RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Muth, M., Cates, S., Coglaiti, M., Fahimi, M., Franklin, J., Karns, S., Kosa, K., Li, Y., Liu, Y., Paoli, N., Squires, R., Taylor, J., Viator, C., Del Roccili, J., Asher, M., Bradlow, E., Diebold, F., Kleindorfer, P., Koontz, S., ... McNew, K. (2007). GIPSA livestock and meat marketing study, Contract No. 53-32KW-4-028, Volume 1: Executive summary and overview, final report. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyard Admin./RTI International. http://archive.gipsa.usda.gov/psp/issues/livemarketstudy/LMMS_Vol_1.pdf
Over time, the variety, complexity, and use of alternative marketing arrangements (AMAs) have increased in the livestock and meat industries. Marketing arrangements refer to the methods by which livestock and meat are transferred through successive stages of production and marketing. Increased use of AMAs raises a number of questions about their effects on economic efficiency and on the distribution of the benefits and costs of livestock and meat production and consumption between producers and consumers. This final report focuses on AMAs used in the beef, pork, and lamb industries from the sale of live animals to final meat sales to consumers and addresses the following parts of the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyard Administration (GIPSA) Livestock and Meat Marketing Study:
Part C. Determine extent of use, analyze price differences, and analyze short-run market price effects of AMAs. Part D. Measure and compare costs and benefits associated with spot marketing arrangements and AMAs. Part E. Analyze the implications of AMAs for the livestock and meat marketing system.
This final report follows the publication of an interim report for the study that used qualitative sources of information to identify and classify AMAs and to describe their terms, availability, and reasons for use. The portion of the study contained in this final report is based on quantitative analyses using industry survey data from producers, feeders, packers, processors, wholesalers, retailers, and food service operators; transactions data and profit and loss (P&L) statements from packers and processors; Mandatory Price Reporting (MPR) data; and a variety of other published data sources.
The final report contains separate volumes that describe the data collection methods and results (Volume 2) and the analysis results for the beef industry (Volume 3), the pork industry (Volume 4), the lamb industry (Volume 5), and meat distribution and sales (Volume 6). Volumes 3 through 6 address the effects of AMAs on prices, costs, quality, risk, and consumers and producers, to the extent feasible given the availability of data.
