Analysis of increase on U.S. hog marketing under prearranged producer-packer marketing agreement and influence on U.S. pork futures trading at Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME)
2002
"Kaku, K. (National Inst. of Livestock and Grassland Science, Tsukuba, Ibaraki (Japan)) | Shimada, K. | Ogino, A. | Yamauchi, M. | Fukase, M. "
"U.S. pork production sector is undergoing a significant change in its size and ownership structure. Further, the marketing linkages of pork producers with meat packers are changing dramatically. In the 1980 s, there were very limited arrangements for contract production and long-term marketing in the pork sector, but in 2000, long-term marketing contracts have rapidly expanded. The objective of this survey is to analyze The main findings of this study were as follows: these changes of marketing and influence to CME pork futures market. (1) Pork is still popular meat to U.S. consumers and per capita consumption of pork in U.S. has been stable since 1970. (2) U.S. pork supply from North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) area especially U.S. & Canada has been between 97.2% and 99.0% of total supply and U.S. pork export has been only between 1.5% and 6.6% of total supply since 1990. U.S. hog production have been mainly targeted to U.S. domestic consumers, not to export. Therefore, U.S. hog production and distribution system has worked mainly for U. S. domestic market. (3) Average coefficients of variation per year on U.S. domestic pork prices during the period of 1995-2000 were 12.34%/year on producer prices, 8.99%/year on wholesale prices, 2.44%/year on retail prices. U.S. pork producers have taken the largest risk on price volatilities within U.S. domestic distribution. (4) The use of marketing contracts between U.S. hog producers and meat packers has increased sharply in recent years. Nearly only 5% of the U.S. domestic hog mareketing in 1980 were under some type of prearranged arrangement with the packer but this number was up to nearly 74% in 2000."
Show more [+] Less [-]AGROVOC Keywords
Bibliographic information
This bibliographic record has been provided by Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Research Information Technology Center