Quality and Grading Risk
Abstract
Many (perhaps most) sorts of agricultural commodities are not homogeneous, but instead vary according to a set of quality characteristics. Some of these characteristics may be easy to inexpensively measure — many sorts of fresh fruit, for example, are sorted into different sizes by using a sizing belt. However, others may be difficult to measure non-destructively — think of trying to measure the color of flesh of a whole melon. In between these extremes (characteristics that are easily measured and those that are difficult or impossible to non-destructively measure) lie the sorts of characteristics that consumers may place a high value on, yet which can be easily measured only by the prospective consumer, such as the smell of a tomato.
Keywords
Quality Characteristic Agricultural Commodity Price Function Post Ranking Price RiskPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Akerlof, G.A. 1970. “The Market for `Lemons’: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 84: 488–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Berck, P., and G.C. Rausser. 1982. “Consumer Demand, Grades, and Margin Relationships.” In G.C. Rausser, ed., New Directions in Econometrics Modeling and Forecasting in U.S. Agriculture. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Bierlen, R., and O. Grunewald. 1995. “Price Incentives for Commercial Fresh Tomatoes.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 27: 138–148.Google Scholar
- Bockstael, N.E. 1984. “The Welfare Implications of Minimum Quality Standards.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66: 466–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bockstael, N.E. 1987. “Economic Efficiency Issues of Grading and Minimum Quality Standards.” In R.E. Kilmer and W.I. Armbruster, eds., Economic Efficiency in Agricultural and Food Marketing. Ames, IA: Farm Foundation.Google Scholar
- Chalfant, I.A., I.S. James, N. Lavoie, and R.I. Sexton. 1999. “Asymmetric Grading Error and Adverse Selection: Lemons in the California Prune Industry.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 24: 57–79.Google Scholar
- Considine, I.I., W.A. Kerr, G.R. Smith, and S.M. Ulmer. 1986. “The Impact of a New Grading System on the Beef Cattle Industry: The Case of Canada.” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 11: 184–194.Google Scholar
- Dimitri, C., J.K. Horowitz, and E. Lichtenberg. 1996. “Grading Services as a Mechanism for Dispute Resolution in Fruit and Vegetable Markets.” Unpublished manuscript, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
- Dupré, R. 1990. “Regulating the Quebec Dairy Industry, 1905–1921: Peeling Off the Joseph Label.” The Journal of Economic History 50: 339–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Egan, T. 2000. “`Perfect’ Apple Pushed Growers into Debt.” The New York Times (November 4, 2000, p. Al).Google Scholar
- Espinosa, J.A., and B.K. Goodwin. 1991. “Hedonic Price Estimation for Kansas Wheat Characteristics.” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 16: 72–85.Google Scholar
- Freebairn, J.W. 1973. “The Value of Information Provided by a Uniform Grading System.” Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics 17: 127–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hennessy, D.A. 1995. “Microeconomics of Agricultural Commodity Grading: Impacts on the Marketing Channel.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 77: 80–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hollander, A., S. Monier, and H. Ossard. 1999. “Pleasures of Cockaigne: Quality Gaps, Market Structure, and the Amount of Grading.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81: 501–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hueth, B., and E. Ligon. 1999. “Producer Price Risk and Quality Measurement.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81: 512–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jewitt, I. 1988. “Justifying the First-Order Approach to Principal-Agent Problems.” Econometrica 56: 1177–1190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lancaster, K.J. 1966. “A New Approach to Consumer Theory.” Journal of Political Economy 74: 132–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Marette, S., J.M. Crespi, and A. Schiavina. 1999. “The Role of Common Labelling in Context of Asymmetric Information.” European Review of Agricultural Economics 26: 167–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Nelson, P. 1970. “Information and Consumer Behavior.” Journal of Political Economy 78: 311–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Price, D.W. “Discarding Low Quality Produce with an Elastic Demand.” Journal of Farm Economics 49: 622–632.Google Scholar