Search

Welfare costs of a potential food shock were estimated by disseminating information to milk drinkers on the prevalence of Mycobacterium avium sub. paratuberculosis (MAP) in the U.S. milk supply, its potential linkage to Crohn's disease in humans, and subsequent government intervention to minimize MAP in the milk supply. We found that 19.6% of milk consumers exposed to MAP information would stop milk consumption at current market prices, and that only 5% of those would return to their original milk consumption levels after the government intervention. Societal costs of the food shock after the intervention were estimated at $18.2 billion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Contemporaneous observations on expected supply and on prices of post‐harvest futures contracts for corn are used to estimate expected demand relationships. These equations are used to estimate the prices of the post‐harvest contracts based on new supply estimates. Each estimate can be compared with a corresponding futures price, i.e. the market forecast. The differences help discern the market expectations about the expected demand for the new crop relative to historical experience, which can help support outlook analyses. We find that in recent years, a 100 million bushel change in the expected supply of corn results in about a 6 cent per bushel negative change in the price of December corn. The discussion also deepens understanding of the term ‘anticipatory prices’ as defined by Holbrook Working in his 1958 work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The motivation to pay a premium for socially responsible products is partly an expression of consumer concern for the well-being of those involved in the production process. Buying a product with a socially responsible label, and donating to a charity are similarly motivated actions. While there is an extensive literature on the economics of charitable giving that examines motivations to donate as well as on the impacts of labelling on consumer demand, there is little overlap between the two literatures. We bridge these two literatures by investigating whether consumers have heterogeneous motivations for paying a premium. Through a laboratory experiment that auctions coffee with hypothetical socially responsible labels that put different weights on in-kind versus cash transfers, we find that those consumers who prefer an in-kind transfer (paternalistic altruists) are willing to pay a 52.5% price premium over standard coffee. Those who prefer that most of the premium is paid as cash (strong altruists) are willing to pay a 42.5% premium. Finally, those who are indifferent to how the premium is spent by the recipient (warmglow givers) are willing to pay only a 19.2% premium. We discuss the implications of our results and future research directions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]