| The main objective of this research was to estimate the impact of informational bias on U.S. producers and consumers of pork. A specific definition of bias was formulated which could be used to objectively evaluate print media. Focus group data provided evidence that allowed for testing two hypotheses. First, consumers were found to be concerned about food safety and health attributes of pork, beef, poultry and fish consumption. Second, it was concluded that consumers have the ability to distinguish biased information from unbiased information, and that they respond to each type of bias differently. General consumer magazines and newspapers, 1989 to 1997, were evaluated by a panel of trained, independent judges and were determined to have a level of bias which was statistically significant. Primary data from this evaluation provided information which was used in the estimation of Pork demand. Supply and demand equations were estimated simultaneously and price elasticities of supply and demand were estimated to be consistent with those obtained in previous research. Welfare economic analysis, along with assumptions regarding changes in the supply of and demand for pork, provided an estimate of the impact food safety information might have on U.S. swine producers and consumers.; The results reported in this study suggest that given the assumptions, pork consumers are made better off on a per capita basis by {dollar}0.49. Swine producers are made better off on a per capita basis by {dollar}316.17 per 1997 swine producer, given positively biased information. |
