I’m not a Toronto Maple Leafs fan, so I care less about the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan than most Ontarians. That being said, I am a minor fan of Maple Leaf Foods. As a result, I find the brewing battle between McCain Capital Corp. and the Teachers’ very interesting. Any battle between one of Canada’s largest pension funds and one of its wealthiest families is bound to have some sparks....

The most entrenched conventional wisdom in agricultural economics is that all agricultural subsidies are capitalized into land values. That is, the present value of future government payments is linked to agricultural asset values, of which land comprises the majority share. Now most think that farm subsidies should actually go to farmers. So when a growing share of farmland is owned by non-operator landlords, it implies that a growing share of farm payments is not flowing to farmers. The policy implications are obvious: farm support programs may be supporting the wrong people....

In the United States, agricultural subsidies are a significant transfer program. Between 1998 and 2004, farmers received, on average, $17 billion annually. In comparison, federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families grants averaged $13.6 billion, while federal aid to post-secondary students averaged $16.1 billion. On a per-recipient basis, agricultural subsidies are one of the largest income support policies. In 2002, the average farm subsidy recipient received $6,947. Compare this to $1,730 annually per recipient household in food stamps; an average total unemployment compensation claim of $4,369;...

The New York Times has a fantastic op-ed on the role of behavioural economics in policy-making.  Here is a snippet on obesity, information and fat taxes: Take, for example, our nation’s obesity epidemic. The fashionable response, based on the belief that better information can lead to better behavior, is to influence consumers through things like calorie labeling — for instance, there’s a mandate in the health care reform...

In a 2007 review of the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilitization (CAIS) program, the Auditor General of Canada (AGC) made the following statement: “The CAIS program was very complex. We found that there was a lack of transparency in how the benefits were calculated. Producers did not receive, in an easy to understand manner, all the information they needed to ask for a payment adjustment or appeal an unfavourable decision.” The interesting feature of this comment is that it appears to indicate that government policy should consider complexity when developing new programs. But should...

There are many applications in agribusiness and ag econ that are appropriately modelled using dynamic programming.  Yet, while I was in graduate school, many of my colleagues struggled with the approach’s underlying concepts.  The method was too unfamiliar to grasp without a link to something that they already understood.  Basically with dynamic programming, you were forced to learn the math before you could identify scenarios where it was useful.  I have a hunch that professors… ...

It’s the USDA’s turn to claim that a small soda tax can lead to large weight losses. Specifically, this paper claims that a 20% tax on “caloric sweetened beverages” can led to weight-losses in the range of “3.8 pounds of body weight over a year, for adults and … 4.5 pounds over a year, for children.” As I’ve posted before, I support fat taxes. However, similar to this study, the researchers should think twice before claiming that a 20% tax can generate such dramatic results. The results don’t hold water....

Should golf courses be considered agribusinesses? According to a brief paper published by the University of California-Davis, they should. If nothing else, the classification of golf courses as agribusinesses is unique and interesting. Still I’m not convinced that the idea holds water. Yet let’s explore it. How well do golf courses compare to other agricultural enterprises? I’m going to examine two perspectives on the topic, an input and output position....

Today’s edition of the London Free Press had a story on the environmental implications of livestock production. It’s one of those generic articles that often appear in papers across the country. The key message is always the same: production of livestock for purposes of human consumption requires substantial land and energy. In essence, eating meat is bad for the environment. There are two points that I will discuss....

Few mainstream media outlets cover agricultural policy. Considering the importance of agriculture to hot-button issues such as the environment, food security, trade, genetic modification and the federal government’s ominous budget deficit (not to mention fads (e.g., local food)), the lack of coverage appears to be a clear oversight. And more than a little strange. Quite frankly, it’s hard to explain....

This blog began as an experiment. Dave and I weren’t sure what to expect. From the onset, we decided to reassess the project’s direction and content after six months. Well six months has come. So where do we stand? This post contains three parts. First, I’m going to do some naval gazing and provide a few brief comments. Next, I present two “best of” lists. Finally, I have some questions and would appreciate some feedback....

Recently, I was sent a link to a very interesting TED talk on the relationship between diet, cancer and obesity.  If you have 20 minutes, it’s worth a watch.  The discussion on diet starts at the 10 minute point (approx).  (HT: Dave Walker.)… ...

While in grad school, I had a colleague who advocated a “one model” approach to econometric analysis. A one model approach involves obtaining a dataset and then estimating a single econometric model (or a very small number of models). In general, when he explained his tactic, he was met with derision. Many, including several faculty members, scoffed at the idea, thinking it a sign of laziness (I too scoffed). Still, the idea may have some merit. So I’m going to explore it....

The Canadian government plays a large role in the food processing sector. They ensure that food is safe and that food manufacturers follow the rules. Consumers are generally better because of it. However, regulations have the potential to impact not only the products that Canadians consume, but also the overall financial performance of firms that produce food. Many industry leaders believe that excessive regulation is causing the slow death of the Canadian food sector. But is this true? Are regulations are harming the financial performance of food companies? Well that’s a big question. Big...

Want to know the junk food equivalent of your favourite sugary beverage?  Check out America’s Worst Beverages (good visuals). Yes, that’s right.  The calories in 8 and 1/2 scoops of ice cream are the same as in 1 Starbucks peppermint mocha. (Via: Flowing Data.)… ...

I found this story absolutely fascinating. Here’s the punchline. Uneven distribution of sugar in a food may allow formulators to reduce the sugar content of foods without detrimentally affecting the sweetness of the finished product, Dutch researchers report....

A few weeks ago the USDA hosted a conference titled Incorporating Behavioral Economics into Federal Food and Nutrition Policy.  The list of presenters includes a “who’s who” of behavioural economic research. Luckily, the conference was recorded and is available online.  I’ve only watched a few presentations, but those I did see are excellent.   The best quip thus far: This [research] is clever, publishable and probably wrong....

The lead story on last night’s National was about a deal between environmental groups and the forestry sector. The fundamentals of the story are that the two groups, forestry companies and environmentalists, were often at “loggerheads” over environmentally sensitive regions of Canada’s boreal. But no longer. The parties reached an agreement. This deal is a great example of an economic principle known as Coasian bargaining. This is how it works....

Yesterday the Government of Canada announced that it allocated $200 million to an “international recruitment drive.” Essentially the federal government is poaching top researchers from the US and Europe and bringing them to Canadian universities. Despite the promise of this initiative, I got stuck on a single unfortunate point. The article contained this sentence: There also is not a single female researcher among the 19 spots, an indication of how few women hold senior positions in science and engineering, the fields that dominate the winning entries....

Yep.  It is now possible to purchase crop insurance on (medical) marijuana.  For the more enterprising farmers, here’s the link. I’m sure there are a few BC “producers” who wouldn’t mind hedging some of their production risk.  Then again, their mood may be such that they are able to simply ”go with the flow.”  You know, take life as it comes…  Or something like that. Alex Tabarrock also asks a “related question”: How...