
Gunderson, Lusk, and Norwood (2005), "Getting Something from Nothing: An Investigation of Beef Demand Expansion and Substitution," Review of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 31, No. 1, 68-87.
In order to do a proper choice experiment, you have to give participants the option to buy nothing. Most of the time, economists have ignored the nothing, but the authors believe there can be significant information in it (so we can get something from nothing ... clever). Specifically, they investigate how consumers substitute between nothing and new products to identify whether the introduction of a new product increases total demand for the class of products or whether demand is largely stolen from other products in the same class. They find that for a new "natural" steak, total steak demand increases with significant differences in the negative impact between USDA Choice steak (larger negative impact) and ungraded beef (smaller).
In the same issue, Rude and Gervais (2005) consider "Biases in Calculating Dumping Margins: The Case of Cyclical Products."
Dumping is identified by exporting goods at a price below "normal" in the home market. But if you have a cyclical product, the trough periods by definition feature below normal prices. And if you have a case like the US/Canada hog industry, the cycles are very well matched. So US hog producers are upset at Canadian imports just at the same time that prices are low (because prices are low) and so cry "dumping!" The authors find an 11% dumping bias that could only be partially addressed by estimating costs over short time periods.
No comments:
Post a Comment