Characteristics of demand for California plums
Author AffiliationsJerry Foytik was Assistant Professor of Agricultural Economics and Assistant Agricultural Economist in the Experiment Station and on the Giannini Foundation, Davis.
Hilgardia 20(20):407-527. DOI:10.3733/hilg.v20n20p407. April 1951.
Abstract does not appear. First page follows.
The development of the plum industry, the economic problems encountered, and attempts at their solution are similar to those of other California deciduous fruit industries. Compulsory regulations on interstate plum shipments, resembling restrictions employed for other commodities, have been imposed frequently since 1933. Continued support for this program presumably signifies the industry’s confidence that grower returns are increased for the shortrun without prejudicing long-run interests. Determination of the effects generated is a crucial problem since limitations currently promulgated are based upon a subjectively determined “feel of the market.”
Advocates of the plum marketing control program have advanced claims to the effect that its operation has been the salvation of the industry and that it should be expanded to cover intrastate, as well as interstate shipments. At the same time, others have regarded such efforts with skepticism, both as to their effectiveness and their desirability. A thorough appraisal of the short-run and long-run effects of market control regulations is in order. Yet no painstaking investigation has been attempted to date.3 Even the pertinent questions to which answers are to be sought have not been carefully catalogued. This study proposes to supply some of the specific information requisite for such an evaluation.
Specifically, the present report is concerned with determining the principal factors responsible for variations in wholesale prices of California plums.
California Federal-State Market News Service. Plums: weighted average prices at eastern auction markets by varieties, by weeks, by markets 1935-1947. Annual summary reports. (Mimeo.)
California Tree Fruit Agreement.(except for 1938, 1942, and 1943 when none were issued). Annual reports 1935-1947. Sacramento. (Mimeo.)
Cochran D., Orcutt C. H. Application of least squares regression to relationships containing autocorrelated error terms. Jour. Amer. Statis. Assn., March 1949. pp.32-61.
Cochran W. G. The use of the analysis of variance in enumeration by sampling. Jour. Amer. Statis. Assn., Sept. 1939. pp.492-510. DOI: 10.2307/2279483 [CrossRef]
Ezekiel M. Methods of correlation analysis. 1930. 1st ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons. xiv + 427p. DOI: 10.2307/3538352 [CrossRef]
Fisher R. A. Statistical methods for research workers. 1946. 10th ed. London: Oliver and Boyd. xv + 354p. DOI: 10.2307/2981200 [CrossRef]
Foytik Jerry. The California plum industry: an economic study 1949. p.vii + 401. (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis.)
Hart B. I. Significance levels for the ratio of the mean square successive difference to the variance. Ann. Math. Stat. 1942. pp.445-47. DOI: 10.1214/aoms/1177731544 [CrossRef]
Heins A. E. On the solution of linear difference differential equations. Jour. Math. and Physics. 1940. 19:153-57.
Hoos Sidney. An investigation on complementarity relations between fresh fruits. Jour. Farm Econ. 1941. pp.421-33. May: (Also: a reply by A. Kozlick, ibid., Aug.: 654-56; and a rejoinder by Hoos, ibid May (1942): 528-29) DOI: 10.2307/1231640 [CrossRef]
Kuznets G. M., Klein L. R. A statistical analysis of the domestic demand for lemons, 1921-1941. 1943. Berkeley: The Giannini Foundation. v + 112p. Report no. 84. (Mimeo.)
Mehren G. L., Erdman H. E. An approach to the determination of intraseasonal shifting of demand. Jour. Farm Econ. 1946. pp.587-96. May: DOI: 10.2307/1232566 [CrossRef]
Production and Marketing Administration (U.S.D.A.), Fruit and Vegetable Branch. California plums: New York auction market sales and prices, in crates, by varieties and by weeks. (Typed.) 1920-1948. Washington, D.C. These summaries were prepared from data furnished by S. W. Shear, Giannini Foundation, Berkeley, for 1920-1936, and from the New York Daily Fruit Reporter, “Detailed deciduous report” for 1937-1948. For some years supplemental data on a size basis are also given
Rauchenstein Emil. Economic aspects of the fresh plum industry. Calif. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 1928. 459:1-26.
Schultz Henry. The theory and measurement of demand. 1938. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press. xxxi + 817p.
Shear S. W. Data on Chicago auction market sales and prices of California plums, by varieties 1922-1934. (Unpublished.)
Thompson J. M. Some theoretical aspects of controlled marketing. Jour. Farm Econ. 1938. pp.495-503. May: DOI: 10.2307/1231152 [CrossRef]
U. S. Bureau of Domestic and Foreign Commerce. National income supplement to Survey of Current Business 1947. p.54. Washington, D.C
U. S. Bureau of Domestic and Foreign Commerce. Survey of Current Business 1948. Monthly issues since January, 1948. Washington, D.C
U. S. Department of Agriculture. Carlot unloads of certain fruits and vegetables in 66 cities 1934-1938. Annual summaries. Washington, D.C
Von Neumann J. Distribution of the ratio of the mean square successive difference to the variance. Ann. Math. Statis. 1941. pp.367-95. DOI: 10.1214/aoms/1177731677 [CrossRef]
Von Neumann J., Kent R. H., Bellinson H. R., Hart B. I. The mean square successive difference. Ann. Math. Statis. 1941. pp.153-62. DOI: 10.1214/aoms/1177731746 [CrossRef]
Waugh F. V. Choice of the dependent variable in regression analysis. Jour. Amer. Statis. Assn. 1943. pp.210-14. June: (Also “Comments” on above by M. Ezekiel, ibid 214-16.) DOI: 10.2307/2279540 [CrossRef]
Waugh F. V., Burtis E. L., Wolf A. F. The controlled distribution of a crop among independent markets. Quar. Jour. Econ. 1936. pp.1-41. Nov.: DOI: 10.2307/1882499 [CrossRef]