Professor Capps has done an excellent job As we observe changes in the total amount of examining changes in food consumption of meat consumption over time (and the mix in the United States and identifying impli-of beef, pork, and poultry within the total cations of those changes for southern agri-meat category), we need to keep in mind culture. There can be little doubt that that annual per capita meat consumption is expanded discussion about the relationship basically determined by meat

more »

... ion. between diet and health has made consumers Frozen meat stocks and meat imports have more aware of what they eat. For example, historically accounted for a relatively small given our own taste preferences, we certainly and fairly stable proportion of total meat cannot explain the sharp increase in yogurt consumption. (The recent influx of Canadian consumption in recent years other than in pork imports is a notable exception.) response to an expanded preference for health In spite of our efforts to do so, we found foods. nothing in Capps' paper to argue with, so However, we need to be careful in trans-we decided to expand on his set of research lating all observed changes in consumption challenges. Capps points out that "there expatterns into conclusions about changes in ists the need to develop more complete theconsumer preferences. Capps correctly oretical and empirical analyses which pointed out that changes in consumption pat-permit clearerpictures of changingpatterns terns do not necessarily reflect changes in of demand their causes, and their likely demand. However, there is quite often a tend-longrun effects. Weagree. The major research challenge regarding ency to forget this as we try to interpret conher demand for food is to determine changes in consumption patterns. For ex-wh er ered chan in consumption ample, in 1974-75 there was a sharp increase ters re changes in consum pf in non-fed beef consumption relative to fed p c c p in non-fed beef consumption relative to fed erences or shifts in demand caused by changes beef consumption. Many observers jumped in suppes of competing commodities and in supplies of competing commodities and to the conclusion that consumer "prefer-therefore changes in relative prices. ences" had sharply shifted in favor of lean What do we mean by a change in consumer beef away from well marbled beef. The facts preferences? There has been almost no reare that consumers temporarily changed their search designed to test hypotheses about consumption pattern in 1974-75 because beef changes in consumer preference. Consumer producers abruptly changed the mix of fed preferences are defined by the consumer's and non-fed beef sent to slaughter in response utility function. Fred Waugh's award winning to the sharp increase in feed grain prices that paper, A Partial Indifference Surface for Beef had occurred without corresponding in-and Pork, provides a rich foundation for creases in fed beef prices. Proponents of the empirical research regarding the nature and shifting preference structure ignored the fact stability of consumer preferences. Unfortuthat during that time, fed beef continued to nately, if Waugh's insightful paper was subsell at a price premium relative to non-fed mitted for journal publication today, it would beef, as it does today, even though pounds be rejected for using a mathematical form of of fed beef consumption exceeded pounds the utility function that implies cardinal of non-fed beef consumed per capita.