title: Economic and market issues on the sustainability of egg production in the United States: analysis of alternative production systems.
abstract: Conventional cage housing for laying hens evolved as a cost-effective egg production system. Complying with mandated hen housing alternatives would raise marginal production costs and require sizable capital investment. California data indicate that shifts from conventional cages to barn housing would likely cause farm-level cost increases of about 40% per dozen. The US data on production costs of such alternatives as furnished cages are not readily available and European data are not applicable to the US industry structure. Economic analysis relies on key facts about production and marketing of conventional and noncage eggs. Even if mandated by government or buyers, shifts to alternative housing would likely occur with lead times of at least 5 yr. Therefore, egg producers and input suppliers would have considerable time to plan new systems and build new facilities. Relatively few US consumers now pay the high retail premiums required for nonconventional eggs from hens housed in alternative systems. However, data from consumer experiments indicate that additional consumers would also be willing to pay some premium. Nonetheless, current data do not allow easy extrapolation to understand the willingness to pay for such eggs by the vast majority of conventional egg consumers. Egg consumption in the United States tends to be relatively unresponsive to price changes, such that sustained farm price increases of 40% would likely reduce consumption by less than 10%. This combination of facts and relationships suggests that, unless low-cost imports grew rapidly, requirements for higher cost hen housing systems would raise US egg prices considerably while reducing egg consumption marginally. Eggs are a low-cost source of animal protein and low-income consumers would be hardest hit. However, because egg expenditures are a very small share of the consumer budget, real income loss for consumers would be small in percentage terms. Finally, the high egg prices imposed by alternative hen housing systems raise complex issues about linking public policy costs to policy beneficiaries.
authors.affiliation: Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA. dasumner@ucdavis.edu
authors.forename: D A
authors.initials: DA
authors.lastname: Sumner
authors.forename: H
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Gow
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Hayes
authors.forename: W
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Matthews
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Norwood
authors.forename: J T
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: Rosen-Molina
authors.forename: W
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Thurman
mesh_terms: D000822:Animal Husbandry / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D000827:Animal Welfare / Q000191:economics / Q000592:standards*; D000818:Animals; D002645:Chickens; D004531:Eggs / Q000592:standards*; D005260:Female; D005502:Food / Q000191:economics; D006799:Housing, Animal / Q000191:economics / Q000592:standards*; D012941:Social Responsibility; D013997:Time Factors; D014481:United States