Affiliation:
1. Assistant Professor, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Tennessee, 2621 Morgan Circle, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA.
Abstract
This study compares profitability and risk of conventional and cage-free egg production in the United States. Evaluating cage-free production is particularly relevant given ongoing consumer driven changes and new cage-free legislation. Results show that while the Modified Internal Rate of Return (MIRR) for conventional production is above an estimated industry opportunity cost of capital, cage-free production’s MIRR does not fully satisfy investors’ expectations. The MIRR of cage-free investment, between 5.6% (deterministic model) and 8.0% (stochastic) per 15-month flock, is below the 9.4% opportunity cost of capital. In addition, the simulations show that there is a 90% probability of conventional production’s MIRR falling between 18.5 and 20.3% per 15-month flock, and cage-free egg production’s MIRR ranging from 6.8 to 9.4%. In order for cage-free to be as equally profitable as conventional production, cage-free egg prices at the farmer gate should be 74% over conventional egg prices. Such high cage-free egg prices are highly unlikely to occur given recent cage-free price premia and consumer willingness to pay estimates from recent research. This study provides a framework egg producers can use to evaluate the potential effects of changes in their portfolio of products (i.e. conventional and cage-free mix) as they accommodate production schedules in this evolving industry.
Publisher
Wageningen Academic Publishers
Reference58 articles.
1. Aerni, V., M.W.G. Brinkhof, B. Wechsler, H. Oester and E. Fröhlich. 2005. Productivity and mortality of laying hens in aviaries: a systematic review. World’s Poultry Science Journal 61(1): 130-142. https://doi.org/10/cv7x2c
2. Agralytica Consulting. 2012. Economic impacts of converting US egg production to enriched cage systems – a report for United Egg producers. Agralytica Consulting, Alexandria, VA, USA.
3. Bell, D.D. and W.D. Weaver (eds.). 2002. Commercial chicken meat and egg production, 5th edition. Springer, New York, NY, USA. Available at: https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9780792372004
4. Bir, C., N.M. Thompson, W.E. Tyner, J. Hu and N.J.O. Widmar. 2018. ‘Cracking’ into the debate about laying hen housing. Poultry Science 97(5): 1595-1604. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pey017
5. Bovay, J. and D. Summer. 2019. Animal welfare, ideology, and political labels: evidence from California’s proposition 2 and Massachusetts’s question 3. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 44(22): 246-266. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.287970
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献