IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/rutdps/36728.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Returns to the Jersey Fresh Promotional Program: The Impacts of Promotional Expenditures on Farm Cash Receipts in New Jersey

Author

Listed:
  • Govindasamy, Ramu
  • Schilling, Brian J.
  • Sullivan, Kevin P.
  • Turvey, Calum G.
  • Brown, Logan
  • Puduri, Venkata S.

Abstract

In 1984, the Jersey Fresh program was implemented by the New Jersey Department of Agriculture and was the first state-funded marketing campaign for agricultural products produced in New Jersey. In an effort to spur demand for New Jersey farm products, this program was designed to increase consumer awareness of the state’s agricultural products as well as to encourage food retailers to promote Jersey Fresh products. With funding from the USDA’s Federal-State Marketing Improvement Program, the New Jersey Department of Agriculture commissioned this study to determine the impact of Jersey Fresh promotion on farmer cash receipts in New Jersey. The econometric analysis was focused on the fruit and vegetable sectors, the primary commodity areas expected to benefit most directly from Jersey Fresh promotion. Study results show that: • For every dollar spent on the Jersey Fresh Promotional Program through 2000, New Jersey’s agricultural fruit and vegetable sector revenues increased by $31.54 (2003 dollars). • The additional economic activity created in the agricultural industry also had impacts on other parts of the economy, namely agricultural suppliers and service providers. In fact, each dollar spent on Jersey Fresh promotion resulted in an additional $22.95 of sales in agricultural support industries and other related industries. • In total, each dollar spent on Jersey Fresh promotion resulted in $54.49 of increased economic output in the State. Adjusting all dollars to 2003 levels, this means that the $1.16 million spent on the Jersey Fresh program in 2000 increased fruit and vegetable cash receipts by $36.6 million and created an additional $26.6 million in economic activity within agricultural support industries. The total statewide economic impact of the Jersey Fresh program was therefore an estimated $63.2 million. The economic activity generated through Jersey Fresh promotion also impacts local, state, and federal taxes. An analysis of these tax impacts shows that New Jersey’s State and local tax revenues increased by $2.2 million in 2000 due to the increased economic activity attributable to Jersey Fresh promotion. Comparing this return to the 2000 program budget of $1.16 million, the Jersey Fresh program appears to be better than revenue-neutral.

Suggested Citation

  • Govindasamy, Ramu & Schilling, Brian J. & Sullivan, Kevin P. & Turvey, Calum G. & Brown, Logan & Puduri, Venkata S., 2004. "Returns to the Jersey Fresh Promotional Program: The Impacts of Promotional Expenditures on Farm Cash Receipts in New Jersey," P Series 36728, Rutgers University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:rutdps:36728
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.36728
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/36728/files/pa040406.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.36728?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. Henry Kinnucan & Olan D. Forker, 1986. "Seasonality in the Consumer Response to Milk Advertising with Implications for Milk Promotion Policy," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(3), pages 562-571.
    2. Stanley R. Thompson & Doyle A. Eiler, 1975. "Producer Returns from Increased Milk Advertising," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 57(3), pages 505-508.
    3. Kinnucan, Henry W., 1986. "Demographic Versus Media Advertising Effects On Milk Demand: The Case Of The New York City Market," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 15(1), pages 1-9, April.
    4. Ronald W. Ward & Julio Chang & Stan Thompson, 1985. "Commodity advertising: Theoretical issues relating to generic and brand promotions," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 1(4), pages 269-276.
    5. Paul M. Patterson & Timothy J. Burkink & Rozlyn S. Lipsey & Jason Lipsey & Richard W. Roth & Mary Kay Martin, 2003. "Targeting tourists with state branding programs," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4), pages 525-538.
    6. Richards, Timothy J. & Patterson, Paul M., 1998. "New Varieties And The Returns To Commodity Promotion: Washington Fuji Apples," 1998 Annual meeting, August 2-5, Salt Lake City, UT 20784, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. John M. Halloran & Michael V. Martin, 1989. "Should states be in the agricultural promotion business?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(1), pages 65-75.
    8. Adelaja, Adesoji O. & Brumfield, Robin G. & Lininger, Kimberly, 1990. "Product Differentiation And State Promotion Of Farm Produce: An Analysis Of The Jersey Fresh Tomato," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 21(3), pages 1-14, September.
    9. Frederick V. Waugh, 1959. "Needed Research on the Effectiveness of Farm Products Promotions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 41(2), pages 364-376.
    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. Hughes, David W. & Isengildina-Massa, Olga, 2015. "The economic impact of farmers’ markets and a state level locally grown campaign," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 78-84.
    2. Carroll, Kathryn A. & Bernard, John C. & Pesek, John D. Jr., 2013. "Consumer Preferences for Tomatoes: The Influence of Local, Organic, and State Program Promotions by Purchasing Venue," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-18.
    3. Velandia, Margarita & Clark, Christopher D. & Lambert, Dayton M. & Davis, James A. & Jensen, Kimberly & Wszelaki, Annette & Wilcox, Michael D., 2014. "Factors Affecting Producer Participation in State-sponsored Marketing Programs: The Case of Fruit and Vegetable Growers in Tennessee," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 249-265, August.
    4. Carpio, Carlos E. & Isengildina-Massa, Olga, 2009. "Measuring the Potential Economic Impact of a Regional Agricultural Promotion Campaign: The Case of South Carolina," 2009 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2009, Atlanta, Georgia 46729, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Onken, Kathryn A. & Bernard, John C. & Pesek, John D., Jr., 2011. "Comparing Willingness to Pay for Organic, Natural, Locally Grown, and State Marketing Program Promoted Foods in the Mid-Atlantic Region," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-15, April.
    6. Carlos E. Carpio & Olga Isengildina-Massa, 2009. "Consumer willingness to pay for locally grown products: the case of South Carolina," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(3), pages 412-426.

    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. Govindasamy, Ramu & Sullivan, Kevin P. & Puduri, Venkata S. & Schilling, Brian J. & Brown, Logan, 2005. "Consumer Awareness of the Jersey Fresh Promotional Program," P Series 36729, Rutgers University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics.
    2. Noel Blisard & James R. Blaylock, 1992. "A double-hurdle approach to advertising: The case of cheese," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(2), pages 109-120.
    3. Jekanowski, Mark D. & Williams, Daniel R., II & Schiek, William A., 2000. "Consumers' Willingness To Purchase Locally Produced Agricultural Products: An Analysis Of An Indiana Survey," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 29(1), pages 1-11, April.
    4. Capps, Oral, Jr. & Schmitz, John D., 1991. "Effect Of Generic Advertising On The Demand For Fluid Milk: The Case Of The Texas Market Order," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 23(2), pages 1-10, December.
    5. John Lenz & Harry M. Kaiser & Chanjin Chung, 1998. "Economic analysis of generic milk advertising impacts on markets in New York State," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 73-83.
    6. Kaiser, Harry M., 1995. "An Analysis of Generic Dairy Promotion in the United States," Research Bulletins 122997, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    7. Ronald W. Ward & William F. McDonald, 1986. "Effectiveness of generic milk advertising: A ten region study," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 2(1), pages 77-89.
    8. Blaylock, James R. & Blisard, William N., 1990. "Effects of Advertising on the Demand for Cheese, January 1982-June 1989," Staff Reports 278346, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    9. Velandia, Margarita & Clark, Christopher D. & Lambert, Dayton M. & Davis, James A. & Jensen, Kimberly & Wszelaki, Annette & Wilcox, Michael D., 2014. "Factors Affecting Producer Participation in State-sponsored Marketing Programs: The Case of Fruit and Vegetable Growers in Tennessee," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 249-265, August.
    10. Kinnucan, Henry W. & Venkateswaran, Meenakshi, 1990. "Effects of Generic Advertising on Perceptions and Behavior: The Case of Catfish," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 137-151, December.
    11. Kaiser, Harry M. & Chung, Chanjin, 1999. "Impact of Generic Milk Advertising on New York State Markets," Research Bulletins 122677, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    12. Venkateswaran, Meenakshi & Kinnucan, Henry W. & Chang, Hui-Shung, 1993. "Modeling Advertising Carryover in Fluid Milk: Comparison of Alternative Lag Specifications," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 10-19, April.
    13. Pritchett, James G. & Liu, Donald J. & Kaiser, Harry M., 1998. "Optimal Choice Of Generic Milk Advertising Expenditures By Media Outlet," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 23(1), pages 1-15, July.
    14. Sartorius von Bach, Helmke, 1992. "Economic Aspects Of Advertising In Agriculture: A Review," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 31(1), March.
    15. Kinnucan, Henry, 1984. "Evaluating Farm Commodity Promotional * * Programs," 1984 Annual Meeting, August 5-8, Ithaca, New York 279028, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Goddard, E.W. & Tielu, A., 1987. "The OMMB'S Fluid Milk Advertising," Working Papers 244815, University of Guelph, Department of Food, Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    17. Henry W. Kinnucan & Cynda R. Clary, 1995. "Brand versus generic advertising: A conceptual framework with an application to cheese," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 355-369.
    18. Nganje, William E. & Hughner, Renée Shaw & Lee, Nicholas E., 2011. "State-Branded Programs and Consumer Preference for Locally Grown Produce," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 20-32, April.
    19. Lee, Jonq-Ying & Brown, Mark G., 1990. "Lag Structures in Commodity Advertising Research," 1990 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Vancouver, Canada 271019, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Blisard, Noel & Blayney, Donald P. & Chandran, Ram & Allshouse, Jane E., 1999. "Analyses of Generic Dairy Advertising, 1984-97," Technical Bulletins 33554, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    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:rutdps:36728. 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/darutus.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.