975. "Transcendental Logarithmic Utility Functions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(3), pages 367-383, June.
    5. Berndt, Ernst R & Darrough, Masako N & Diewert, W E, 1977. "Flexible Functional Forms and Expenditure Distributions: An Application to Canadian Consumer Demand Functions," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 18(3), pages 651-675, October.
    6. Murray, Jane, 1984. "Retail Demand for Meat in Australia: A Utility Theory Approach," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 60(168), pages 45-56, March.
    7. Paul Cashin, 1991. "A Model Of The Disaggregated Demand For Meat In Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 35(3), pages 263-283, December.
    8. 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.
    9. Christensen, Laurits R. & Manser, Marilyn E., 1977. "Estimating U.S. consumer preferences for meat with a flexible utility function," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 37-53, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Marketing;

    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:aare00:123744. 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/aaresea.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.