IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uersor/393830.html

Fruit and Vegetable Backgrounder

Author

Listed:
  • Lucier, Gary
  • Pollack, Susan
  • Ali, Mir
  • Perez, Agnes

Abstract

The U.S. fruit and vegetable industry accounts for nearly a third of U.S. crop cash receipts and a fifth of U.S. agricultural exports. A variety of challenges face this complex and diverse industry in both domestic and international markets, ranging from immigration reform and its effect on labor availability to international competitiveness. The national debate on diet and health frequently focuses on the nutritional role of fruit and vegetables, and a continued emphasis on the benefits of eating produce may provide opportunities to the industry. In the domestic market, Americans are eating more fruit and vegetables than they did 20 years ago, but consumption remains below recommended levels. In terms of per capita consumption expressed on a fresh-weight basis, the top five vegetables are potatoes, tomatoes, lettuce, sweet corn, and onions while the top five fruit include oranges, grapes (including wine grapes), apples, bananas, and pineapples. The industry also faces a variety of trade-related issues, including competition with imports. During 2002-04, imports accounted for 21 percent of domestic consumption of all fresh and processed fruit and vegetables, up from 16 percent during 1992-94.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucier, Gary & Pollack, Susan & Ali, Mir & Perez, Agnes, 2006. "Fruit and Vegetable Backgrounder," Vegetables and Melons Outlook 393830, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:uersor:393830
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.393830
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/393830/files/VGS-313-01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.393830?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. Westcott, Paul C. & Young, C. Edwin & Price, J. Michael, 2002. "The 2002 Farm Act: Provisions And Implications For Commodity Markets," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33745, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Jerardo, Alberto, 2004. "The U.S. Ag Trade Balance...More Than Just a Number," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pages 1-6, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hanson, Kenneth & Somwaru, Agapi, 2003. "Distributional Effects of U.S. Farm Commodity Programs: Accounting for Farm and Non-Farm Households," Conference papers 331120, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    2. Patrick Westhoff & Marc Rosenbohm & Youngjune Kim & Benjamin Brown, 2022. "The sector‐level safety net provided by the current mix of farm programs," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(3), pages 1204-1221, September.
    3. Flanders, Archie & Smith, Nathan & Fonsah, Esendugue & McKissick, John C., 2009. "Simulation Analysis of Double-Cropping Vegetables and Field Crops," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2009, pages 1-10.
    4. Capps, Oral, Jr. & Williams, Gary W., 2006. "The Economic Effectiveness of the Cotton Checkoff Program," Reports 90753, Texas A&M University, Agribusiness, Food, and Consumer Economics Research Center.
    5. Elanor Starmer & Aimee Witteman & Timothy A. Wise, "undated". "Feeding the Factory Farm: Implicit Subsidies to the Broiler Chicken Industry," GDAE Working Papers 06-03, GDAE, Tufts University.
    6. Johansson, Robert C. & Cooper, Joseph & Vasavada, Utpal, 2005. "Greener Acres or Greener Waters? Potential U.S. Impacts of Agricultural Trade Liberalization," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 42-53, April.
    7. Antimiani, Alessandro & Conforti, Piero & Salvatici, Luca, 2005. "Alternative Market Access Scenarios in the Agriculture Trade Negotiations of the Doha Round," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 6(2), pages 1-23.
    8. Whitaker, James B. & Effland, Anne, 2009. "Income Stabilization Through Government Payments: How is Farm Household Consumption Affected?," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(1), pages 36-48, April.
    9. Eickhout, B. & Meijl, H. van & Tabeau, A. & Zeijts, H. van, 2004. "Between Liberalization and Protection: Four Long-term Scenarios for Trade, Poverty and the Environment," Conference papers 331268, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    10. Ahearn, Mary Clare & Collender, Robert N. & Diao, Xinshen & Harrington, David H. & Hoppe, Robert A. & Korb, Penelope J. & Makki, Shiva S. & Morehart, Mitchell J. & Roberts, Michael J. & Roe, Terry L. , 2004. "Decoupled Payments In A Changing Policy Setting," Agricultural Economic Reports 33981, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    11. Drouet, Laurent & Haurie, Alain & Labriet, Maryse & Thalmann, Philippe & Vielle, Marc & Viguier, Laurent, 2005. "A Coupled Bottom-Up / Top-Down Model for GHG: Abatement Scenarios in the Swiss Housing Sector," Conference papers 331346, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    12. Qasmi, Bashir A. & Van der Sluis, Evert, 2008. "Review and Analysis of International and Budgetary Considerations for the 2007 U.S. Farm Bill," Economics Staff Papers 6761, South Dakota State University, Department of Economics.
    13. Shogren, Jason F. & Dohlman, Erik & Chambers, William, 2003. "Behavioral Implications Of Counter-Cyclical Payments And Base Acreage Updating Under The 2002 Farm Act," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 21937, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    14. Doan, Darcie & Goldstein, Andrew & Zahniser, Steven & Vollrath, Tom & Bolling, Chris, 2005. "North American Integration in Agriculture: A Survey," 2004 NAAMIC Workshop I: North American Agrifood Market Integration: Current Situation and Perspectives 163851, North American Agrifood Market Integration Consortium (NAAMIC).
    15. Molly Anderson, 2008. "Rights-based food systems and the goals of food systems reform," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 25(4), pages 593-608, December.
    16. Xia, Doris Yan, 2005. "Impacts of Multi-Fiber Arrangement Removal on Global Textile and Cotton Trade," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19453, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    17. Johansson, Robert C. & Livingston, Michael J. & Westra, John & Guidry, Kurt, 2006. "Simulating the U.S. Impacts of Alternative Asian Soybean Rust Treatment Regimes," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 116-127, April.
    18. Allan Drazen & Nuno Limão, 2004. "Government Gains from Self-Restraint: A Bargaining Theory of Inefficient Redistribution," NBER Working Papers 10375, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Traoré, Fousseini, 2017. "Domestic and trade policies affecting the world cotton market," IFPRI book chapters, in: Bouët, Antoine; Laborde Debucquet, David (ed.), Agriculture, development, and the global trading system: 2000– 2015, chapter 7, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    20. Ruben N. Lubowski & Andrew J. Plantinga & Robert N. Stavins, 2008. "What Drives Land-Use Change in the United States? A National Analysis of Landowner Decisions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(4), pages 529-550.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:uersor:393830. 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/ersgvus.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.