Macroeconomic Policy Impacts on United States Agriculture: A Simulation Analysis

United States monetary and fiscal policies influence the domestic agricultural economy directly and, through international linkages, indirectly. This study estimates the magnitude and statistical influence of coefficients relating U.S. macroeconomic policy to the U.S. agricultural economy through domestic and foreign markets. Specific objectives are to specify and estimate a general equilibrium quarterly econometric model of the U.S. macroeconomy and simulate the impact of federal deficit spending on real interest rates, real exchange rates, and net exports of agricultural products. Three hypotheses were tested. The first hypothesis that an increase in federal deficit spending increases the real interest rate could not be rejected; a $100 billion reduction in the U.S. deficit was estimated to reduce real interest rates by two percentage points or more. The second hypothesis that an increase in real interest rate increases the real value of the U.S. dollar in foreign exchange markets had strong support and could not be rejected. A third hypothesis that a rise in the real value of the dollar reduces net exports of U.S. farm products also could not be rejected. Results indicate that the U.S. agriculture would benefit from the lower exchange value associated with an ‘optimal’ macroeconomic policy. That policy initially made the overall U.S. economy perform less satisfactorily but that performance improves over time.     

THE IMPACT OF INPUT PRICE INFLATION ON THE UNITED STATES FARMING INDUSTRY*

The impact of national inflation on net income of American farmers is expressed as the elasticity E of net income with respect to input prices. E is derived mathematically from a series of equations expressing productivity, revenue, costs, and elasticities of supply and demand. Empirical estimates of E are calculated for large input categories as well as for all purchased inputs for both the short and long run using estimates of the required parameters. Price inflation for cash operating inputs with an elastic demand such as fertilizer tends not to disadvantage farmers. But total use of inputs such as real estate, labor, and, durable inventories are relatively unresponsive to higher taxes, wages and interest rales, and thus farmers are seriously disadvantaged by inflation of these “prices.” In general, farmers benefit from input price increases if the price elasticity of demand for the input exceeds that of farm output. For all purchased inputs, this study reveals a small impact on net farm income from a once-for-all input price increment of one percent. ?effet de ?inflation nationale sur le revenu net des fermiers amériains s'exprime par la flexibilité E du revenu net par rapport au prix de revient. E est dérivé par calcul mathémalique d.une série ?équations qui expriment la productivité, le rapport, les frais et la flexibilité de ?offre el de la demande. On estime empiriquement la valeur de E pour des catégories ?investissement importantes de même que pour loutes les matières premières achelées, à tongue et à courte échéance, en se servant ?estimes des paramètres nécessaires. La hausse des prix des investissements achetés cast et dont le besoin est variable, tels que les engrais, tend a ne pas occasioner de perte pour le fermier. Mais ?emploi total ?investissements tels que biens immeubles, main ?oeuvre et invenlaires à longue durée sont relativemenl peu sensibles à?augmentation du laux des impôts, des salaires, el ?intérêt. de sorte que les fermiers sont sérieusement handicapes par la hausse de ces “prix”. En général, les fermiers bénéficient de ?augmentation des prix de revient si la flexibilityé de prix des ressources excede celle de la production fermiere. Pour toutes les ressources achetées, cette étude révèle qu'une augmentation de un pour-cent dans les prix des investissements definitifsproduit un effet minime sur le revenufermier net.     

Investing in Research and Education versus Commodity Programs: Implications for Agricultural Productivity

The long-term impact of research, education, and various government support programs on U.S. agricultural productivity was analyzed using an error correction model. Results indicate that the proposed reduction in commodity program expenditures (e.g. 1996 Farm Bill) is unlikely to reduce agricultural productivity. Results suggest that shifting public funds from commodity programs to education and research would raise U.S. agricultural productivity. Our estimates of long-term rates of return to public research are lower than those from most previous, perhaps due to our improved model specification, but are high enough to justify continued public investments to raise productivity.     

Internal economics of rural elementary and secondary schooling

An economic model is developed to handle schooling efficiency problems. Estimated educational production functions and cost relationships which allow for factor substitution and control for quality are combined to find the most efficient method of producing a given output. Also, the minimum size of school district is related to student density and other characteristics of the geographic area. Thus, the study simultaneously determines the optimal organization of resources within a school district, as well as the optimal school district size.     

An Analysis of U.S. Aggregate Output Response by Farm Size

Past empirical evidence on supply response by size of farm in the U.S.A. provides no clear basis to conclude that supply elasticities vary systematically with farm size. In this paper, the central hypothesis that no systematic relationship exists between production response to price and size of farm is rejected. U.S. farms are disaggregated into nine economic size categories and own-price supply elasticities are measured for per farm and total agricultural output. Empirical results from this study suggest that supply response does vary systematically by farm size, with smaller farms exhibiting greater elasticities than midsized farms.     

Agricultural trade negotiations as a strategic game

This study views multilateral trade negotiations as a strategic game among nations or regions, including taxpayer, consumer, and producer components. Payoffs are calculated from an intermediate-run international trade model initialized with 1989 data. For the public at large, the Nash equilibrium and socially optimal outcome is liberalization of trade – unilateral or multilateral. Maintenance of the status quo of market distortions costing the world billions of dollars each year is rational only if producer payoffs are sovereign so that strategies optimal for producers are considered optimal for nations. Remedial policies are discussed, including opportunities for economic education, political system reform, and less incentives for producers to scuttle multilateral trade negotiations.