New Economics Papers
on Agricultural Economics
Issue of 2006‒06‒24
thirteen papers chosen by

  1. Input-Outrageous: The Economic Impacts of Modern Biofuels Production By Swenson, David A.
  2. U.S. Sugar Policy Options and Their Consequences under NAFTA and Doha By Abler, David; Beghin, John C.; Blandford, David; Elobeid, Amani
  3. Heterogeneity of Preferences, Limited Commitment and Coalitions Empirical Evidence on the Limits to Risk Sharing in Rural Pakistan By DUBOIS, Pierre
  4. Private Labels, National Brands and Food Prices By BONTEMPS, Christophe; OROZCO, Valérie; RÉQUILLART, Vincent
  5. Calendar Anomalies in an Emerging African Market: Evidence from the Ghana Stock Exchange. By Paul Alagidede; Theodore Panagiotidis
  6. Identifying the Effect of Unobserved Quality and Experts' Reviews in the Pricing of Experience Goods: Empirical Application on Bordeaux Wine By DUBOIS, Pierre; NAUGES, Céline
  7. Optimal Incentives under Moral Hazard and Heterogeneous Agents: Evidence from Production Contracts Data By DUBOIS, Pierre; VUKINA, Tomislav
  8. Allocation and competitiveness in the EU emissions trading scheme: policy overview By Michael Grubb; Karsten Neuhoff
  9. Environmental Policies and Trade Liberalization: a Time Consistency Issue By CALMETTE, Marie-Françoise
  10. A Dynamic Model of Food and Clean Energy By CHAKRAVORTY, Ujjayant; MAGNE, Bertrand; MOREAUX, Michel
  11. Carbon capture and sequestration: how much does this uncertain option affect near-term policy choices? By Laurent Gilotte; Valentina Bosetti
  12. Permis d'Emission Négociables, Ressources Non-Renouvelables et Croissance By GRIMAUD, André; ROUGÉ, Luc
  13. La PAC issue de la réforme de juin 2003 a-t-elle un avenir ? By Hervé Guyomard

  1. By: Swenson, David A.
    Abstract: Measuring the net economic impacts of ethanol plants has been problematical: access to good industrial accounts is limited, the sector has historically gone through volatile swings, regional logistical responses to a plant beyond corn inputs are not well understood, and the sector is currently expanding rapidly. In the current uncertain energy world, the prices paid for inputs and received for outputs are also volatile. There exists quite a bit of confusion about the overall value of this dimension of value added agricultural processing to local, regional, and national accounts. There is a tendency for proponents of this industry to overstate, over-describe, and outright double-count economic activity linked to ethanol and other biofuels production. This paper will present the findings of a modeled ethanol plant configuration in a hypothetical three-county region in Iowa.
    JEL: C5
    Date: 2006–06–13
  2. By: Abler, David; Beghin, John C.; Blandford, David; Elobeid, Amani
    Abstract: We analyze the potential impact of continuing the existing U.S. sugar program, replacing it with a standard program, and implementing the standard program with multilateral trade liberalization. Under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), duty-free sugar imports from Mexico will undermine the program’s ability to operate on a “no-cost” basis to U.S. taxpayers. As the Mexican beverage industry is likely to expand considerably its high-fructose corn syrup use, the sugar thereby displaced will seek a market in the United States. Under these conditions, marketing allotments could not be utilized under current legislation and prices would likely fall to the loan rate. The government would accumulate significant sugar stocks. The replacement of the current sugar program by one similar to other major U.S. crop programs would solve the problem of stock accumulation and accommodate further trade liberalization under a new World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement or future bilateral trade agreements. Our analysis of recent WTO proposals suggests that a WTO agreement is unlikely to impose significant adjustment pressures on the U.S. sugar market beyond those created by NAFTA. The adoption of a standard program would make it easier for the United States to meet its commitments under a new WTO agreement in terms of reductions in trade-distorting amber-box support. Moving to a standard program would increase the costs of the program for taxpayers but would lower costs for sugar users. Given reasonable assumptions about program parameters, the principal program cost would likely be through direct payments rather than through countercyclical or loan-deficiency payments. These costs could be lower than the maximum estimated here, because of limitations on payments to individual producers.
    Keywords: Doha, NAFTA, policy, sugar, U.S. sugar program.
    Date: 2006–06–13
  3. By: DUBOIS, Pierre
    Date: 2005–08
  4. By: BONTEMPS, Christophe; OROZCO, Valérie; RÉQUILLART, Vincent
    JEL: L81 Q13 D40
    Date: 2006–04
  5. By: Paul Alagidede (Loughborough University); Theodore Panagiotidis (Loughborough University)
    Abstract: This paper investigates two calendar anomalies in an emerging African market. Both the day of the week and month of the year effects are examined for Ghana. The latter is an interesting case because i) it operates for only three days per week during the sample period and ii) the increased focus that African stock markets have received lately both from academics and practitioners. We employ rolling techniques to asses the affects of policy and institutional changes. This allows deviations from the linear paradigm. We finally employ non-linear models from the GARCH family in a rolling framework to investigate the role of asymmetries. Contrary to a January return pattern in most markets, an April effect is found for Ghana. The evidence also shows the presence of the day of the week effects with asymmetric volatility performing better than the benchmark linear estimates. This seasonality though disappears when only the latest information is used (time-varying asymmetric GARCH). Our approach provides a new framework for investigating this well-known puzzle in finance.
    Keywords: Calendar Anomalies, Non-Linearity, Market Efficiency, Asymmetric Volatility, Rolling windows.
    JEL: C22 C52 G10
    Date: 2006–06
  6. By: DUBOIS, Pierre; NAUGES, Céline
    JEL: D82 L15 Q11 C51
    Date: 2006–01
  7. By: DUBOIS, Pierre; VUKINA, Tomislav
    JEL: D82 L24 Q12 K32 L51
    Date: 2005–12
  8. By: Michael Grubb; Karsten Neuhoff
    Abstract: The European emissions trading scheme (EU ETS) has an efficient and effective market design that risks being undermined by three interrelated problems: the approach to allocation; the absence of a credible commitment to post-2012 continuation; and concerns about its impact on the international competitiveness of key sectors. This special issue of Climate Policy explores these three factors in depth. This policy overview summarizes key insights from the individual studies in this issue, and draws overall policy conclusions about the next round of allocations and the design of the system for the longer term.
    Date: 2006–06
  9. By: CALMETTE, Marie-Françoise
    JEL: F12 F18 H21
    Date: 2005–11
  10. By: CHAKRAVORTY, Ujjayant; MAGNE, Bertrand; MOREAUX, Michel
    JEL: Q41 Q42 Q15
    Date: 2006–05
  11. By: Laurent Gilotte (CIRED - Centre International de Recherche sur l'Environnement et le Développement - [CNRS : UMR8568] - [Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales][Ecole Nationale du Génie Rural des Eaux et des Forêts][Ecole Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées]); Valentina Bosetti (FEEM - Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei)
    Abstract: Policy makers as well as many economists recognize geological Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) as a key option to avoid costly emission reduction. While an extreme perspective is to envision CCS as a magic bullet to solve the issue of climate change, the economics perspective is more balanced and see it as a part of a portfolio of mitigation actions. Besides, as any novel mitigation technology, CCS can be implemented with a twofold purpose; on one side it can substitute some other technological efforts to reach a given environmental target. On the other side, it offers the opportunity to go for additional emission reductions and<br />reach a "safer" climate target. In order to balance these two<br />possible utilizations of CCS and assess their respective effects on<br />early policystrategies, we undertake a twofold numerical experiment.<br /> First, a cost-efficiency analysis is undertaken where CCS sole effect<br /> is substitution of other efforts. This is followed by a cost-benefit analysis where both purposes have to be balanced. We find that future availability of CCS is less a reason to relax near-term abatement efforts than what could be inferred from previous analyses. Moreover, cost-benefit analysis indicates that the environmental target should be more ambitious when CCS is included in the picture.
    Keywords: Climate Change, Uncertainty, Sequestration, Cost-benefit analysis
    Date: 2006–06–16
  12. By: GRIMAUD, André; ROUGÉ, Luc
    Date: 2005
  13. By: Hervé Guyomard (INRA-Unité d'économie - [INRA])
    Abstract: La PAC issue de la réforme de juin 2003 a-t-elle un avenir ? Colloque de la SFER (Société Française d'Economie Rurale), La réforme de la PAC : modalités d'application et perspectives dans les Etats membres de l'Union européenne, Paris, 23 juin 2005
    Keywords: Politique Agricole Commune - PAC
    Date: 2006–06–13

General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.