Regional Minimums in the U.S. Beef Complex

E. Dennis, B. Lubben
{"title":"Regional Minimums in the U.S. Beef Complex","authors":"E. Dennis, B. Lubben","doi":"10.32873/unl.dc.cap001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This report shows how the currently proposed policies differ; shows how these policies have aligned with historical market behavior; provides alternative specifications to regional minimums; and suggests policy alternatives to regional minimums.\n\nThe main purpose of this report is to show how current and potential alternative specifications of regional minimums would have historically aligned with observed market behavior. However, the fundamental question in the debate of the validity and effectiveness of regional minimums first rests on whether robust price discovery has historically occurred over time and within each USDA-AMS region. If there has been a lack of price discovery during certain times of the year or systematically within certain regions, then creating regional minimums is one alternative to increase negotiated trade to robust levels. Thus, if either of these two conditions are met, then one should not expect any formulation of regional minimums to match historical market behavior. This does not necessarily imply regional minimums are poorly constructed or would be ineffective at increasing price discovery. On the contrary, to create regional minimums so that they matched historical market behavior considering either of these two conditions would be counterproductive to the objective of increasing negotiated trade to a robust level. Rather than solving issues of price discovery, the enacted regional minimums would only continue permitting deficient levels of price discovery to persist under the guise of “improved price discovery.”","PeriodicalId":118160,"journal":{"name":"Center for Agricultural Profitability","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Center for Agricultural Profitability","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32873/unl.dc.cap001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This report shows how the currently proposed policies differ; shows how these policies have aligned with historical market behavior; provides alternative specifications to regional minimums; and suggests policy alternatives to regional minimums. The main purpose of this report is to show how current and potential alternative specifications of regional minimums would have historically aligned with observed market behavior. However, the fundamental question in the debate of the validity and effectiveness of regional minimums first rests on whether robust price discovery has historically occurred over time and within each USDA-AMS region. If there has been a lack of price discovery during certain times of the year or systematically within certain regions, then creating regional minimums is one alternative to increase negotiated trade to robust levels. Thus, if either of these two conditions are met, then one should not expect any formulation of regional minimums to match historical market behavior. This does not necessarily imply regional minimums are poorly constructed or would be ineffective at increasing price discovery. On the contrary, to create regional minimums so that they matched historical market behavior considering either of these two conditions would be counterproductive to the objective of increasing negotiated trade to a robust level. Rather than solving issues of price discovery, the enacted regional minimums would only continue permitting deficient levels of price discovery to persist under the guise of “improved price discovery.”
美国牛肉综合体的区域最低标准
这份报告显示了目前拟议的政策有何不同;说明这些政策是如何与历史市场行为相一致的;提供替代区域最低规格;并提出了替代区域性最低标准的政策建议。本报告的主要目的是展示当前和潜在的区域最低规范在历史上如何与观察到的市场行为保持一致。然而,关于区域最小值的有效性和有效性的辩论中的基本问题首先取决于是否在历史上随着时间的推移和在每个USDA-AMS区域内发生了强劲的价格发现。如果在一年中的某些时间或某些地区缺乏价格发现,那么建立区域最低限额是将谈判贸易增加到强劲水平的一种替代方案。因此,如果满足这两个条件中的任何一个,那么就不应该期望任何区域最小值的公式与历史市场行为相匹配。这并不一定意味着区域最小值结构不佳或在增加价格发现方面无效。相反,在考虑这两个条件中的任何一个的情况下,创造区域最低值,使它们与历史市场行为相匹配,将不利于将谈判贸易增加到一个强劲的水平。而不是解决价格发现的问题,制定的区域最低价格只会继续允许在“改善价格发现”的幌子下持续存在不足的价格发现水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信