real world can be dangerous. The authors fail to
convince me that one can actually get from a static
equilibrium model to the real world.
Burfisher, House, and Langley provide an excel-
lent review of models developed to assess the eco-
nomic impact of a U.S.-Mexico FTA from a national
agricultural policy perspective. However, more at-
tention to the enterprises and industries which per-
meate and define southern agriculture would have
been appreciated. Unfortunately, the paper focuses
on models with a commodity bias toward crop and
livestock operations of national rather than regional
importance. It is simply suggested that models ap-
propriate for government policy makers may be less
well-suited for firm and industry decision makers
with state and regional perspectives.
Estimating price and revenue changes is an impor-
tant activity for economists. The more specific we
can be for a particular industry, the more useful the
information will be to producers, input suppliers,
and agribusiness firms. Alternatives to partial and
general static equilibrium models should be consid-
ered. Analyses such as the above-noted industry-
level studies commissioned by the American Farm
Bureau and state-level, industry-specific reports
(Taylor; Rosson et al.; Fuller and Hall; Schulthies
and Schwart; Behr and Bedigian) serve as useful
models.
For economists concerned with commercial agri-
culture, the bottom line focus is on how well agricul-
tural firms and industries can compete as the rules of
the game change. Our profession can contribute with
identification, analysis, and explanation of key is-
sues and variables including macroeconomic policy,
infrastructure, investment, production and market-
ing costs, supply response, and supply∕demand situ-
ations. As we enter an era of expanded trade
negotiations and agreements, demands for timely
and accurate analyses of potential economic impacts
on specific commodities at the national, regional,
and state level can be expected to increase.
REFERENCES
Behr, R.M. and K. Bedigian. “Mexico’s Citrus Industry.” Working Paper 91-4, Economic Research Depart-
ment, Florida Department of Citrus, University of Florida, July, 1991.
Cook, R.L., C. Benito, J. Matson, D. Runsten, K. Schwedel, and T. Taylor. “Implications of the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) for the U.S. Horticultural Sector.” in NAFTA (North American
Free TradeAgreement) Effects on Agriculture, Fruitand Vegetable Issues, VolumeIV. ParkRidgeIllinois,
The American Farm Bureau Research Foundation, 1991.
Fuller, S. and C. Hall. “The U.S. Mexico Free Trade Agreement: Issues and Implications for the U.S. and
Texas Fresh Vegetable/Melon Industry.” U.S.-Mexico Free Trade Issues for Agriculture Series, Texas
A&M University, TAMRC International Market Research Report No. IM-2-91, May, 1991.
Rosson, C.P. ΠI, B.K. Schulthies and D. White. “The U.S. Mexico Free Trade Agreement: Issues and
ImpUcations for the U.S. and Texas Livestock and Meat Industry.” U.S.-Mexico Free Trade Issues for
Agriculture Series, Texas A&M University, TAMRC International Market Research No. IM-5-91, April
1991.
Schulthies, K.B. and R.B. Schwart. “The U.S.-Mexico Free Trade Agreement: Issues and Implications for
the U.S. and Texas Dairy Industry.” U.S.-Mexico Free Trade Issues for Agriculture Series, Texas A&M
University, TAMRC International Market Research Report No. IM-10-92, May 1991.
Spreen, TH., R.P. Muraro and G.F. Fairchild. “Analysis of the Impact of the North American Free Trade
Agreement in the U.S. Citrus Industry,” in NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) Effects on
Agriculture, Fruit and Vegetable Issues, Volume IV. Park Ridge Illinois, The American Farm Bureau
Research Foundation, 1991.
Taylor, T.G. “A Comparative Analysis of Costs for Fresh Market Tomatoes Produced in Florida and Sinaloa,
Mexico.” International Working Paper Series, Food and Resource Economics Department, University of
Florida, No. IW-92-1, January 1992.
81