Doctoral Dissertations

Date of Award

12-1968

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy

Major

Agricultural Economics

Major Professor

M. B. Badenhop

Committee Members

J. G. Snell, T. J. Whatley, W. E. Goble, Larry M. Boone, Hans E. Jensen

Abstract

This study was designed: (1) to develop consumption functions for total meat, beef, pork, poultry, cold cuts, and fish and seafood using selected economic and social factors of households in five income groups ($0-2,999, $3,000-5,999, $6,000-8,999, $9,000-11,999, and $12,000 and over), (2) to compare mean quantities purchased and expenditures for each kind of meat for the five income groups, and (3) to estimate income elasticities and consumer unit elasticities for each of the five income groups. Data were obtained in Knox County, Tennessee, from 215 families for a ten week period beginning September 4 and ending November 12, 1967. Least squares regression was used to fit three linear models to the meat consumption data within the five income groups for each kind of meat. Model I designated quantities purchased or expenditures for meat to be a function of annual disposable household income. Model II denoted the dependent variable, quantities purchased or expenditures, to be a function of annual disposable household income and consumer units. Model III postulated the quantities purchased or expenditures for meat to be a function of annual disposable household income, consumer units, race, number of people receiving an income per household, number of social groups the homemaker belongs to, age of the head of the household, who does the food purchasing, religion, occupation, number of meals served to guests, number of meals eaten by children at school, number of meals eaten out, education of the homemaker, and education of the husband. Dummy variables were used to represent the variables that are not usually measured on a numerical scale. Within most income groups the variation in income explained little of the variation in the quantities purchased and expenditures for meat. But, consumer units, in general, explained a large percentage of the variation in the consumption of total meat, beef, pork, and cold cuts. Neither income nor consumer units explained much of the variation in quantities purchased or expenditures for poultry or fish and seafood. The other social and economic variables were significant for certain income group-kind of meat combinations. However, no variable was consistently significant for all income group-kind of meat combinations. A comparison of the income elasticities computed from the models indicated that the magnitude and signs of income elasticities varied considerably between models and between income groups. The magnitude of income elasticities computed from significant coefficients for the same income group and the same kind of meat, but for different models, varied as much as 75 percent indicating that the magnitude of income elasticity was influenced by the presence of other variables in the regression equation. In general, consumer unit elasticities for both quantities purchased and expenditures for total meat, beef, pork, and fish and seafood were less than one. Most of the consumer unit elasticities for both quantities purchased and expenditures for cold cuts were greater than one indicating that cold cuts were more responsive to changes in consumer units than total meat, beef, pork, or fish and seafood. More research is needed regarding how income elasticity changes with the level of income. The results of this study indicate that the common practice of discussing income elasticity in singular terms is often not appropriate. Also, income elasticities vary considerably as the number of variables in the equation changes. More research is needed regarding when and by how much elasticities are influenced by other variables.

Download
Files over 3MB may be slow to open. For best results, right-click and select "save as..."

Share

COinS