This paper develops a structural market model for the Hungarian milk market. The results indicate that the abolition of export subsidies in 2004 led to considerable market distortions. The processors were able to exploit significant oligopsony power. However, the opportunities to benefit from this favourable market position eroded rather quickly with the development of alternative marketing channels for raw milk (exports to Italy). The authors conclude that export subsidies had a negative welfare effect due to foregone specialization gains since they postponed the development of these markets.
BakucsL. Z.FertöI. (2005), ‘Marketing margins and price transmission on the Hungarian pork meat market’, Agribusiness, Vol 21, pp 273–286.
2.
BakucsL. Z.FertöI.HockmannH.PerekhozhukO. (2006), ‘Farm to retail price transmission on the pork market: A German–Hungarian comparison’, in CurtissJ.BalmannA.DautzenbergK.HappeK., eds, Agriculture in the Face of Changing Markets, Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Central and Eastern Europe, IAMO, Halle (Saale), pp 414–429.
3.
BojnecS. (2002), ‘Price transmission and marketing margins in the Slovenian beef and pork markets during transition’, paper presented at the X. Congress of European Association of Agricultural Economists, 28–31 August, Zaragoza, Spain.
4.
BresnahanT. F. (1982), ‘The oligopoly solution concept is identified’, Economics Letters, Vol 10, pp 87–92.
5.
BresnahanT. F. (1989), ‘Empirical studies of industries with market power’, in: SchmalenseeR.WilligR. D., eds, Handbook of Industrial Economics, Vol 2, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 1011–1057.
6.
ChambersR. G., ed (1988), Applied Production Economics. A Dual Approach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
7.
CortsK. S. (1999), ‘Conduct parameter and the measurement of market power’, Journal of Econometrics, Vol 88, pp 227–250.
8.
GewekeJ. (1986), ‘Exact inference in the inequality constraint normal linear regression model’, Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol 1, pp 127–141.
9.
HockmannH.VönekiÉ. (2004), ‘German and Hungarian milk chains: Expectations and first experiences of accession and market reform’, in PoppJ.HegedüsN. Kamarásné, eds, Application of the Common Agricultural Policy in the Enlarged European Union, Agricultural Economics Research Institute, Budapest, pp 227–241.
10.
KrepsD.SheikmanJ. (1983), ‘Quantity commitment and Bertrand competition yield Cournot outcomes’, Bell Journal of Economics, Vol 14, pp 3265–3337.
11.
MeyerL.von Cramon-TaubadelS. (2004), ‘Asymmetric price transmission: A survey’, Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol 55, pp 581–611.
12.
MuthM. K.WohlgenantM. K. (1999), ‘Measuring the degree of oligopsony power in the beef packing industry in the absence of marketing input quantity data’, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol 24, pp 299–312.
13.
PerekhozhukO. (2007), ‘Marktstruktur und Preisbildung auf dem ukrainischen Markt für Rohmilch’, Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Central and Eastern Europe, Vol 41.
14.
PeterG., ed (2003), Marktintegration und Preisrisikoreduzierung durch den ungarischen Warenterminmarkt für Getreide, Cuvellier Verlag, Göttingen.
15.
TiroleJ., ed (1988), The Theory of Industrial Organisation, MIT Press, Cambridge and London.
