Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T00:53:18.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Regional Analysis of Vegetable Production with Changing Demand for Row Crops Using Quadratic Programming

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2016

J.E. Epperson  and
L.F. Lei
J.E. Epperson
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Georgia, Athens
L.F. Lei
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Georgia, Athens
Get access

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to ascertain the competitive and complementary potential of fresh vegetable production relative to traditional row crop production using a regional partial equilibrium model. It seems clear from the analysis that vegetable crops are not destined in the near future to replace row crops in terms of land utilization. Nevertheless, vegetable crops appear to compete with and complement row crops well as evidenced by substantial increases in production as market share was assumed to increase. However, fresh vegetables cannot be considered as residual enterprises to which producers move when the demand for row crops declines. Even with a simulated 20 percent decrease in the demand for row crops, the acreage of fresh vegetables did not increase.

Keywords

market sharealternative cropswelfare analysissoutheast
Type
Submitted Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , July 1989 , pp. 87 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, R.M., King, G.A., and Johnston, W.E.. “Effects of Energy Cost Increases and Regional Allocation Policies on Agricultural Production.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 59 (1977):444–455.Google Scholar
Alabama Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. County Data 1975-1984. Montgomery, AL, 1985.Google Scholar
Babb, J.H., Epperson, J., and Wells, G.J.. An Analysis of the Competitive Position of South Carolina's Fresh Market Tomato Industry. South Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 644, 1982.Google Scholar
Carley, D.H., and Fletcher, S.M.. Peanut Farmers' Attitudes Toward Alternative Marketing Methods for Farmers' Stock Peanuts. Georgia Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Rep. No. 502, 1986.Google Scholar
Carter, H.O., and Dean, G.W.. “Income, Price, and Yield Variability for Principal California Crops and Cropping Systems.” Hilgardia, 30 (1960):175–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahlgran, R.A.. “Welfare Costs and Interregional Income Transfers Due to Regulation of Dairy Markets.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 62 (1980):288–296.Google Scholar
Davis, G.H., and Meyer, G.. “Future of Our Ground Water Supplies.” Water Well Journal, (1967):30–44.Google Scholar
Decoteau, D.R., Dufault, R.J., and Garrett, J.T.. “Development of a Continuous-Supply Produce Availability Model for Site and Regional Production.” Hort Science; 23, 5 (1988):825.Google Scholar
Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. Field Crops County Estimates 1975-1984. Orlando, FL, 1985.Google Scholar
Georgia Crop Reporting Service. Georgia Agricultural Facts, 1975-1984. Athens, GA, 1985.Google Scholar
Geraghty, J.J., Miller, D.W., Leeden, F.V.Der, and troise, F.L.. Water Atlas of the United States. New York: Water Information Center, Water Research Building, 1973.Google Scholar
Hammig, M., Conway, R., Shapouri, H., and Yanagida, J.. “The Effects of Shifts in Supply on the World Sugar Market.” Agri. Econ. Research, 34 (1982):12–18.Google Scholar
Hazell, P.B.R., and Scandizzo, P.L.. “Competitive Demand Structures Under Risk in Agricultural Linear Programming Models.” Amer. J. Agri. Econ., 56 (1974):235–244.Google Scholar
Houck, J.P. “The Relationship of Direct Price Flexibilities to Direct Price Elasticities.” J. Farm. Economics, 47 (1965):789–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, K.S. U.S. Demand.for Food: A Complete System of Price and Income Effects. U.S.Department of Agriculture, Technical Bullentin 1714. Washington, DC, 1985.Google Scholar
Kiker, C., and Lynne, G.D.. “Agricultural and Water Regulation in the East.” Journal of the American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, 41 (1977):32–36.Google Scholar
Kundell, J.E. “Ground Water Resources of Georgia.” Institute of Government, University of Georgia, 1978.Google Scholar
La Moreaux, P.E. Ground Water Resources of the South—A Frontier of the Nation's Water Supply. U.S. Geological.Survey Cir. 441, 1960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathia, G.A., and Brooker, J.R.. “Relative Profitability of Vine-Ripe Tomatoes in North Carolina and Tennessee.” So. J. Agr. Econ., 9, 2 (1977):121–127.Google Scholar
Meister, A.D., Heady, E.O., Nicol, K.J., and Strohbehn, R.W.. U.S. Agricultural.Production in Relation to Alternative Water, Environmental, and Export Policies. Iowa State University Center for Agr. and Rural Dev. CARD Report 65, 1976.Google Scholar
Mittelhammer, R.C. “The Estimation of Domestic Demand for Salad Vegetables Using A Priori Information.” Ph.D. Dissertation. Washington State University, 1978.Google Scholar
North Carolina Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. North Carolina Agricultural Statistics, 1975-1978. Raleigh, NC, 1982.Google Scholar
North Carolina Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. North Carolina Agricultural Statistics, 1979-1982. Raleigh, NC, 1985.Google Scholar
Price, D.W., and Mittelhammer, R.C.. “A Matrix of Demand Elasticities for Fresh Fruit.” West. J. Agr. Econ., 4, 1 (1979):69–86.Google Scholar
Ray, D.E., and Richardson, J.W.. Detailed Description of Polysim. Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin T-151, 1978.Google Scholar
Simmons, R.L., and Pomerada, C.. “Equilibrium Quantity and Timing of Mexican Vegetable Exports.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 57 (1975):472–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
South Carolina Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. State and County Data, 1975-1980. Clemson, SC, 1981.Google Scholar
South Carolina Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. State and County Data, 1980-1984. Clemson, SC, 1985.Google Scholar
Stucker, B.C., and Collins, K.J.. The Food Security Act of1985—Major Provisions Affecting Commodities. Washington, DC: U.S. Department.of Agriculture Agr. Info. Bull. No. 497, 1986.Google Scholar
Takayama, T., and Judge, G.G.. Spatial and Temporal Price and Allocation Models. Amsterdam: North Holland Publication Company, 1971.Google Scholar
Tennessee Crop Reporting Service. Tennessee County Estimates, 1975-1984. Nashville, TN, 1985.Google Scholar
Tew, B.V., Wetzstein, M.E., Epperson, J.E., and Robertson, J.D.. Economics of Selected Integrated Pest Management Production Systems in Georgia. Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report 395, 1982.Google Scholar
Todd, D.K. The Water Encyclopedia. New York: Water Information Center, Water Research Building, 1970.Google Scholar
U.S. Department.of Agriculture (a). Agricultural Marketing Service. Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Arrival Totals. Fruit and Vegetable Division, Washington, DC, 1983-1985.Google Scholar
U.S. Department.of Agriculture (b). Agricultural Marketing Service. Fresh Fruit and Vegetable National Shipping Point Trends. Federal-State Market News, Philadelphia, PA, (weekly), 1976-1985.Google Scholar
U.S. Department.of Agriculture (c). Agricultural Marketing Service. Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Prices, 1975-1984. Fruit and Vegetable Division. Market News Branch, Washington, DC, 1976-1985.Google Scholar
U.S. Department.of Agriculture (d). Agricultural Marketing Service. Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Shipments. Fruit and Vegetable Division, Washington, DC, 1981-1985.Google Scholar
U.S. Department.of Agriculture (e). Agricultural Marketing Service. Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Unload Totals. Fruit and Vegetable Division, Washington, DC, 1981-1982.Google Scholar