This paper explores growers’ supply response to the 2005 “Sideways effect” demand shock (Cuellar, Karnowsky, and Acosta, 2009) triggered by the 2004 release of the movie Sideways. We use a modified difference-in-difference approach to evaluate the supply response in California and regional supply response differences within California. We use U.S. Department of Agriculture data for the period 1999–2012 and find evidence of a supply response in the post-release period that is consistent with the “Sideways effect” on wine demand. The positive supply response for Pinot Noir is stronger than the negative response for Merlot and concentrated in lower value Central Valley vineyards. (JEL Classifications: D25, Q12)

In two-tier price systems, yield uncertainty creates incentives to overproduce quantity-restricted outputs even when prices for surplus output are very low. These incentives arise from precautionary motives against expected losses from quota shortfalls. Using an approach augmented for multiple input applications, the likelihood of excess production and the relative importance of price changes in different markets are estimated for Icelandic dairy farms. The results indicate that the average farm plans to exceed its quota, and price changes in the surplus milk market are approximately three times more effective in generating supply response than price changes in the quota milk market.

Grain supply is the joint effect of both area and yield; however, research often targets either one or the other. The research presented here estimates the complete supply elasticity of grains using novel approaches to approximate producers’ price and weather expectations on both yield and acres planted. The results from this approach combining acreage and yield show the negative impact of expanded production on average yields and the supply response. Additionally, the research extends previous methods of approximating producers’ price expectations through the use of historical basis prices.

Factors which explain supply response behavior of South Carolina tomato growers were determined. Two well known supply response models were used for comparison: the Nerlovian structural model and the Just risk model. The Just risk model reflected the significance of the risk effect in both stable and unstable periods. An evaluation of forecasting power between the two models was indeterminate. Growers are apparently willing to invest in more information with increased market instability because growers were influenced by the Florida winter price of tomatoes in planting decisions during the period of instability.

We demonstrate the use of the small-sample econometrics principles and strategies to come up with reliable yield and acreage models for policy analyses. We focus on demonstrating the importance of proper representation of systematic and random components of the model for improving forecasting precision along with more reliable confidence intervals for the forecasts. A probability distribution function modeling approach, which has been shown to provide more reliable confidence intervals for the dependent variable forecasts than the standard models that assume error term normality, is used to estimate cotton supply response in the Southeastern United States.

In responding to a comment article, we concur that quantifying U.S. livestock price response to changing Japanese meat import demand requires nonzero supply elasticities beyond one quarter. However, rigidities in market trade and empirical tests justify the inclusion of exchange rates in the short-run analysis. Producer welfare asymptotically approaches zero for increasing supply elasticities in the long run, but short-run transitions in producer surplus are meaningful to producers.

An econometric model of cotton acreage response was estimated for four distinct production regions in the United States. This work builds on previous work in the area of supply response under government farm programs and provides up-to-date regionalized estimates of own-price elasticity of cotton acreage supply. The own-price variable used in this study is a weighted combination of expected market price and government policy variables. Results indicate regional similarity in response to own price but differences with respect to the prices of alternative enterprises. Differences in regional response to paid diversion are also indicated.

Risk has long been recognized as potentially important in determining agricultural supply. However, supply response models have either incorporated risk in an ad hoc manner or not at all. A rational expectations supply response model incorporating price risk is developed, an estimation procedure suggested, and an empirical example presented.

A recent study by Miljkovic, Marsh, and Brester estimates that reductions in the Japanese tariff-rate quota between 1993 and 2001 increased U.S. beef prices by $1.03 per cwt and yen depreciation between 1995 and 1998 reduced U.S. hog prices by $0.99 per cwt. Relaxing the assumption that U.S. beef and hog supplies are fixed cuts the total elasticities underlying these estimates by 50% or more. The upshot is that shocks in the Japanese market have little effect on U.S. beef and pork prices. Hence, producers may be better off focusing on domestic issues such as dietary concerns over red meat consumption.

Elasticities of import demand and supply often drive economic models, butfew empirical estimates of these elasticities exist for vegetables andfruits. For those that do exist, most are outdated. Because elasticitieschange over time as income, prices, and market conditions change, outdatedelasticity estimates may not be representative of changes in importquantities demanded or in acreages, yield, and quantities supplied.Moreover, import demand elasticities by country of origin for mostvegetables and fruits are nonexistent. This article presents research thatupdates elasticity estimates for each of the selected product categories andincludes production and trade implications.

Remarkable changes have occurred over the years in the domestic andinternational economic environment of the fruit and vegetable industry.These changes are partly driven by the North American Free Trade Agreement,nutrition policies, and development and enforcement of new food safetystandards. The articles in this invited session examined the effect of thesedrivers and their implication on the future competitiveness of the southernfruit and vegetable industry.