Estimating Backward Integration In A Primary Input Market: The Case Of U.S. Hog Industry
The U.S. pork sector is evolving from an industry of small, independent firms vertically linked by spot markets to one of substantially larger firms vertically connected through contractual agreements and integration. Potential benefits to this tighter vertical arrangement include lower consumer pork prices, although the true nature of this benefit is still under debate. At the same time, there is concern of market foreclosure because highly vertically integrated industry may prevent independent hog producers from having access to open markets in which to sell their output. Boehlje underscores the need for empirical answers to questions related to the above structural change in the pork industry. The objective of this paper is to estimate econometrically the extent of backward integration by pork processing firms into the upstream hog production stage, taking into account the oligopsonistic nature of the processors, and to simulate the effect of vertical integration on consumer and producer prices and welfare. Following Perry, backward integration is defined as the fraction of the upstream limiting production factor (e.g., farm land, feedlot facilities and water supply) that the downstream processors own. This economic measure of vertical integration is richer than the traditional measure which is a ratio of internal intermediate input production (by the upstream subsidiary) to the total intermediate input usage (by the downstream processor). Rather than an economic measure of backward integration, this accounting ratio reflects the resolution of vertical integration and, by itself alone, does not give insight into the price and welfare effects of the structural change. The procedure of this study is as follows. An individual processor's profit maximization problem consists of maximizing revenue from a variety of pork products and minimizing the hog input expenditures, where the latter sub-problem involves a division of the total hog input procurements between open market purchases and internal production by the upstream subsidiary. From the optimization, one derives the optimal pork output supply, total hog input demand, and open market hog input purchases. These behavioral equations of the individual processor are aggregated and estimated in conjunction with the pork product demand equations of consumers and the open market hog supply equation of independent hog producers. The aggregate model is then used as a basis for simulating price and welfare effects of vertical integration. Possible estimation problems arising from the complexity of the optimal solutions are anticipated and coping strategies devised. In addition, data are unavailable on open market hog quantities; as a result theoretical restrictions derived from the model are used to transform this variable so as to utilize the slaughter data published by the USDA.
|Date of creation:||1998|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (612) 625-8713
Fax: (612) 625-6245
Web page: http://www.cifap.umn.edu/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- John, George & Weitz, Barton A, 1988. "Forward Integration into Distribution: An Empirical Test of Transaction Cost Analysis," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 337-55, Fall.
- Moschini, GianCarlo, 1988. "Model of Production with Supply Management for the Canadian Agricultural Sector, A," Staff General Research Papers 11269, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Appelbaum, Elie, 1979. "Testing price taking behavior," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 283-294, February.
- Koontz, Stephen R. & Garcia, Philip, 1997. "Meat-Packer Conduct In Fed Cattle Pricing: Multiple-Market Oligopsony Power," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(01), July.
- Lawrence, John D. & Kliebenstein, James, 1995. "Contracting and Vertical Coordination in the United States Pork Industry," Staff General Research Papers 5050, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Hennessy, David A., 1996.
"Information Asymmetry As a Reason for Food Industry Vertical Integration,"
Staff General Research Papers
5032, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- David A. Hennessy, 1996. "Information Asymmetry as a Reason for Food Industry Vertical Integration," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(4), pages 1034-1043.
- Westfield, Fred M, 1981. "Vertical Integration: Does Product Price Rise or Fall?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(3), pages 334-46, June.
- Lieberman, Marvin B, 1991. "Determinants of Vertical Integration: An Empirical Test," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 451-66, September.
- Greenhut, M L & Ohta, H, 1976. "Related Market Conditions and Interindustrial Mergers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(3), pages 267-77, June.
- Urban, Thomas N., 1991. "Agricultural Industrialization: It's Inevitable," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 6(4).
- Ward, Clement E., 1997. "Vertical Integration Comparison: Beef, Pork, and Poultry," 1997 Annual Meeting, July 13-16, 1997, Reno\Sparks, Nevada 35759, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
- Azzeddine Azzam, 1998. "Captive Supplies, Market Conduct, and the Open-Market Price," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 76-83.
- Perry, Martin K, 1978. "Vertical Integration: The Monopsony Case," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(4), pages 561-70, September.
- Antonovitz, Frances & Buhr, Brian L. & Liu, Donald J., 1996. "Vertical Integration Incentives In Meat Product Markets," Staff Papers 13989, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
- Azzeddine Azzam, 1996. "Testing the Monopsony-Inefficiency Incentive for Backward Integration," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(3), pages 585-590.
- repec:tpr:qjecon:v:103:y:1988:i:2:p:345-56 is not listed on IDEAS
- Alan Barkema & Michael L. Cook, 1993. "The changing U.S. pork industry: a dilemma for public policy," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, issue Q II, pages 49-65.
- Caves, Richard E. & Bradburd, Ralph M., 1988. "The empirical determinants of vertical integration," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 265-279, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:umcicp:14480. 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)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.