Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-5jtmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-31T15:02:06.693Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sales Response to Generic Promotion Efforts and Some Implications of Milk Advertising on Economic Surplus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Stanley R. Thompson
Stanley R. Thompson*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Cornell University
Get access

Extract

Each year various agricultural commodity groups spend millions of dollars advertising and promoting their respective products. Typically such “demand creating” attempts have been purported as a panacea for low producer returns despite their unevaluated performance records. Notwithstanding the magnitude of these promotional expenditures, the literature is scarce regarding the effect of advertising on commodity sales. Such knowledge would provide an invaluable input for promotion expenditure decisions and a means to evaluate the effects of advertising and promotion on economic surplus.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , October 1974 , pp. 78 - 90
Copyright
Copyright © Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 Bass, Frank and Clarke, Darrel G., “Testing Distributed Lag Models of Advertising Effects,” Journal of Marketing Research, IX, August, 1972, pp. 298–308.Google Scholar
2 Brandow, G. E., Interrelations Among Demands for Farm Products and Implications for Control of Milk Supply, Pennsylvania State Univ., Agric. Exp. Sta. Bul. 680, August 1961, Table 1.Google Scholar
3 Currie, M. J. et. al., “The Concept of Economic Surplus and Its Use in Economic Analysis,” The Economic Journal, Vol. LXXXI, Dec. 1971, pp. 741–79.Google Scholar
4 Chen, Dean, Courtney, Richard and Schmitz, Andrew, “A Polynomial Lag Formulation of Milk Production Responses,” Am. J. Agr. Econ., Feb. 1972, pp. 77–83.Google Scholar
5 Dupuit, J., “On the Measurement of the Utility of Public Works,” Annales des Ponts Et Chaussees, Second Series, Vol. 8, 1844; translation reprinted by D. Munby, Transport, 1968.Google Scholar
6 George, P. S. and King, G. A., Consumer Demand for Food Commodities in the U.S. with Projections for 1980, California Agric. Exp. Sta., Giannini Foundation Mimeo. No. 26, March 1971.Google Scholar
7 Henderson, Peter L., “Market Experimentation for Measurement of Advertising and Promotion Effectiveness,” Proceedings from the Business and Economic Statistic Section of the American Statistical Association, 1966.Google Scholar
8 Henderson, Peter L., “Efficacy of Production Promotions,” a paper presented at the Association of Southern Agricultural Workers Conference, Jacksonville, Florida, Feb. 1962.Google Scholar
9 Hicks, J. R., Value and Capital, (second ed.) Oxford: Claredon Press, 1953.Google Scholar
10 Hoos, Sidney, “The Advertising and Promotion of Farm Products–Some Theoretical Issues,” J. Farm Econ. 47: 349–363, 1959.Google Scholar
11 Hu, Teh-Wei, “An Econometric Model of Demand for Dairy Products in the U.S. Post-War Period 1947-63,” Paper presented to the Econometric Society, Toronto, Canada, August 28-30, 1967, Table 3.Google Scholar
12 Jackson, Geoffrey H., “Milk Supply Response and Some Regional Implications for Dairy Policy in the United States.” Unpublished PhD dissertation. Dept. of Agric. Econ., Cornell Univ., 1973, p. 67.Google Scholar
13 Jackson, Geoffrey H. and Piggott, Ronald R., “Procedures for Selecting the Final Form of a Polynomial Lag Model.” Unpublished manuscript. Dept. of Agric. Econ., Cornell Univ., 1972.Google Scholar
14 Johnson, Paul, “The Social Cost of the Tobacco Program,” J. Farm Econ., Vol. 47, No. 2, May 1965, pp. 242–55.Google Scholar
15 Johnston, J., Econometric Methods, second ed., McGraw-Hill, 1972.Google Scholar
16 Marshall, Alfred, “On Rent,” Economic Journal, Vol. III, March 1893, p. 495.Google Scholar
17 Nerlove, Marc, “Estimates of the Elasticities of Supply of Selected Agricultural Commodities,” J. Farm Econ. 38: 496–509, May 1956.Google Scholar
18 Nerlove, Marc, Distributed Lags and Demand Analysis for Agricultural and Other Commodities, Washington, USDA, Agricultural Handbook 141, June 1958.Google Scholar
19 Nerlove, Marc and Arrow, Kenneth J., “Optimal Advertising Policy Under Dynamic Conditions,” Economica 114, May 1962, p. 129#x2013;42.Google Scholar
20 Patinkin, Don, “Demand Curves and Consumer's Surplus,” Chapter 4 in Christ, Carl, F. et al. ed., Measurement in Economics, Stanford Univ. Press, 1963.Google Scholar
21 Rojko, Anthony S., The Demand and Price Structure for Dairy Products, USDA Technical Bulletin 1168, 1957, Table 24.Google Scholar
22 Tweeten, Luther G. and Tyner, Fred H., “The Utility Concept of Net Social Cost–A Criterion for Public Policy,” Agricultural Economics Research, Vol. XVIII, No. 2, April 1966, pp. 33–42.Google Scholar
23 Wallace, T. D., “Measures of Social Costs of Agricultural Programs,” J. Farm Econ., Vol. XLIV, No. 2, May 1962, pp. 580–594.Google Scholar
24 Ward, Ronald W., “Evaluation of Generic Advertising Effectiveness with Econometrics,” Measurement of Sales Response to Generic Promotion of Food Products: Seminar Proceedings, MRC 73-6, Texas Agric. Market Research Center, Texas A & M Univ., 1973, pp. 55–79.Google Scholar
25 Waugh, Frederick V., “Needed Research on the Effectiveness of Farm Products Promotions,” J. Farm Econ. 47: 364#x2013;76, 1959.Google Scholar
26 Wilson, Robert R. and Thompson, Russel G., “Demand, Supply and Price Relationships for the Dairy Sector, Post-WW II Period,” J. Farm Econ., Feb. 1972, pp. 77–83.Google Scholar
27 Yon, Bernard and Mount, Timothy D., “The Response of Sales to Advertising: Estimation of a Polynomial Lag Structure,” Unpublished manuscript, Dept. of Agric. Econ., Cornell Univ., 1972.Google Scholar