Supermarket fluid milk pricing practices in the western United States

Agribusiness

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 509-530

  Carman, Hoy F ^a   Sexton, Richard J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846374727     PISSN: 07424477     EISSN: 15206297     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/agr.20062     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Azzam, A., (1999). Asymmetry and rigidity in farm-retail price transmission. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 81, 525-533.
2. Bailey, K.W., (2003). Impact of the Northeast Interstate Dairy Compact on consumer prices for fluid milk. Review of Agricultural Economics, Spring, 108-122.
3. Bettendorf, L., and F. Verboven., (2000). Incomplete transmission of coffee bean prices: Evidence from the Netherlands. European Economic Review, 27, 1-16.
4. Carlton, D.W., (1989). The theory and practice of how markets clear: Is industrial organization valuable for understanding macroeconomics? In R.Schmalensee & R.Willing (Eds.), Handbook of industrial organization. Amsterdam: North Holland, 909-946.
5. Carman, H.F., (1998). California milk marketing margins. Journal of Food Distribution Research, November, 1-6.
6. Cotterill, R.W., and Brundage, M.F., (2001). Competition or the lack thereof in local fluid milk markets: San Francisco, Seattle, Chicago, Miami and Dallas-Fort Worth. Issue Paper No. 21. Food Marketing Policy Center, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
7. Cotterill, R.W., and Dhar, T., (2003). Oligopoly pricing with differentiated products: The Boston fluid milk market channel. Research Report Series No. 74. Food Marketing Policy Center, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
8. Cotterill, R.W., and Franklin, A., (2001). The public interest and private economic power: A case study of the Northeast Dairy Compact. Monograph No. 1. Food Marketing Policy Center, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
9. Dairy Marketing Branch, California Department of Food and Agriculture. California Dairy Information Bulletin. Sacramento, California, monthly issues.
10. Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Outlook. Washington, D.C., monthly issues.
11. Frigon, M., Doyon, M., & Romain, R., (1999). Asymmetry in farm-retail price transmission in the Northeastern fluid milk market. Research Report No. 45. Food Marketing Policy Center, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
12. Houck, J.P., (1977). An approach to specifying and estimating nonreversible functions. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59, 570-572.
13. Kaufman, P., (2000). Consolidation in food retailing: Prospects for consumers & grocery suppliers. Agricultural Outlook, August, 18-22.
14. Kinnucan, H.W., & Forker, O.D., (1987). Asymmetry in farm-retail price transmission for major dairy products. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 69, 285-292.
15. Odabashian, E., (1997a). Got moo-la? Bay Area grocers continue to gouge consumers on milk. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., West Coast Regional Office, San Francisco, March, 1-15.
16. Odabashian, E., (1997b). Got moo-la? Los Angeles grocers continue to gouge consumers on milk. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., West Coast Regional Office, San Francisco, June, 1-7.
17. Sexton, R.J., Zhang, M., and Chalfant, J.C., (2003). Grocery retailer behavior in the procurement and sale of perishable fresh produce commodities. Contributors and Cooperators Report No. 2. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
18. Stigler, G.J., and Sherwin, R.A., (1985). The extent of the market. Journal of Law and Economics, 28, 555-585.