Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T16:57:59.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modeling Weekly Truck Rates for Perishables

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Richard Beilock  and
J. Scott Shonkwiler
Richard Beilock
Affiliation:
University of Florida
J. Scott Shonkwiler
Affiliation:
University of Florida
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The transportation literature reveals several studies that attempt to model freight rates. These efforts are important as they provide insight into rate determinants and consequently assist firms in planning, provide input into transportation policy debates, and are of use in transportation and commodity research. In such studies, freight-rate variations typically are explained by differences in commodity types, competition from alternative modes, and distance (Perkins; Benishay and Whitaker; Binkley and Harrar; Ferguson and Glorfeld; Boles; Miklius). However, when shippers must rely on one mode to ship a very limited mix of goods to one or a few destinations, this approach is of little use in explaining rate variations. The produce industry is a case in point.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , July 1983 , pp. 83 - 87
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1983

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

Beilock, R., and Fletcher, G.. “Characteristics of the Florida Produce Trucking Industry.” Unpubl. ms., 1983.Google Scholar
Benishay, H., and Whitaker, G. Jr “Demand and Supply in Freight Transportation.” J. Indus. Econ. 14(1966):243–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binkley, J., and Harrar, B.. “Major Determinants of Ocean Freight Rates for Grains: An Economic Analysis.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 63(1982):47–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boles, P. “Owner-Operator Costs of Hauling Fresh Fruit and Vegetables in Refrigerated Trucks.” USDA-ESCS Rpt. ESCS-82, July 1980.Google Scholar
Federal-State Market News Service. Marketing Florida Vegetables. Fruit and Vegetable Division, North Palm Beach, Florida, 1979-1981.Google Scholar
Ferguson, W., and Glorfeld, L.. “Modeling the Present Motor Carrier Rate Structure as a Benchmark for Pricing in the New Competitive Environment.” Transportation J. 21(1981):59–66.Google Scholar
Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. Citrus Summary: 1981. Orlando, 1982a.Google Scholar
Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. Vegetable Summary: 1981. Orlando, 1982b.Google Scholar
Gardner, D. “The Farm-Retail Price Spread.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 57(1975):399–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heien, D. “Price Determination Processes for Agricultural Sector Models.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 59(1977):126–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kmenta, J.Elements of Econometrics. New York: McMillan, 1971.Google Scholar
Miklius, W. “Estimating the Demand for Truck and Rail Transportation: A Case Study of California Lettuce.” Agr. Econ. Res. 19(1967):46–50.Google Scholar
Pavlovic, K., et al. Domestic Transportation for Florida Perishable Produce. Transportation Res. Ct., University of Florida, November 1980.Google Scholar
Perkins, M.A Truck Freight Model. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Transportation Studies Rpt. 80-15, June 1980.Google Scholar
Theil, H.Principles of Econometrics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1971.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. “Fresh Fruit and Vegetables and Ornamental Crops: Weekly Summary—Shipments and Unloads.” A.M.S., 1978-1981 (weekly).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. “Fruit and Vegetable Rate Report.” A.M.S., 1979-1981 (weekly).Google Scholar