IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uconnr/153344.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

WIC Contract Spillover Effects

Author

Listed:
  • Huang, Rui
  • Perloff, Jeffrey M.

Abstract

The three major infant formula manufacturers bid state by state to be the exclusive provider to poor families under the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, and all three compete for non-WIC customers at grocery stores. Previous studies explained the low WIC prices and the higher retail prices as the result of price discrimination. We propose an alternative spillover model. Grocery stores, which supply both WIC participants and others, provide relatively large amounts of shelf space to the firm that wins the state-level WIC contract. Non-WIC customers, inferring from the large shelf space that the WIC brand is superior, are more likely to buy it. Because the contract winner benefits from a spillover effect in the lucrative non-WIC retail market, firms are willing to bid more aggressively for WIC contracts than in a price discrimination model. The spillover model is more consistent with the data than is the price discrimination model. We show that the retail price markup of the firm that wins the state WIC contract does not change when the contract is awarded, but that its shelf space increases in excess of the share of WIC customers.

Suggested Citation

  • Huang, Rui & Perloff, Jeffrey M., 2009. "WIC Contract Spillover Effects," Research Reports 153344, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:uconnr:153344
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.153344
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/153344/files/rr118.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.153344?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kenneth S. Corts, 1998. "Third-Degree Price Discrimination in Oligopoly: All-Out Competition and Strategic Commitment," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 306-323, Summer.
    2. David E. Davis, 2012. "Bidding for WIC Infant Formula Contracts: Do Non-WIC Customers Subsidize WIC Customers?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 80-96.
    3. Amrouche, Nawel & Zaccour, Georges, 2007. "Shelf-space allocation of national and private brands," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 180(2), pages 648-663, July.
    4. Oliveira, Victor & Prell, Mark A., 2004. "Sharing the Economic Burden: Who Pays for WIC's Infant Formula?," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pages 1-7, September.
    5. Oliveira, Victor & Frazao, Elizabeth & Smallwood, David M., 2011. "The Infant Formula Market: Consequences of a Change in the WIC Contract Brand," Economic Research Report 118020, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Oliveira, Victor & Frazao, Elizabeth & Smallwood, David M., 2010. "Rising Infant Formula Costs to the WIC Program: Recent Trends in Rebates and Wholesale Prices," Economic Research Report 59384, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    7. Oliveira, Victor & Prell, Mark A. & Smallwood, David M. & Frazao, Elizabeth, 2004. "Wic And The Retail Price Of Infant Formula," Food Assistance and Nutrition Research Reports 33873, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    8. Murray, Chase C. & Talukdar, Debabrata & Gosavi, Abhijit, 2010. "Joint Optimization of Product Price, Display Orientation and Shelf-Space Allocation in Retail Category Management," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 125-136.
    9. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    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. Katherine Meckel, 2020. "Is the Cure Worse Than the Disease? Unintended Effects of Payment Reform in a Quantity-Based Transfer Program," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(6), pages 1821-1865, June.
    2. Oliveira, Victor & Frazao, Elizabeth & Smallwood, David M., 2011. "The Infant Formula Market: Consequences of a Change in the WIC Contract Brand," Economic Research Report 118020, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    3. David E. Davis, 2012. "Bidding for WIC Infant Formula Contracts: Do Non-WIC Customers Subsidize WIC Customers?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 80-96.
    4. David Davis, 2014. "Buyer Alliances as Countervailing Power in WIC Infant-Formula Auctions," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 45(2), pages 121-138, September.
    5. David E. Davis, 2012. "Bidding for WIC Infant Formula Contracts: Do Non-WIC Customers Subsidize WIC Customers?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 80-96.

    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. Rojas Christian A. & Wei Hongli, 2019. "Spillover Mechanisms in the WIC Infant Formula Rebate Program," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 17(2), pages 1-14, November.
    2. David Davis, 2014. "Buyer Alliances as Countervailing Power in WIC Infant-Formula Auctions," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 45(2), pages 121-138, September.
    3. Oliveira, Victor & Frazao, Elizabeth & Smallwood, David, 2013. "Trends in Infant Formula Rebate Contracts: Implications for the WIC Program," Economic Information Bulletin 161130, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    4. Hodges, Leslie & Toossi, Saied & Todd, Jessica E. & Ryan-Claytor, Cayley, 2024. "The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC): Background, Trends, and Economic Issues, 2024 Edition," Economic Information Bulletin 341637, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    5. Katherine Meckel, 2020. "Is the Cure Worse Than the Disease? Unintended Effects of Payment Reform in a Quantity-Based Transfer Program," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(6), pages 1821-1865, June.
    6. David Davis, 2014. "Buyer Alliances as Countervailing Power in WIC Infant-Formula Auctions," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 45(2), pages 121-138, September.
    7. Oliveira, Victor & Frazao, Elizabeth, 2015. "The WIC Program: Background, Trends, and Economic Issues, 2015 Edition," Economic Information Bulletin 197543, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    8. Imke Reimers & Claire (Chunying) Xie, 2019. "Do Coupons Expand or Cannibalize Revenue? Evidence from an e-Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 286-300, January.
    9. Saitone, Tina L. & Sexton, Richard J. & Volpe, Richard J., III, 2012. "Markups and Promotional Patterns of California WIC-Authorized Foods," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124927, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Karki, Uttam & Guthrie, Bradley & Parikh, Pratik J., 2021. "Joint determination of rack configuration and shelf space allocation for a retailer," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    11. Tsao, Yu-Chung & Lu, Jye-Chyi & An, Na & Al-Khayyal, Faiz & Lu, Richard W. & Han, Guanghua, 2014. "Retailer shelf-space management with trade allowance: A Stackelberg game between retailer and manufacturers," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 133-144.
    12. Irion, Jens & Lu, Jye-Chyi & Al-Khayyal, Faiz & Tsao, Yu-Chung, 2012. "A piecewise linearization framework for retail shelf space management models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 222(1), pages 122-136.
    13. Li, Xuemei & Saitone, Tina L. & Sexton, Richard J., 2018. "Electronic Benefit Transfer and the Women, Infants and Children Participation Rate: Evidence from Oklahoma EBT Transition," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 273850, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Oliveira, Victor & Frazao, Elizabeth & Smallwood, David M., 2011. "The Infant Formula Market: Consequences of a Change in the WIC Contract Brand," Economic Research Report 118020, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    15. Oliveira, Victor & Davis, David, 2015. "Manufacturers’ Bids for WIC Infant Formula Rebate Contracts, 2003-2013," Economic Information Bulletin 206808, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    16. Flamand, Tulay & Ghoniem, Ahmed & Haouari, Mohamed & Maddah, Bacel, 2018. "Integrated assortment planning and store-wide shelf space allocation: An optimization-based approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 134-149.
    17. McLaughlin, Patrick W. & Saitone, Tina L. & Sexton, Richard J., 2013. "Non-Price Competition and the California WIC Program," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150783, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Volpe, Richard & Saitone, Tina & Sexton, Richard, 2014. "Cost Containment in the WIC Program: Vendor Peer Groups and Reimbursement Rates," Economic Research Report 183224, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    19. Wright, Austin L. & Sonin, Konstantin & Driscoll, Jesse & Wilson, Jarnickae, 2020. "Poverty and economic dislocation reduce compliance with COVID-19 shelter-in-place protocols," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 544-554.
    20. Iacovone, Leonardo & Ferro, Esteban & Pereira-López, Mariana & Zavacka, Veronika, 2019. "Banking crises and exports: Lessons from the past," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 192-204.

    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:uconnr:153344. 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/fmuctus.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.