ííy\V -«J-*-^ ' ' / J tí^ >? /^ í> O ^

Measuring the

I Supply and Utilization

§ of Farm Commodities

New lndexes,1924-54

PRODUCTION

/

DOMESTIC

FOOD

IMPORTS

STOCKS .^

TOTAL

USE

DOMESTIC

NONFOOD

'S EXPORTS

Agriculture Handbook No. 91

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

Washington, D. C* November 1955
FOREWORD

During the last 30 years, supplies of farm commoaities have changed

substantially. These changes reflect trends in production, in stocks, and in

imports. Significant changes have occurred in utilization, also. These have

resulted from trends in domestic civilian constmiption, in consumption by the

Armed Forces, in exports, and in amovints used for feed and for other purposes.

Research economists have long, wanted a broad statistical measure of

these changes in the supply and utilization of farm commodities. We hope

that the material given here will provide much of the necessary information.

The index of supply-utilization of all farm ccamaodities presented in

this report includes a master index and coordinated subindexes. These indexes

measure the flow of farm commodities from our farms and from overseas, and out

of stocks into use as food or for nonfood purposes in the United States, for

civilians and the Armed Forces, into export channels, or back into stocks.

Because all coraponetits have been worked up in terms of equivalent farm values

in constant dollars, these indexes provide the necessary information for simultaneous cross section and time series analyses. The framework of the indexes

provide for much flexibility because the value aggregates, given in the

appendix, can be shifted arooind to meet the needs of psLrticular analyses.

Those wanting more detailed breakdowns of the statistics should consult Agriculture Handbook No. 62, Consumption of Food in the United States,

1909-323 and its siipplements—also the basic supply-and-distribution tables

for individ\xal farm commodities published annually by the Agricultural îferketing Service. The emphasis of the present handbook is upon the aggregate supply

and utilization of all farm commodities and of major subgroups.

Tlje handbook was prepared by the staff of the Consimiption Section of our

Statistical and Historical Research Branch. Marguerite C. Burk was primarily

responsible for planning the master index and for writing the general sections.

Martin J. Gerra, with the assistance of many technicians throughout the Department, developed most of the statistical procedures. The contributions of

other staff members are noted at appropriate points in the text.

The stTody on which this report is based was carried on under the authority of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 19^^-6 (RMA, Title II).

Frederick V. Waugh, Director

Agricultural Economics Division

Agricultural Marketing Seirvice
CONTENTS

Chapter !• Scope and use • •.• 1

Brief description of the master index •. • • 2

Uses and limitations of the master index .:..^....^••....... 3

Chapter 2. Construction of the master index #••• 15

Basic concepts and definitions • 15

Statistical notes •. • • ••.... • 21

Supplementary infoj-mation on procedure used for major

coimodity groups • # 27

Chapter 3. Measuring supplies of farm comnodities ••.....• 33

Flow from current production • 3ii

Imports • h2

Changes in stocks •^•••••••••••..•... U7

Chapter U« Measuring flows into utilization •• •••••• 61

Civilian food use of farm commodities ••• 66

Military takings for food use 77

Domestic nonfood use • • 81

Exports of farm commodities 88

Explanation of the Department of Agriculture account ••••••••••• 95

Appendix 99

Guide to tables, figures, and exhibits •••...•• Hh
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agriculture Handbook No. 91

Washington, H. C. November 1955

MEASURING THE SUPPLY AND UTILIZATION OF FARM OOMMODITIES

CHAPTER 1, SCOPE AND USE

Information on supply and use of major farm commodities has been collected and studied for many years« But hitherto no satisfactory tool has

been developed to analyze changes in supply and use of all agricultural commodities as a coordinated whole, or to relate developments in a particular

group of commodities or source of sipply or channel of distribution to the

vhole flow through time» The master index of supply-utilization and its

subindexes, presented herein, were designed to provide such a tool. 1/

This systea of indexes provides a more complete picture of the supply

and use of agricultural products in the United States than we have had before« It is an integrated set of measurements for the agricultural economy

having certain similarities with interrelated items in the Gross National

Product series and the input-output tables for the economy as a whole. It is

unique in that it gauges quantitative changes in the structure of the supply

and use of the products of an industry through time.

This handbook describes the concepts and methods employed in working up

the indexes, discusses their uses and limitations, and compares them with

other measiUTes of the same economic phenomena. Text tables contain the indexes and appendix tables carry the value aggregates from¡idiich they were

derived.

The index of supply-utilization of farm commodities was developed

gradually over the last 15 years to meet the needs of World \íaT II and of

postwar years for overall statistical measures. Statisticians both within

and outside the Department had sought measures of the general level of food

supplies, the relative contribution of domestic production, the proportions

of supplies or of production moving to our civilian population, to the Armed

Forces, or to our allies, and of the significance of changes in stocks. An

1/ For description of the food component of this index see: (l) lÄiited

States Department of Agriculture. Bureau of Agricultural Economics. Consumption of Food in the united States, 1909-$2. U. S. Dept. Agr. Handbook

Sb. ¿2. ?^,T^6T Washington, D. C. 1953. (2) Burk, Marguerite C, and

Gerra, Martin J. "Supply-Utilization of Agricultural Food Products."

Agricultural Economics Research. 6:33-Í4l. 195U.

The master index was first presented in a brief article, "Introduction

of the Index of Supply-Utilization of All Agricultural Products." The National Food Situation. October 195U. Agr. Mktg. Service. (Processed)
- 2 -

early effort was made to devise a means of measuring exports and imports of

agricultural products that could be related to our production. 2/ The

frequent error of describing the result of subtracting eaqports from food

production as domestic use, neglecting the contribution of imports and changes

in stocks, led to the development af the index of total food utilization, y

This index represented an aggregation of production, imports, and changes in

commercial stocks, which was in turti distributed into commercial exports and

shipments. Department of Agriculture net purchases (deliveries adjusted for

changes in Department held stocks), military takings, and a residual representing domestic civilian use.

After several years' experience with this index, it became apparent that

a more refined and inclusive measure was needed. Details of the revisions

for the food segment are set forth in Agriculture Handbook No. 62. In brief,

they stemmed from conceptual clarification, extension of coverage to all faim

commodities, improved statistical handling for processed commodities, and the

shift to 19Ú7-1|9 base and weight periods.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE MASTER INDEX

The index of supply-utilization of all farm commodities measures their

total annual flow from our farms and into the united States from foreign

cotintries and United States Territories, and out of stocks. At the same

time it measures their flow into domestic distribution, through Government

and commercial channels to foreign countries and lÄiited States Territories,

and into stocks. (See exhibit A.) The index combines detailed statistics

on the supply and distribution of each commodity on the basis of its equivalent farm value, using 19U7-U9 farm prices for all years covered by the indexes, beginning with 192U. The combination of changing quantities and fixed

prices, using a modified Laspeyres formula, U/ provides a measure of changes

in quantities in economic terms. The master index and its subindexes include

changes in supply and use of farm commodities in unprocessed form and of

major products processed from them. To indicate the important basic concept

of tracing the flow in terms of the primary faxin commodities, the designation

of the index has been changed from "agricultural products" to "farm commodities." i

As you examine the following sections of this handbook, jrou will see how

certain basic concepts (set forth in chapter 2) and the need for operating

within an overall structural design influence the meaning and use of both the

2/ Nelson, G. Lois. "Volume of united States Esqjorts and Inserts of Foods,

19'59-1:3.'* Journal of Farm Economics,. 26:399-U05. 19Ui.

3/ Carried regularly in the National Food Situation from April 19U5 to

April 1953 and described in United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau

of Agricultural Economics. Consumption of Food in tíie United States, 1909^1i>

Pp. 2-10. U. S. Dept. Agr. Misc. Pub. No. SfÍT Washington, D. C. 19149.

y See chapter 2 for statistical details.
- 3 -

master index and the subindexes* All components had to be fitted together to

form a logical structure of indexes for use in economic analysis» Accordingly, the subindexes for production, imports, eacports, domestic use, as well

as others, do not match existing single purpose indexes* Their differences

and similarities with well-known indexes in this same general area, as well

as their particular uses and limitations, are carefully noted in chapters 3

and U«

USES AND LIMITATIONS OF THE MASTER INDEX

This measure has been designed to provide a framework for economic and

statistical analysis of ^at has happened to supplies and use of all farm

commodities in particular years and over a period of years as a coordinated

whole» (See fig» lO It provides a means of ascertaining changes in the

general level of our supplies of farm commodities for food use by oiar civilians and Armed Forces, as well as changes^ in the level and source of supplies

of nonfood farm products» By integrating information on foreign trade with

data on domestic production, it permits analysis of the extent of selfsufficiency in farm commodities and of the significance of foreign demand for

products of American farms» The index and its componoits provide basic data

for study of overall and specific changes in the utilization of agricultural

products in \inprocessed and processed forms by United States civilians and

Armed Forces, our allies, our Territories, and other countries.

Subindexes provide means of appraising the significance of specific

factors that have contributed to changes in the supply and utilization of

farm products jfti the past, and of making future projections. Special subindexes can be developed within the general framework for use in particular

studies. For example, it is expected that the subindexes will be useful in

measuring tbe effects of special Government programs on the agricultural

economy»

To avoid delay in making the basic indexes generally available, this

handbook is published without detailed analytical examples of how the indexes

can be used in studying major agricultural problems. But the usefulness of

the index for analytical purposes is indicated in the article in Agricultural

Economics Research, mentioned earlier. The potentials of these indexes as

they are explored further will be reported in special articles and, perhaps,

in bulletins»

Meamrtiile, certain general limitations of the master index of supplyutilization and the subindexes should be kept in mind» More detailed notes

on limitations are given in sections of this handbook pertaining to specific

subindexes. Because the indexes are constructed with 19li7-U9 average farm

prices, they do not measure changes in value arising from changes in prices

or price relationships, nor do they measiire changes in marketing settees

added to unprocessed farm commodities»

This index measures the total flow of products from farm output into

Me. For example, it counts quantities of grains used for feed and seed in
- ilExhibit A.- Structure of the master index of supply-utilization, 19Ç3

Part I. The overall framework

Item

Production

Imports and inshipments

Net change in available

stocks

Total utilization

Domestic use

Food

Nonfood

Total

Commercial exports and

shipments

Ü3DA export programs

Stock change

Deliveries

Net purchases

Net production

Feed and seed from

domes"*^ic production

Gross production

Imports and inshipments

Supplementary items

Complementary items

Total

Available stocks

Increase over year

Decrease over year

Net charif-e

Total flow into

utilization

All farm commodities : Food commodities Nonfood comnodities

Fann value: Percentage: Farm value: Percentan:e: Farm value: Percentage

in 19U?-li9: of 19)i7-U9t in 19U7-li9: of 19)a7-U9: in 19U7-li9: of 19li7-!i9

dollars :utilisation: dollars :utilization: dollars :utilization

mi. doi^

39,606

2,963

-1,586

Pct>

101.7

7.6

-U.l

Mil, dol.

33,îi22

2,U87

Pet.

101.2

7.5

-2.9

Mil, dol.

6,l81i

U76

-630

hOx982_ ^L0i^2_ iu25X IQlA 6.030

2,356

2

181

6.0

¥s

l,53)i

2

181

U.7

^

822

183 .5 183 .6 2/

Part II. Supplementary information en supply

29,110

10,U96

7U.8

26.9

3/

3/ JL

3/

39,606 lQJ:.tl___ ^^'l^^ 101.2

1,527

l,li36

3.9

3.7

1,175

1,312

3.5

li.O

352

12U

-2^61.

Pet.

lOii.7

8.1

-10.7

1Q2/L

2li,l55

1U,289

62.0

36.7

2U,m8

9,088

73.0

27.5

7

5,201

.1

88.1

38,144» ?8.7 33,236 . 100 .i. 5,208 88.2

13.9

1

JL..

6.18U 10I1.7

6.0

2.1

JéL^.. Ü=..«-_=Jíl. J2a,,^,.„._|¿^^

-1,880

29h

-U.9

.8

-1,193

237

-3.6

.7

-687

57

-11.7

1.0 _

Uo,983 105.2 314,953

-2,Q -630

105.8 6,030 102.1

See footnotes on next. page.

Continued
- 5-

Exhibit A.- Structure of the master in^ox of supply-utilization, 1953 -Continued

Part III. Supplementary irj'ormation on utilisation

"XLI fañ'TcoinmoHitÍBa

Item

Donßstic use

Food

Civilian, domestically produced

Civilian, imported

Military

Total food use

Nonfood

Feed and seed

Other nonfood

Total nonfood use

Total domestic use

Comercial extîorts and

shipments

USÖA. net purchases for

a:q)ort

Total utilization

T'ood coimnodities"

Farm value' Percentage'

in IJIiT-h?' of I?!i7-U9'

dollars 'utilization'

Nonfood commodities

Farn value| Percentage' Fann value' Percentage

in 19U7-U9; of 19U7-II9' in 19U7-U?' of 19ii7-U9

dollars 'utilization' dollars 'utilization

Mil. dol. F5tT

21,U07 ?)t.9

2,092 S,h

6% 1.7

Mil. dol.

21,1407

2,095

656

.-"2iïIM:

Pet.

6U.7

6.3

2^

Iñ.o.

Mil. dol. Pet,

0.1

JL jj

10,588

3.701

.IU.289

27.2

9.5

7,837

1,201

TTogr

23.9

3.6

jm:

2,701

2,500

U5.8

1x2.3

2,356

183

6,0

.5

.=IM36.___.10'l-i=

l,53!i

183

ii.7

.6

822

88.2

13.9

U0,983 105.2 3ü,953 105.8 6,030 102,1

Part IV. Supplementary information on available stocks, in equivalent farm valije

Category

CCC price support and other, excluding holdings for

foreign supply

under price support loans

"unencumbered" farra and commercial

Total available stocks

I Jan. 1, 1952; Jan. 1, 1953; Net change

MSTI. dol. Mil. dol. ml. dol.

1.151

752

13^339

"^^,252"

1,065

i,3ia

13,868

"16,27U

-86

539

529

1,032

Part V. Supplementary information on military and ejqjort accounts

Food co.iriodities

It«n

Military account

Military takings

Military shipments

for civilian relief

Export account

Commercial exports

and shipments

Government deliveries

USDA deliveries

Military shipments

for civilian relief

Total exnorts

All farm coranodities Nonfood commodities

Farm value* Percentage* Farm value' Percentage' Farm value' Percentafte

in 19U7-U9' of 19U7-U9' in-19U7-li9= of 19U7-U9; in 19U7-ii9; of 19U7-U9

dollars 'utilization' dollars 'utilization" dollars 'utilization

Mil, dol.

3/

37

2,356

181

37

Pet.

3/

0.1

6.0

.5

.1

Mil, dol.

656

37

1,53U

181

37

Pet.

2.0

.1

U.7

.6

,1

2,57r TT i,75r TX

Mil, dol.

3/

822

822

Pet.

y

13.9

1/

IL

13.9

i/ J.ess than 0.05 percent. 2/ Less than 0.5 ndllion dollars. 3/ Not available.

Note: Some figures in this exhibit differ slightly from those in other parts of thxs handOooK

because these figures have been forced to add to certain given totals.
- 6 -

WHAT THE INDEX OF SUPPLYUTILIZATION MEASURES

% OF 1947-49 TOTAL UTILIZATION ^^»..*^r>i-ricc

L A. SOURCES OF SUPPLY OF ALL FARM COMMODITIES

Stock change *-i _

100

1925-29

1935-39 1942-45 1952-54

* BASED ON FARtá VALUE EQUIVALENTS IN 7947-49 DOLLARS

® INCLUDES TRADE WITH U, 5. TERRITORIES

A NET PURCHASES FOR EXPORT BY U, 5. DEPT, OF AGRICULTURE

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEC. 1730-55(8) AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE
- 7 -

the value of crop output moving into utilization and again in the value of

livestock products and later crop output. In this sense, the index shows

gross flow. To cope with difficulties likely to arise from this doublecounting, separate value aggregates and subindexes for feed and seed are

given at appropriate points in the following chapters* This provides net

measures for use on particular problems \iti±le retaining the basic total flow

concept. It is a good illustration of the flexibility of this system of indexes.

The meaning of "production** employed in the development of this index

differs from that used by either the index of farm output or the index of

farm marketings and home consumption, as described in chapter 3. This index

does not include unharvested crops. It counts grains in the year produced

even though they may be retained on the farm for feed and seed use or for

future sale. Livestock animals are counted only when slaughtered. Rubber,

silk, forest, greenhouse, and nursery products are excluded«

As noted in tables 1, 2, and 3^ we use changes in stocks from beginning

to end of each year rather than total stocks at either point. This is the

result of the fact that information on all holdings of farm conmiodities at

all levels of distribution is not reported. Changes in reported stocks, however, are believed to give a reasonably adequate measxare of overall stock

changes for the pxirpose of measuring total flow and utilization.

Finally, use of these indexes is limited by the basic concept of total

flow of farm commodities in each year« They do not indicate total supply

available at any one time in the year, but the index of total utilization

does measure how much has flowed into the several channels for final distribution and use during the year. 5/

As indicated in the foregoing paragraphs, chapter 2 contains details of

the construction of the master index, chapter 3 is devoted to the measures of

changes in supplies, and chapter h to changes in use.

5/ See Gerra, Martin J. "Visualizing Changes in the Supply and Use of Our

Farm Products," The Agricultural Situation, Vol. 38, No. 10. Pp. 6-8.

October 195U. U. S. Dept. Agr., Agr. Mktg. Service. Washington, D. C.
- 8 -

§

+>I0)

0^

I

8(

CO

0)

H

1

^

•a

•s

Xi

0)

'S

01

3

4*

a

I

Q

+>

o

01

CO

6<

o

0)

H -P 4*

0) l^^l-Sn _

g 10

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I I I

I I I

I I I

I (M i-l • I I

I • • I I I

I O III

I I I I I vO O H ONGO ^ XT en en H t^ CVl ^-d* lllll ••••••••••••••

lili I H-4-ir^ m CM CO Ol r-l H H H

I W H I I I

I • • I I - - -

I O*^^ I I I I I I I

^^

I I I I COHCO H-* 0\H liNiTiCJ lAOO^-* II I I ••••••••••••••

I H CO-* -^rOcnWHHHH

lllll

lllll

lllll

I I I I I I I I I I I I CO 0\ m CVI vo lA rr> OJ CU H CM H •^«»>s^

I Î ! ¡ I ! I ! ! I I I o* •'.•.•.••.•.•:•.• '^

CVI ir\ÇO H vO ON i-l lA O <n^ O lA H ONCO VÛ H CM H vO Í^OO O -:t m t*- b-1*- 00-4'

0\C0 CO O\C0 t^ i^vO C»-vO in iTNxf lA u\^ CO CXI H H H CM CO UN-* lA lAVO vo ir\vo

GO ir\CVJ Cy\-* H ONCOONt-vO O ITVONH 0J-* <^00 00 lA lAOO vO CO CM CM VO H CO CM

>H¿ côrô »á Ä ¿5^ 818( S 8( S€; Ä S^^^ S^^^^ SJ^^ 8( 8^^ 8Î 8ÎvO\ON F* ^ (J\<T\ 5^«^

H C^ H CJS if\-4- ON O CXJ COCO O CO t*- CO-:t ON O ^ H O COVO ON CO CJN CM COVO 0\i/\

CO (í\cá <T\(í\(f\í^oo cf\cÄiAût5cc> t^oo cÄç^H H çî 2^Ç0 ¿¿^i£^tr'Äiû-â.S2 COCOCOrOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO CO.* -4"^ COCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO COCO

t*-00 H o (3N r- o CO t--* CO o í^ CM CO 00 lA CO-4- t^i/NCMCMb-OcOOCOiTN CJNt^ • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••

CM H CO H H CM lAirvcO-* CO t^vO t-UM/NVO iTN CO H lAVO i/\vOc0 t^vO U>t^OOC?\ lrvlAlf^l^iU^lr^l^vlAl^il^vlfNl^vl^il^vlAu^l^vl^vl^^u^u^u^l/^u^u^l/^lr^u^u^ lAiA

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oo • •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••

88888888888888888888888888888 88

ON H VO CM t*-^COVO CO H »H 00

o * rA tA r H-* H côviî rOiAON^

II III III

CM CM 00 ON^ CO CMCMt^-OHCOiTNHVOVO ONO

I CM CMH^ • H H CMVO CM

I I

CM CM COCO

I I I

t- H VO CM rH O OO b-vO UMTvVO iTi CO H CO CO^ CO o o -d- ir\ CO COOO CO o CM CM CO

VO t—t^t*-t^C0 t*-vo iTNvOvOOOCO CJNC*-h- t^oO irvvo t^vOVO vo t*-vo t*-t-t*- l*-^

1

CM CO OVO VO O O OvC^-^f-^- CM H CJNH lAVO O ifNOO CM C3NIAVO ifNt^vO-*^ t^t*-

öNONONÖ^Ov =* s^'8i€; s; s^ »& s^s 8i & s? s^€;^SI ONp ONî:! ON' ON ON ON ON ON ON ONCJN

I

Ü •^. iO^J?. 5rrSP. ?> ÇL !d ^ ^^-^ ">^ ^^co ON o H CM CO-* IAVO t*-oo o\ o rH CM CO^

H r-\ i^ r-i f^ rA

I CO-:t UNVO t-CO 0N< _^j§ssîsîrr.::

r^ T-i r^ r^ i^ r^ f-i ,
- 9 -

ü

i

43

3

•H

1

Î

10

I

o

i

3>-

ï

H

O

0)

O

tu

4*

O

03

o

1

I

I

- -^ s

o -rl TÍ

&í 4> +>

a

o -H

a*

! ! ! ! I I ! i'-l ¡ ! ! ! ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡^t^-* H 0Nu>.AW(nHt-<.iaN^

! ¡ ¡ ! ! I ! i'l ! Î I I 1 I ¡ ! «00Ofr>u^0^W^lí^C«lr^J^.rs^

i ! ii i i i i i i Î ! i ! i ! i2<^-.<)¡^-.'?^^'1-H.^Í^

^^70^ ^-^-^ H-* O O t^^ HVOOHO\CVICVJt-t-0\0 (niTNCO CVJ H oco

v0O-4-v000HOLfNHiACVIOvOt*-if\0\v0HCViC0CX>C^CU i/\^ CVI CD CVJ m t^ lA

t9^ £^ ri IP r^-^ cu CVI ro CO o o m co-:t 00 H vp H t^cü r^vo -=f cvj<nin.t^t^ooco

CVJ CVI CO oo ^-vo ir\ irvCO OwO ON 0\ co co c*-00 vO OO O ^- ir\ O t*-vo ON (O-^ CVI t*--4-

ONHONCVJHHONONOO^Ot^ONONOCVJ mvO ON-3- O <J\ C\\0 \S\ l/NGO CD f^ vO ITN

curocvjcntncocvjcvjcncncvjcvjcvj cvj 00 en en <n co3-5^ rncncninín^o^fn (ncn

-d-co vo (nvo ir^ino <nvo vo H t^-* cvj cvjco ir^-^co H CVj cvioooo coiACO rn O H

ii r-jr-iHCvjcvicncvjcvjoocvj (n-d-^ vo. _ . . _. . _

-íí--4'-Sf-*-^-4--íl'-:t-^-d'-4--:t^-*-:t-4' iTNl/NUMTNUMnUMTNUM/N t-ONH mooGû r-t^vo t^r*-co S CVJ en

vo vO

»rNÍ^-4- o CVJ iTN-íf C^vOirNCVJt»-OCOH CJNt^-:t H-:!" vo cnvO OCJNOt^-HONCVJtH f-i H r^ H r-\ H ,-i H r-i r^

,(nO UN\,ONVO o tr\vO00 O CVJ<nt^i/\CVJGO-^ cnh-HHVOVOCVJ t*VO H CVJ í"?^ I coH CVJ-4" CVI-* t^cn

II I II

CVI CVJ H J- I rH H CVJVO CVJ

III II

CU CVI-á- m

I I I

HVOOl»-^-ir^t-CU-í|-HCO-:t iTNCnvO H CU lA CU H COVO t*--3- H 00-4*-:!• lA vO t*- • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

ITM/WO UMTNVO UMTk-^- LA-* VO VO C^lfWO VO t*-tAVO t^VO VO VÛ C^VO t^ t*-í^ t-VO

HH^-cnOOVOH cu ONCO H lA t^CO lA O H C^CTWO OCO lA^ 00 H O O t-CU

h-t^t-^-í*-t-t

H r-l I

-sf lAVO t-CO OxO H

0\ONO\O\ONONONCJN HHHHHHHH

eu fn-4- lAVo t^co ON

<n en fñ <n ço (n <n <n.

ONONONONONONONCJN "^"^ ONON'ONöN C\'S\'G\'G\ CJN ON ON C7N ON

I CO

^ *::! "^ •

ÏJ ^ 1-1 Tí

w «c ^ <d .

4) C pq -p

O (n|3 (U

o

•p

4^ -

•H Vi

§+» +> a ^

œ »H g

Ö •*-: »ri oT «û

_ »d 3 »H H

PI 0) o 4>

OH «H

0) a ti 6 41

*H "fil

w • s Ä d

S Q^

<n oa

• M 4£

n O d

I O o> S 4j m

k CO 0)

O^

•H I

0) H ^^ __ _

ta CD >ï

•H o H «voia

I 0, - "^ &? i t)0 o o 4^ (

" Ö^

4-»

ä

IHHiHHHHHHHi

-P 0)

, ca hö o

S1 r ^ oNi o ^ to

o 'S 9 s ly

ö -H ö a g _

p PI PI o »ö

O) d PQ

to »d CO .

>4 Q ^* «^ d

6 o d h o

Ü Ü 3 jj ^^

^-1 -H »Ö 4^001
- 10 -

i

%4

1-»

^

§

4H

O

X

0)

'S

cu

i

a (O

3

EH

>l

I

+>

•H

H

•H

S

cnl

>•HO

aid

H -P -P

(O

p

ais

. §

o -H

£ o

|Vi

ü

I I I I I I I CI cvj I ! I

f I I I I I I •• 1 I I I I I

I I I I I I I O lililí

lili

lili

lili

1 I <M CVJ

I 1 • •

OlHI

I I

I I

I I vo H H OJ O Hvo t/Nvo cno rotr\^

II ••••••••••••••

I I H^ i/N^ rocncí H H H cu

II ••••••••••••••

I I H m^-* cocncvi H H H H

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I !

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I o H * Í I* •* * i* » • •

m r-i O vo o\oo H vo Hoo t--4- COi^ COifNt^COCO vooo H o\rot-o\aivo Ol-* t^

i/\^^-* en CO <n CVJ CVJ H H H H H CO CM H H H H PO OJ CU CO-* IT^^-4-

ir^ONO-d" H CVJONCVJt*-CVJ rovo r-rOt^irvcOH H COO CJ\0 HCO i/MTv-* lAH (^

o ^ t--* r^ "! if\\0 Jt i-l JÍ- (M i-l o\vo o\co o\ t-1- cooo H ^ eu H vo t^vo o w

I I I I I I

I I I I I I

I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I ro H iH o tf\ eu OOCO t^-* t^ o CJNVO

iiiiiiiiiii ••••••••••••••

I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 H^ vo ONGO eu eu eu eu H eu eu H H

OMTkcnO o H-íl-vo <nr-i ON-* vo^ HvO u\C7\rOir^ t-vo t*-^ 00 t^ »/\ O CJ\ CU H

rô cG -^ cô cô.4 lA lA-^ lAoQ o\ t^ ONVQ vo t^-* o\-d- i/N h- ro-dh lA-í »O <!? ^^ i:r^ vOvOvOvOvOvOvOvOvOvovövovovovövovOVO irviAi/Mr>vOVOvOVOvOvOvûVOvo

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

88 88888888888888888888888888888

r-ir-\r^f-^.-\r^r-{r-\Hr-ir-irArAHr-ii-\r-{rAr^r-\r^r^Hr-\r^r^rArAr-\HrH

5vi^*."o^'irvVO-:t CO H-if ON cu CJNCJNt^VO ifNO-* ONH-*GO COH t*VO-* O t^-*

eu CUCOifNirvirNt^CU il I II eu or>H <n I I I

H I eu b-H H cooi eu eu III III

vo ON ir^ cu cu o moo oiAvoo-^rHcu-iteuoovoí^ ONOO t*- O OO GO CJNCO O H en

VO vo r-C^t*-QO t*-vO vo vo vo ONOO ON t^ t^ t-t*--:!- IT^VO lA lAvO v¿ v¿ VO VO t^t^vO

-* ON (noo <n-* (n o iH H iTi eu t-oo irNCU(neuoo-*oooHt^<no\ r-oo o vo H

^

•^1 /O^i $Í79P. 9>QLd. 5if^-=i" ^^ t^co ONQ H eu ooj- I/NVO t*-co ONO H oi «n

I H H H H H rH H . IHHHHHHHHi

«n^

- IfN

ON

HHHHHHHHHHH
- 11 -

1

i

1

1

I

I

§ 8

S SP

SE; O

> M

S

i' Q)

+> .. CO o

•tí

S>i

O

•P H o

O «H «H

En 42 +>

7

f^ (4 aÄ_ S

r^

PI «

|8gg

¿I

¿a'S

! ¡ I I ¡ I I ^-J Î ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡^.CO^^HWVO^vO^HcnvOiA

I I

I I

I I I

I I I

I I I

¡ j HOO GhkVOOOCO CVI VOCO ITNOO-:!-VO i/N

I I H <M^-=í rocñcj H H H H

I I I COO 1/\<M t-VO-4- CVJ CVl H COH^ ^ ^

! ! j C5H • .• r .• • ; .• r • -^^^

H(^lr-^l/^qo-4•c^vo^moo^oovoo-5^Hoovoo^HO^^-o^<^Joou^^-H

^ rrxnfnmmcvJH HH H H H cu cvi H H H ci <n ci cî cn^ iA-:f lA

CM \0 CVJ H t^ H CVI mC7Mr\O\0O t^OO o H l*-CVJ CO OJ H O\00 H VO CM O CM GO lf\0O ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ÎT? iO-5*. i£> !£> î£>-^. -^UNmrHOCOrH-d-UMn^-OiTiCMO c^voo vo CO ON 0\ h- h-vo CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCOcMCMCMCMCMCMÎMCOcnrOfnCMOJWWC^^

I I I

I I I

I I I

lili

lili

lili

I I I I H CJ\-* incO CM-d- t-t^-:i' C7\H o t- II II ••••••••••••••

I I I • I H COVO a\GO CMCMCMCMHCMCMCMH

^OHOt-HOHVOOOCM CO.* -4- CM 0\ CO-:* Hh-OOGO HOO CUGO-*-*a\OVO

t-GO q>Cp ^OOOÇ^dr^^HCMH-*V¿ t^vo t^ cA <ik lA lA-¿ -:± vo v¿ oo H cî

ON ON CO COCO Ht^0.4-HlfNCM0 CO tPk-d* lAONiT^VO ONt^COCOVO CM-d--:t VOOO t^

-P^P^t^h-{

CM lA CO CM NO VO -* t«--* OHiTNHNOOOOH-^CO-^CJN f-NO NO H ON NO

CM H CM ^ CO.* NO CM

II 111

CM CM H^

I I I

CMNOHHOOCMCMCM

III III

C7N CO t-NO NO CM NO CONO O ON-:t j;t C7Nt*-OOC0-*OCOH00HNO00 O CMCOi/Nt*-

j¿ IAIAIAIANO lAiA-i lA-* NO NO NO lANO NO NO-* NO C^NíÍ IANÔNOVO t^l4t^t^NO

o t^ CM t-^ ^ 00 ON-* UN CM UN CM -4- ON ON NO t^-* VO UN CM COCO ON H O NO -if CM NO

-* UN NO t-GO CAO H CM CO-* UN NO h-OO

OñONONONONONONONONONONONCTNCJNON

t-ifirAr-ii-ir-irAHr-it-it

ONQ H CM CO-* UNNO^g 2^0 H CM CO-*

C7N ON ON ON ON ON öN üN öN ON ON ON ON ON 0\ ON

O ü

-p »d -H >i -.^ d

d 0) o 4H 10 m s

g -P PI 0) ^

•o E î u ,-1 aa

S rrt G S 0) A «3

fÖ 0) 3 «H o o OM

O 03 g ti O U •

JjH ^ a a 8 g

•Ö " 0) 0) 'S ä d

3 vj O

d 'H ^

H o OO H 5

m ^-

g* .

•H H CM

p:: 10 CN

a> «H n

sas

p

«d 0) c0

S 5P ^^ o coco

a 01 4>

•H oj g

8915

_ »d «H »O

g s » a

•H ^

P

Ä «d 0)

-P 0) A

•H

0) .. Ill

a .!*

d -P 01

d isilg • (4 a

•H 10 ,P (0 o p

1^ 0) d

•d CO

•H «H 1-11

g•H

\1ä

Ö " fl) Id

983^.5

ö 3

.|88-P fl)

i CO b

<P lONO ft «GOlH

n p »d <u (U

d 0) ^ 0) 0) h h

§ o & 8

85

CO ^ 10

o (O -p

îli

^ »d ^il

0) o 0) ft (q

4H a> Q) « n _

2O(04)ViQ-PË

d «Í ^ d S

-p'dOfHr*>>««

0) CB 1-1 pB|

Q Q A) L|

a O ^ H «H OH

- d ci d 2 -»^ *-i O o H «d «H •

a (d CO **'^<<w CD fd d

45 Q) «d col « m 0)

5| g "H "

Us g 8 8^9©

4^ ^ n a UNIS O

n
- 12 -

OB

ä

I

i

•H

H

t

0)

•H

+3

O

1

g

•H

^3

1

I

I

m

H

>»

O)

g

•H

ta

•p

o

Ü

g

•H

-PÜ

a;

CO

0)

d -H d

4i iH o

O «H «H ei -g +>

0)

>p ä c (d y*^

a; a 'H H o cvJl

55 X! -H +3

o 0) CO

4^ fX tfí

U 'Ö 'T^ -^ S Ö JÍ tí Pi 3 (A o

s 5^

3

•Sa

Ü

I I lCVJ-*O^OCVJu>CVli

I I I H m ir\ cvj eu-^ iH

¡ ?:îf:Î^

i I H roiT^ CVI CVJ-:f CM

'T^it^iIM

¡ ¡ • ¡ I « I I ¡ î ! l::,>¡?::¡?:¡í:^,^.'?^'?^^^^

coH-*vo^ovo^-HfncvJ(n^GOlAH^^cMHO^^c^cncOHsOHHvo^o

W ^ fO W ^ ÍVÍ CVT CVÍ ÎO OÍ OJ CUCVICVJHHH ^HHHCVJHrHHHH

CVJ ONvO-ít >0 O J- (r\0\t^cO t-^ OJ i/N Os OOVO lAOOJ^OsCUOoO rOOO ^-^-^

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

88888888888888 88888 88 88 8 88 88888

UMrM/> VO CM CO C^^-t CMCMt-CMCMiTNrHH-ií" -^-iPvCM-^O irNt-ONrHirsOO

III lliH

III

f-IHII I I H I» IIHI

>

CM-d'aNOCJLr\./>CMO\.H-d'HONmHO i/NVO O lACO UAiTvcTNONH COONfOONC—

or- OC" 1 t- ^ .--i C^ C;\ CVS vO J^ o o C ^ ,H J o vO -^ o o --O ON t-- o cri LiM-

"¿í-^• ••••••••••••••• •••••••^••'

ON O O c^ o\a) 5^-o coa OCOONOO a\co r- a. o. ONOD OS QN q v- •

COI

^ U>NO r^OO CJ\0 iH CM Ci^^ irvNOt^OO 0\0 iH CM rO^ , _

O\0\O\0\0\0\O\O\<J\O\O\O\O\GsO\O\OSO\O\O\O\O\OsO\O\O\0\Q\O\O\Oy

irwO t-cX) C7N O H CM ^0-=^

0)

ce

I H HH H H H 1 I r^ H »H H H I
- 13 -

g

•H

1Ü

irv i

I

I

(0

0)

^

OB

> irvl

O

o

-p ,^

CO u

V

l>1

:S §

1

•H

§

1-

•p

'S

o

•H

4í

4)

3

O

I

I

OS

-P H o

O -H Ti

t< 4» -P

P

Pl O

0)

0) H Q

-p

CO

4* I

I

I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I t I I I

I I I I I I I I I

I OJ^H^OvOiTNCViHHH

MCHC-I

I

I I I I I

I OJ^H^OVOrHCJHHH I I I I I

» I I I I I H COi/NCVl CVl^ CVJ ?^"?:îÎ::|

lililí

lililí

lililí

I I I I I I I i I

I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I o

o CO CVJ (n-d- (ni/NVO t*--:f 0\CO OOOHirMfNOHHCVJOO <n-*co o u>o H owo

59^. op. 9><P. «r> CM ^ ^ ifNcq CO t-7 o\vo if\ cvi vo m irvvo rH ir\Jt m <

<M CVI cu CVJ CVI CVÍ 81 81 W CVI H H H H H H H Í888^í?^

^^fOl/^r^omo^HHHH^o ITNVO mtnHOMTiONcnHvovûO-^ ir^ co-^ cvi vo

>- H h-^ -* VO -^ ^-00 iTi O H rovo -*OOvûHOrHO\ONUMr\OifNH-sf4rNHCVJ

¿&â^AS - AQ ( ON ONGO GO 00 GO I ä§§8^33^^8

liMTvOUMTiOHl^HCO-ífOWOVOt^irNrOCVIOVOCVJVOUMrvOCTNOO t—*

-* -* UNVO CM COCO HOJHiTiCVJCVJJiCJNH-d- ^^"y^d ir^r-ON cvjvo ovo

Il I I H I

I

CVJ-:tHCVJt-C3\HH-:t CVI ON CO-*-:t O-* CÎN cnvo 00 t*-^-VO lA CJN H COCO 0\ H t- • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

VO ^-Î^-h-VO t*-VO ITNCOl/NCOVO t-ON UNVO VO rjC3Nt^t*-O\rj00 O\t^OC0C000VO

O oj vo t^ CVJ t*--* <n m lA ^-co t^ cvj o H cvj irwo «oco o <n ITNVO ^ o\vo vo t^ o\

^

lAvo r*-oo <J\ o H CVI <n-* UNVO t*-co crk Q H Qf ^^^ ^^ tS 2* S

ONONONONONCïNONONONONONONCJNON ON a\ O\'9N ON'ÎK O\ O\ CKON üN ON

r^rAr-ir-ir^HHHHrAr-ir^r-AHHHHr-ii-i

H CM m-*

UMTVITNUN

ON ON ON ON

1

'S

m «d

^ .. o

§^

gcvTlw

-P 00

^gg as

•^ ^ -p -H i

-P 6 ra (0 O

+> a O çg _

"•'S 5 « g g -p « )H 3

Q) > Q¿ >< «H

'^ s a Ö g

« H -H q-i a

i^ <0 C9 p

3 > »d &

> g H

p <u -p a3

«I s 5> -

o^ a -p _

4¿ b B o {H

•g « P< a CO -H

(D 0) o

.-^a"^s .

•d G 3 " üj +2

8*--3318

«Slâ *'^

o «d CD -p a

Hl« g -p o 3

às
- lUEbchibit B.- Supply-utilization of soybeans, 1953

Part I. Bean account Part II. Crushing account

Item

: Average :

Quan- • 1^*^7-119 i ^arm

tity • f* • value

:price per:

: bushel :

Item

Quantity

19U7^9 ' ^''}^

^olesale ' «?^®

price • ^^^0

1,000 lb. Dol. Mil.dol.

Supply

Production

Imports

Change in stocks 1/

Total flow into utilization

utilization

Seed

Feed

Commercial exports and shipments

Net USDA purchases for eiqport

To crushing mills

Uhreported utilization

Production of oil 2,5l5,U97 0.183 per lb. h6o

1,000 tons

Production of cake and meal : 5,557 81.62 per ton h5k

Mal ? 9iir"

Derivation of ratio to deflate i^olesale values

to equivalent fazn values:

FaiTO value of soybeans crushed ^ 598 mil, dol. « íTCí ) nr+

Total %Äiolesale value of products 911i mil. dST " °>***P<^

from crushing

Part III. Products account

Oil Cake and meal

Item * Quan-

; tity

: Average

: 19li7-U9

: Wholesale

! price

: per pound

' ^ , • Equiva-

: Whole- : ^g^t

• sale : f^

; value 1 ^3i^g 2/

• Quan-

; Uty

: Average : : «„„4„^

: 19U7-U9 : Whole- : ^^^^^

8 wholesale: sale : f^^^

: price : value »^ w

: per ton : .»«xue ¿^

Supply

Production

Imports

Change in stocks 1/

Total flow into utilization

: 1,000 lb.

i 2,515,U97

i 29.018

Dol.

0.183

Mil.dol. Mil.dol.

I46O 301

5 3 •

: 1,000 tons Dol. Mil.dol. Mil.dol.

!

: 81.62

5,557 hSh 297

21 2 1

-16 -1 -1

: 2.^Iili.^lÇ li65 30I4 - ^-562

:

Quan- :

tity :

:

:

L55

infliolesale value

:Percent-

: age

Amount: distri-

: bution

: 3/

2^

! :

: i

Quantity

i î

Average '^n^olesale value: g^^^.

19l*7-U9 • :Percent-: ^^^^

^olesale-Amorat- ^^^ . ' fam

price ' ' distn-: ^¿¡^^ :

per pound' • ^"tion : w '

Average:

19U7-U9:"

idiole-:

sale :

price :

per ton:

»BquiT-

'alent

' fat»

' value

; ^

utilization î

Domestic food use :

Domestic nonfood use, total :

Feed :

Other i

Commercial exports and shipments:

Net ÜSDA purchase for export :

1,000

lb.

2,127,821

267,18U

U8,769

-119

Dol.

0.183

Mil.

dol. Pet.

389 87.0

U9 11.0

9 2.0

Mil. î

dol. î

265 î

33 :

6 :

1,000

tons

57

m

80

Dol.

81.62

Mil.

dol. Pet.

5 1.1

UU3 97.U

W 553

5 1.1

7 1.5

mi.

dol.

3

3

h

Total reported ; 2,Wi3,655 Uli loo.o 30U : 5.06¿ ki 100.0 297

Part IV. Combined account for beans and products, farm value

Item

Supply

Production

laqports

Changes in stocks 1/

Total flow into utilization

Utilizati'm

Domestic food use

Domestic nonfood use, total

Seed

Feed

Other

CoDmercial exports and shipments

Net ÜSDA purchase for export

uhreported utilization

Beans

Mil, dol.

695

93

Oil

Mil, dol.

Cake and meal

Mil, dol.

Total

JW

V

3

Mil, dol.

695

1

95

791

— 265 58 33

^

5 «.

— 33

100

7

25

6

—

3

290

287

3

U

268

292

36

110

7

25
- 15 -

CHAPTER 2. CONSTRUCTION OF THE MASTER INDEX 6/

This chapter first explains why we developed the master index of supplyutilization of farm commodities in its particular form* Then it describes

the major steps we took in putting together the mass of statistical data we

had assembled on the flow of farm commodities from the three categories of

supply into the specified channels of utilization. It also contains descriptions of the special handling required for data on imports, stocks, and military use, and of particular problems encountered in working with some commodities*

We had three principal objectives in constructing this statistical tool:

(l) To provide statistical measures of changes in quantity of farm resources

supplied and used from year to year for economic analysis; (2) to combine all

farm commodities moving into distribution in raw and processed forms on some

kind of an equivalent basis which would have economic meaning; (3) to provide

a statistical framework within which data on volvime movements of commodities

from soi3rces of supply into channels of distribution could be separated or

combined for analytical purposes without concern for changes in price through

time and through the marketing process*

BASIC CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS

These guiding objectives governed the formulation of the basic concepts

and definitions for the master index and the subsequent handling of the data.

To measure changes in quantities supplied and used through time, we

adopted the Laspeyres type of constant price weighted index, using weighted

average farm prices of the postwar base period, 19U7-U9. Under this formula,

the quantities of farm commodities are combined on the basis of their value

relationships or economic importance* Accordingly, shifts in supply and utilization from lower priced items, reflecting lower costs of production and

consumer preference to higher priced commodities, do affect the aggregate

values and the indexes, even though total tonnages may remain unchanged or

even decline* Pertinent statistical details appear in the following section*

Farm Equivalents of Processed Products

We wanted to take account of foreign trade, changes in stocks, and other

parts of the flow of products processed flx)m farm commodities« So we had to

convert data on quantities of processed items at several stages in the distribution process to some kind of equivalents of the farm commodities used in

producing them. We rejected the idea of using physical conversion factors

such as the 16 percent crushing ratio of oil from soybeans because we recognized the fact that oil represents more than 17 percent or so of the total

joint demand for soybeans in products, compared with about 83 percent for

6/ Prepared by Marguerite C* Burk and Martin J. Gerra*
. 16 .

soybean cake and meal. The answer to our question of how we were to measure

equivalents was apparent as soon as we began to think in terms of prices as

well as quantities, that is, value. For example, the total farm value of

soybeans crushed was apportioned between oil and cake and meal according to

the ratio of the returns to millers for their sales of oil and of cake and

meal. This method reflects the theory of joint demand. Although details of

such confutations are given below, at this point it may be helpful to refer

to exhibit B. There you will see how the ratios were developed for each year

by using weighted average wholesale or primary market prices for individual

products in the base period and the annual output of each product, then comparing the total \Aiolesale value of the products with the farm value of the

physical quantity of the raw commodity processed. This ratio was applied to

reduce wholesale values of the processed items being used for each category

of supply and utilization to their equivalent farm value.

Choice of Measures for Production

One of our most difficult decisions was where and ^en to measure production. Should we count in each yearns production the total quantity of

crops produced, whether harvested or not, and vÄiether sold or not? Should

our measure of the entry of livestock products into the flow from farms to

users include increases in number and weights of livestock animals remaining

on farms? Or should we work with a marketing concept?

To reach such decisions, we went back to our guiding objectives. Since

our aim was to measure changes in utilization, we excluded quantities of

crops not harvested and excess cullage of harvested crops. "Production'* of

crops is reported diiring the year by the Agricultural Estimates Division and

is clearly differentiated from marketings. Our plans for measuring sources

of supply provided for use of reported data on changes in farm stocks of

grains and other crop items. We decided, therefore, to measure crops at the

point of harvest rather than of sale or marketing.

For a number of reasons, including the problems of dealing with gains

and losses in weights of live animals kept on farms in our measure of flow,

a concept of marketings for consumption was adopted for livestock products.

But milk, meats and other products used for feed and for food on farms where

produced were counted as part of each year's production. To avoid duplication of breeding and feeder stock, we used data on live animals slaughtered.

Complications in interpreting the indexes ^ich might arise because of the

shift from farm produced to industrially produced power were avoided by

excluding horses and mules. Game animals were excluded because they are

usually not farm produced. But at some future time it may prove desirable

to include commercially produced rabbits.

Because of our desire to measure total flow of goods produced by agriculture, whether back into farm production or outside the agricultural

economy, we made no adjustments in either crop or livestock production for

grains and other commodities used for feed and seed whether on fairos where

produced or purchased supplies. But we did keep track of feed and seed

separately; and data on net production are developed in chapter 3.
- 17 -

Forestry products (except maple sirup and sugar) and greenhouse and

nursery products (except vegetables), fishery products, and spices were

excluded on the grounds that they are not generally regarded as farm commodities.

Role of Stocks in the Master Index

One of the major problems in planning the index was how to handle stocks

on farms and at the various stages in distribution. Depletion of stocks Is

often considered to be a source of supply, but stock accumulation could not

be viewed as a "use" in the framework of the master index because the same

commodities would flow into channels of utilization in succeeding years#

Moreover, we discovered that commodities purchased by the United States Department of Agriculture for price support and stockpiled would turn up in

other utilization channels later on. Purchases specifically for delivery to

our allies or for relief might be accumulated temporarily, but they usually

moved out of the country in the following year.

These considerations led to the handling of changes in stocks—other

than those held by United States Department of Agriculture for supply programs as a source of domestic supply—by denoting accumulations with the

negative sign, depletions with the positive sign, as in tables 1, 2, and 3.

Note the use of changes in reported stocks rather than total stocks. Thus,

the algebraic addition of production, imports, and change in such stocks in

each year would equal the sum of the flows into domestic use (including military procurement), commercial e3q?orts and shipments to Territories of the

lÄiited States^ and net purchases of the Department of Agriculture for its

export programs• These net purchases were, in turn, the Department's deliveries abroad plus or minus the change in stocks held for export. The

handling of some rather complicated transfers between Government programs

for domestic distribution. Army surpluses, and special relief programs can

be traced in detail by neans of data available in Agriculture Handbook No. 62.

During the 3-year period of preparation of this index the handling of

United States Department of Agriculture stocks was revised to conform with

the method indicated in the preceding paragraph; the accumulation of stocks

by the Department under the price support program indicated the inadequacy of

our classification. When the index for food commodities was originally developed, stocks of grains (excluding rice), and of potatoes and oilseeds

held by the Department during 19lil-U6 were kept with commercial stocks because they were principally for price support. For convenience, stocks of

eggs and other commodities originally bought under price support but frequently transferred in 19l|l-l|6 to the supply program were kept with supply

program stocks in the Department account. Thus, we had put Commodity Credit

Corporation's price-support stocks of some commodities with available commercial stocks so that their accumulation did not enter into the utilization

accounts. But price support stocks of other commodities were carried in the

stock account under the foreign supply program of the Department. Accoixîi^ly^ they were counted as used in the year purchased although transfers to

civilian and military accounts were carefully tabulated.
• 18 .

After I9U6, pilce support stocks of food commodities other than grains,

potatoes, and oilseeds, and of cotton, tobacco, shorn wool, and mohair had

increased significance• Statistics on all commodities were therefore

reviewed, and stocks acquired under price support were put with available

stocks on the supply side of the supply-utilization index, whereas stocks of

the same commodities that were being held specifically for export programs

were put into the Department account• This revised procedure provides a

cleaner measure of net purchases for export beginning in 19li7 though it

leaves a relatively insignificant break in Department of Agriculture stock

series between the end of 19U6 and the beginning of 19U7* The Department

account is described further in chapter U.

Imported Commodities

Conceptual difficulties encountered in fitting imports into the general

scheme of the master index of supply-utilization of farm commodities posed

several questions« V/hich commodities that we iitç)ort are to be regarded as

farm commodities? What are their equivalent farm prices? Commodities

produced in the United States presented no problems» But what about rubber,

silk, spices, coffee, bananas, and babassu kernels? We used a substitution

test for deciding what to include as farm commodities • It was admittedly

somewhat arbitrary. We ruled out rubber and silk, on the basis that they

conçete more directly with industrial products—now synthetic rubber and

rayon and nylon» Spices were omitted because information on United States

production is so meager, their relative importance is so minor, and some of

them are really forestry products* But we included coffee, tea, cocoa,

bananas, and the oilseeds on the grounds that they competed rather directly

with commodities produced in the United States»

Because we had already decided to include farm equivalents of processed

commodities in all segments of the index, the handling of imported oils, for

example, presented no conceptual difficulties, even though their byproducts

were not imported»

We rejected the idea of using prices paid foreign producers of imported

commodities not produced here but judged to be farm commodities» Values

coinputed with such prices, even if we were able to get them, would overstate

the competitive position of imports with domestic products because of transportation and handling costs» We decided to use prices at the level of the

first domestic transaction (usually at the dock) because that is the level at

which imported commodities which have undergone little or no processing may

be competitive with domestically produced coranodities. It is also the point

at which these commodities enter into domestic channels for processing and

distribution to final consumers» (For imported tree nuts it was necessary to

derive an average import price. This we did by dividing census figures for

value of imports by quantity imported.)

Exported Commodities

we i^clS^f^n''l!;^i^î^^^ the supply-utilization index, except production,

we included in exports both raw farm products and products processed from
- 19 -

farm commodities insofar as we could trace them* We have put shipments to

Ü. S. Territories with exports to foreign countries as part of our process

of deriving total consumption in continental United States. As adequate

data on production and stocks are not available for U. S. Territories, estimates of use of farm commodities in those areas have not been developed*

We did, however, meet with a major problem in the area of e3Ç)orts*

Should sipplies procured by our Armed Forces for civilian relief and rehabilitation in occupied and liberated areas, and those which were proctired for

troop use but diverted to foreign civilian use, be counted as deliveries for

export or as domestic procurement? There are two aspects to this problem*

Military procurement for troop use was obviously a domestic use and civilian

feeding in occupied areas was directly related to military objectives.

During World War II, and immediately after, supplies procured for troop use

and for foreign civilian use were transferred back and forth between programs

at the will of the theatre conrnianders* We decided against trying to develop

data on military stock changes; so we could not balance out military procurement for civilian programs and reports on shipments of supplies from the

lÄiited States for such programs*

The other aspect of this problem was our desire to measure total movement from continental United States other than for use by our troops* For

this, we needed to use delivery or shipment data, considering them with other

exports*

After considering both alternatives (which were irreconcilable), we

decided to use both concepts, but not at the same time* For the basic

framework of ttie supply-utilization index, we counted military procurement

for civilian use with military procurement under a broad definition of

domestic use by our Armed Forces and excluded such supplies from Department

of Agriculture deliveries for export and from commercial exports and shipments* Thus we avoided double counting* Then, to get a more complete

picture of farm commodities moving out of the country, we developed a

separate set of data on the value of shipments for civilian relief and rehabilitation for the section of chapter k on exports* These can be combined

with data on deliveries for export by the Department of AgricultvEPe to get

a total for Government deliveries, and then with exports and shipments

through commercial channels to get a ccmplete measure for all exports and

shipments* This illustrates the flexibility of this set of indexes* They

permit special combinations of data for particular analyses.

Domestic Utilization

This broad category is used for all farm commodities combined because

data on military procurement of nonfood commodities are not yet available*

The index of supply-utilization of farm food commodities does, however,

separate civilian and military uses* As explained in the section on exports,

military procurement of food commodities includes purchases for use of United

States troops (and for allied troops supplied by our troops) and for distribution to civilians in occupied and liberated areas* A system for reporting
- 20 •

to the Department of Agrtculture military takings of textiles and textile

end products, and eventiially those of other nonfood farm commodities, is

now being set upj but development of historical data will be time-consuming*

Domestic utilization as measured for this index, however, differs frcan

the concept generally used for fibers. With the concept generally used, for

example, total quantity of cotton processed by United States mills as domestic use would be counted* Following our basic reasoning and methodology, we

count cotton equivalents of textiles and textile end products in exports, and

exclude them from our domestic residuals* Further, we include in domestic •

use farm value equivalents of imported products such as fabrics and garments*

The residual character of our estimates of domestic disappearance of food for

civilian use is discussed at length in chapter 2 of Agriculture Handbook

No. 62.

Food commodities moving into domestic civilian utilization are aggregated in this index in terms of equivalent farm commodities (excluding

fishery products, game, spices) and farm prices* This is in contrast to

their handling in the index of civilian per capita jfood consumption which is

developed in terms of food products measured at retail and which \ises average

retail prices* The index being described here measures the use of farm resources for food* The other measures changes in the level of civilian food

consumption, including marketing services sold with food at retail*

Food-Nonfood Breakdown

When working with supplies of farm commodities, we find it convenient

to handle food and nonfood commodities separately* The index of supplyutilization of farm food conmodities covers all commodities having any food

use in the United States* Thus it includes pulled wool, because pulled wool

comes from sheep and lambs slaughtered for meat^ All other farm commodities

are classified as nonfood and included in the index of svpply-utilization of

farm nonfood commodities* They include shorn wool as well as cotton, tobacco,

and inedible oils* Because the Department of Agriculture bought linseed oil

for food use by the Soviet Union during the war, we classified it as a food

commodity, 7/

In moving to the utilization side of our indexes, we shifted to a

distinction between^^od. and nonfood use* We exclude from food use, for

example, the equivalent farm value of millfeeds although they are a part of

the utilization of wheat, a food commodity, and include them in the nonfood

category of the index of supply-utilization of farm food commodities. See

exhibit A. ——.

oil^cJ^L*. ''°''î''!17 ^ ^"^ ^^^'^ definition of food commodities, so the

daS TheÎe'Îllîî S"^ ^ ^''^^"f'.^î^ ^^^ ^^ ^^^^^<* *° nonfood'at a later da^. There will be only a negligible effect on the food-nonfood break-
- 21 -

STATISTICAL NOTES

Like most other Indexes prepared by the Department of Agriculture, the

master index of supply«utilization of all farm commodities and its subindexes

were set up on the basis of the index fórmula developed by Laspeyres. Following this formula, we mxiltiplied the quantities of individual farm commodities

given in each category of the supply and distribution table for all years by

average farm prices for 19U7-U9 to compute their values* Next we added up

the values for all commodities in each category, year by year* The indexes

were derived by comparing the aggregate values in each year with the matching

average for the base period 19U7-U9« Similarly, the percentages of total

utilization in each year were calculated by comparing the aggregate values in

each category with the aggregate value of total utilization in that year*

The usual symbolism for the Laspeyres formula is -£2*i . The 2 sign

2Po^o

means suirination* For this set of indexes, the p's are farm prices. PQ

indicates the price in the base period, described as "o." The q's are the

quantities of unprocessed farm commodities accounted for in each category of

the supply and distribution table for each year* The q^ means the quantity

in the base period; the q-^ signifies the quantity in year t* Note that thece

q's apply only to unprocessed commodities* To indicate that we also worked

into our indexes the equivalent values of processed items, we have modified

Vt

the usual symbolism to It ^ where

^0

It index number for year t

Vt the total value in constant 19U7-U9 dollars of both

unprocessed farm commodities and the equivalent

farm value of processed commodities supplied by the

particular source or flovring into the specified

channel in year t*

VQ » the total farm-equivalent value in constant 19U7-U9

dollars of farm commodities used in tmprocessed and

processed forms in the base period 19U7-U9 for the

index through time* To derive percentages of total

utilization in each year, VQ becomes the total farmequivalent value of total utilization in that year*

See exhibit A*

Although an adequate discussion of the theoretical implications of the

Laspeyres index formula is beyond the scope of this handbook, a few notes are

given here to aid non-technical readers* Prices are used to weight or combine the changing quantities, because they are considered to be good indicators, when used with quantities, of the relative economic importance of
. 22 .

individual commodities in the total agricultural picture. As the basic

formula indicates, the same p's or prices are used for every year. Therefore, changes in computed values are caused by changes in the q's or

quantities. These changes can be of two types. First, the quantity of every

commodity might be 5 percent higher in year A than in year B. If so, the index would be 105. Second, quantities of some commodities may increase more

than others from year A to year B. If the items tÄth larger increases are

relatively high in value, that is, in pq, they will have greater effect on

the total"^ value of year B, and therefore on the index, than if the larger

increases were in minor items. For example, a 5 percent increase in use of

cattle and calves is of much greater significance to the master index than a

10 percent increase in honey.

Reference again to exhibit A may help the reader visualize the structure

of this index, particularly if he remembers that a similar table is involved

for every year of the 31-year period now covered by the index. Likewise, a

computation such as that demonstrated by exhibit B is necessary for most commodities for every year.

The period 19U7-U9 was used for the base of all indexes through time and

as the source of the price weights, following the recommendation of the Office

of Statistical Standards of the Bureau of the Budget. It should be stressed

that adoption of a particular base period does not necessarily signify a

"normal period" in some long-rim economic sense. It is usual, however, to

adopt a fairly recent period, which is relatively free of marked distortions

in the price-production structure. Adoption of fixed base-period prices

freezes into the index-weighting structure the economic relationships that

existed in the period selected. If the base-period price weights used to

express values in constant dollars were $1.00 for commodity A and $3#00 for

commodity B, a unit change in the quantity utilized of A would influence the

total movement of the index only a third as much as a unit change for B. But

10 years later, because of shifts in consumer demand, commodity A might sell

for $3.00 and cOTimodity B for $1.00. The effect of a unit change in A is

now three times as important in the economy as a unit shift in B* But, as

the index was constructed with base-period prices as weighting factors, a

unit change in A still has only one-third the effect on the total movement of

the index as a change in B,

As these price relationships change over time, comparisons among several

years that are remote from the base period are not as valid as direct comparisons between specified years and the base, >Äiich give relatively accurate

approximations of trend. So far as 19U7-U9 more closely represents the economic relationships existing at present than do prewar relationships, it is

to be prefein:ed to the more distant date. After careful testing of the results of linking to prewar price weights (l92$-29 and 1935-39) for prewar

years, it was concluded that the differences in the estimates for the index

were insignificant and did not merit the extensive statistical computations

that would be involved. Hence, 19U7-U9 price weights were used throughout.
- 23 -

Prices Used

The weighted average farm prices used for deriving the value aggregates

as a first step toward combining commodities were obtained by: (l) Multiplying the average midmonth prices received by farmers 8/ by the volume of

monthly sales to obtain calendar-year average prices at the farm level for

each commodity; and (2) weighting these annual prices by the yearly production of each commodity to ^et the average 19li7*U9 farm prices. The use of

monthly sales weights permitted each monthly price to influence the yearly

price according to the relative importance each month's marketing returns

bore to annual marketed value. By weighting each of these annual prices by

the quantity of the commodity produced in the given year, an allowance was

made for year-to-year changes in the value of farm production not marketed

(that is, supplies retained on farms for home consuiTÇ)tion, feed, or seed).

All quantity data for processed items were combined by use of weightedaverage 19U7-U9 wholesale prices.9/ Weighting factors used were the annual

production of the processed items for each of the 3 base years. If available, price data used were United States annual averages; otherwise, they

were annual averages at the most representative markets.

Quantities Used

Statistical data on sources of supply of major farm commodities and

on their annual flow into major channels of utilization—e^qport, militarj»^

takings, civilian use—have been developed and published by the Biu^eau

of Agriciiltural Economics, now the Agricultural Marketing Service. For

convenience, they have often been presented as tables of supply and distribution. 10/ These were the principal sources of information on quantities produced, imported, taken from or put into stocks, exported, and so

8/ Prices received by farmers for their products sold at local markets or

at the point to which they deliver their products in their own conveyances or

in local conveyances hired for the purpose. These prices, monthly sales, and

annual production data are reported by the Department of Agriculture,

9/ As reported by the Agricultural Marketing Service, the Bureau of Labor

Statistics, and trade papers. Wholesale prices as used here are prices at the

first transaction level, that is, primary market prices*

10/ Tables on all major commodities having food use will be found in Agriculture Handbook No. 62. Pertinent information on nonfood commodities can be

found in:

U. S. Dept. of Agr. Statistical Bulletins, Washington, D. C.

No. 1U2 Wool Statistics and Related Data. September 19^1i.

No. 1^9 Grain and Feed Statistics. March 1955.

No. 99 Statistics on Cotton and Related Data. June 19^1 and Supplement

for 195U to Statistical Bulletin No. 99• September 195ïu

No. Ili7 Oilseeds, Tats and Oils, "azSTTHeiFTroducts, 1909-53. June 195U.

No. 58 First Annual Report on Tobacco Statistics, May 1937.

No. 138 Annual Report on Tobacco Statistics. December 1953*
.214-

on. In some instances, supplemental data on processed commodities had to be

developed. For other items, it was necessary to shift from a marketing year

to the calendar year which was used through the whole supply-utilization index. This was done when data for some rather minor items had not been assembled on a comparable basis. Details on individual commodity groups are

given in a later section of this chapter.

Components of Supply-Utilization Index for Each Year

Value aggregates were computed in two steps for each category or source

of supply and for each utilization category or channel of distribution.

(1) We obtained values for xmprocessed commodities by multiplying the quantities of the raw commodities given in each category of each commodity's

supply and distribution table on a farm basis as they leave the farm by the

related base-period prices paid to farmers. (2) In order to take into account the imports, changes in stocks, and uses of processed commodities, the

wholesale or primary market values of joint products were computed separately for each commodity, using quantities of processed items and wholesale

prices. Then these were adjusted back to equivalent farm values on the basis

of the ratio of the farm value of the raw farm commodities used in processing

to the total ^olesale value of the processed items.

The total value aggregate for all quantities entering into utilization

was computed by adding the value aggregates for production, imports, and

change in stocks. This total was equal by definition to the sum of the value

aggregates for all channels of distribution or use. By comparing the value

aggregates for each category with that for total utilization in each year,

data for section a of tables 1, 2, and 3 were obtained—percentage of total

utilization in each year.

Measurement of Chaiiges in Supply and Utilization through Time

Relationships of the value aggregate for each category in each year to

that for total utilization in 19U7-U9 were readily computed. These provide

the percentages for section b of tables 1, 2, and 3* Furthermore, comparisons of various sets of value aggregates provide the basis for a great

number of subindexes, some of which are illustrated in chapters 3 and U. As

prices were held constant, it is evident that this type of index shows the

change in total value between a given year and the base period caused by

changes in quantity, shifts among farm commodities, and shifts among end

uses.

Figures in the tables of this handbook are computed from unrounded data*

No attempt is made to adjust details to totals except for the figures in

tables 1 to 3*

Soybeans Used to Illustrate Statistical Procedure

To illustrate the handling of commodities supplied from domestic production and imports and used in raw and processed forms for food and nonfood
- 25 •

pioposes, ve give here an outline of the procedure used for soybeans as beans

and as the tvo joint-products which are oil and cake and meal* As you can

see in exhibit B, three supply and distribution tables were developed, for

beans and the two products* Total disappearance or use of soybeans as such

was derived as the sum of changes in stocks, farm production, and inqports of

beans* The categories of bean use were seed and feed (a nonfood use), exports, and use for crushing (although this i^s only an interim category).

Quantities in each category of the table were multiplied by the average farm

price of soybeans in 19U7-U9 to obtain the supply and distribution of soybeans in terras of farm value. (See fig* 2.)

The next step was to derive the ratio between the farm value of soybeans

crushed (obtained above) and the wholesale value of oil and of cake and meal

produced from the process* The primary market prices or, as moi^ commonly

described, the wholesale market prices as reported by the Bureau of Labor

Statistics for 19U7-U9 were used with the quantities of processed jointproducts produced to compute the necessary wholesale value* The resulting

ratio was used to reduce the readily computed wholesale values of imports

and stocks of oil and of cake and meal to their equivalent values at the

farm level • These were added to the farm values of soybean imports and of

stocks, as well as on the distribution side to the value of soybeans sold

for crushing

A similar procedure was followed to derive the equivalent farm values of

the processed commodities moving out of current production, imports, and

stocks (l) into food commodities, and in turn distributed among the categories of food use by United States civilians, the Armed Forces, Department of

Agriculture purchases, and for exports and (2) into nonfood use as feed in

this country and abroad.

The final step was to add the aggregates of direct soybean uses (feed

and seed used on farms irtiere grown and quantities sold to other farmers for

feeding) obtained earlier, to the food, nonfood, export, and other categories

for processed items indicated above* The total aggregates for each of these

categories were then compared with the total value of soybeans utilized each

year in all forms* The result of this computation was the percentage utilization of soybeans in a given year* All values are in terms of constant

dollars* This procedure was used in order later to show changes in quantities from year to year rather than changes in value arising from price

changes*

The same general procedure was followed for each of the farm products

included in the master index. The index as published, however, shows distribution to broad categories only* Although estimates for individual

industries are not precise, totals for broad classes of utilization are

regarded as sufficiently reliable for analysis of shifts in utilization.
- 26 »

(D

cn

iï

^Seed

Feed

& wa

Commerci

U. S. D. A.

<u.UJ

• %

IN © o

MOflO m TILI SOY

/

w 5 <

w

ml 5
- 27 -

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ON PROCEDURE USED

FOR MAJOR COMMODITY GROUPS 11/

Oilseeds>- This coinmodity group includes the following oilseeds and their

products: (Î) Domestically produced (and inç>orted) cottonseed, flaxseed,

peanuts, soybeans, and sunflower seed which are described as food commodities,

and tung nuts and rapeseed, the nonfood commodities; and (2) inç)orted copra,

sesame seed (food), and nonfood castor beans, babassu kernels, palm kernels,

and palm oil* The supply and distribution tables for a few items had to be

adjusted from crop year to calendar year basis, using available data on

January 1 stocks, foreign trade, and crushings«

To illustrate further how we traced the distribution of products made

from raw farm commodities to their final consumption, we will describe the

adjustment in the oilseed data in some detail• As noted in figure 2, soybeans

produced on the farm were traced through to consumption in the form of oil in

the margarine, shortening, soap, and other industries. This industrial use

is not the final level of consumption; the final level is the disappearance

of margarine, shortening, soap, and other products containing cottonseed,

linseed, peanut, and soybean oil» Therefore, we adjusted our data to reflect

the utilization of these end products* This was done by adjusting the value

of crude oil used by food and nonfood industries by the value of exports,

shipments, and military and Department of Agriculture takings of processed

products (margarine and shortening, for instance) so that these categories

would include the crude-oil equivalent of the processed products»

We did not attempt to include inçorts, bí^cause imports of edible processed products made from cottonseed, linseed, peanut, and soybean oil are

negligible, and data on imports for inedible products containing these oils

could not be readily compiled» Factors were not available to convert products containing these oils into oil and seed equivalents» We therefore

derived estimates of the value of oils wliich had been e3q>orted and taken by

the military and the Department of Agriculture in the form of processed

products by applying the percentage that yearly eacport, military, and Department requirements for margarine and shortening were of the total domestic

consumption of margarine and shortenirig, and applying these percentages to

the value of oil utilized in food uses» For example, if in a given year the

Aimed Forces bought 20 percent of total margarine and shortening used, then

20 percent of the quantity of crude oils utilized for food purposes was

designated as military takings* No estimates were made of nonfood military

requirements because of lack of data»

13/ Martin J» Gerra has prepared a detailed statement of the handling of

statistical data for individual commodities to fill in missing segments and

to make some adjustments to our basic concepts» It is available on request»
. 28 .

This detailed estimating procedure was not required for most commodity

groups; data on final consuirqption as processed products could be directly

converted to an equivalent lower level of processing. To illustrate, in the

case of beef, exports, imports, and military and Department of Agriculture

takings of canned, dried, and frozen beef and beef products are regularly

converted to a careass-weight equivalent in estimating civilian per c^ita

consumption* We had only to convert carcass-weight equivalents to a liveanimal equivalent basis, using our general procedure for processed products*

Meat Animals.- In this commodity group we worked with the value of meat

from cattle and calves, hogs, sheep and lambs, and the major part of other

products derived from these animals, including pulled wool but excluding

shorn wool*

We began with the total live weight of animals slaughtered in each year.

Slaughtering closely follows marketings for current slaughter. The major

product that results from the slaughtering operation is meat. Other products

include hides, skins, fats, oils, and other such lesser items as glue,

gelatin, boneblack, blood, hair, and bristles. The farm value for each type

of animal is the live weight of hogs or other livestock slaughtered multiplied

by the average price per pound received by farmers. This value was adjusted

for the effect of changes in stocks and imports of the major products processed from the animal carcass, reduced to equivalent farm values, to derive

total utilization. The distribution of this value to food, nonfood, export,

and other uses was then carried out by the general method outlined above.

Because of the difficulty of allocating accurately the values from

certain processed products (that is, tallow, oleostearine, and other fats

and oils obtained from both cattle and calves) to either the live value of

cattle or of calves, these animals are treated together in the index.

Edible offals are excluded from the usual supply and distribution tables

for meats because these are on a carcass-weight basis# Having no reported

production data, we \xsed general factors which relate the weight of edible

offals to dressed weight of meats of the several types to obtain production

estimates* Then from reported data we developed other parts of a standard

supply and distribution table*

Data on the supply and distribution of hides and skins were worked up,

beginning with the n\:unber of animals slaughtered plus the number dying in

each year. Supply and use balance sheets were used for tallow, oleo products,

lard, and pulled wool* Pulled wool was allocated the proportion of total wod

stocks, exports, and domestic use which it bore to total production of shorn

wool plus pulled wool in each year.

Poultry and Eggs*- No particular problem was encountered in dealing with

these conmiodities* Eggs for hatching are regarded as a nonfood use, similar

to seed that is transferred back into agricultural production. Nonfood use cf

eggs also includes storage losses due to spoilage or wastage*
- 29 -

Dairy Products>^ By converting data for all manufactured dairy products

to their equivalents in total milk fat and total nonfat milk solids, it was

possible to avoid duplication in combining these products and to combine them

with data for ^ole milk.

Quantity of milk fed to calves, the principal nonfood use of milk fat,

is a reported figure, but quantity of nonfat milk solids used for nonfood

purposes is derived as a residual figure* This may slightly overstate nonfood use because, in addition to the quantity of nonfat milk solids going

into feed and industrial nonfood uses or wasted, possible errors of underestimating some food uses would be reflected»

Data on total fat and nonfat milk solids were combined and included in

the index by multiplying each supply-utilization category by the estimated

weighted base-period average price received by farmers for milk solids. That

price was derived by dividing the farm value of milk produced by the total

solids equivalent of milk sold and used for farm household use, plus the

solids equivalent of ^ole milk fed to calves• Thus, total price was attributed to milk solids only*

Fruits and Tree Nuts>- Farm production of fruit is the total quantity of

fruit harvested each year* Part of this production is consumed in its unprocessed, fresh form* The rest is processed into dried, canned, and frozen

fruits and juices and consumed in those forms* Data on the supply and distribution of processed fruits were put on comparable fresh-equivalent bases by

the use of conversion factors so that quantities of dried, canned, and frozen

fruits and juices in each supply and distribution category could be aggregated with quantities of fruit sold in fresh form*

In order to incorporate the supply and distribution of tree nuts on a

farm commodity basis, data on shelled nuts were converted to an equivalent

unshelled basis by means of average conversion factors*

Vegetables and Other Food Crops.- All commercial production sold for

fresh use and for processing and rough approximations of total production of

farm, rural nonfarm, and urban gardens were totaled to obtain the quantity

of vegetables produced yearly for consumption in fresh, canned, frozen, and

dried form.

Data on processed vegetables were converted to a fresh-equivalent basis

by using average conversion factors* They were then used to adjust the

quantities supplied and distributed in those categories as fresh vegetables*

Each category was valued at the average weighted price received by farmers

in the base p^-iod for the vegetables sold for processing and for fresh

market use to derive the total values for t he index*

The same procedure was used for potatoes, sweetpotatoes, dry edible

beans, cowpeas for peas, and dry field peas. For convenience, mustard seed

and popcorn are grouped with these vegetables to form an "other food crop**

category* Having no separate data on foreign trade in popcorn, we considered production as being entirely for domestic food use*
. 30 •

Sugar and Sirups>^ This group includes sugarcane and sugar beets, the

products resulting from their processing—industrial molasses, edible

molasses, refined cane and beet sugar, refiners" sirup, molasses beet pulp,

dried beet pulp, and moist beet pulp—as well as sugarcane sirup, sorgo

sirup, maple sirup, and maple sugar« Data for this subgroup of commodities

are reported in terms of farm-equivalents. Except for honey, no allowance

is made for military use or Department of Agriculture takings of the minor

products because of lack of identifying information on the small quantities

involved* Honey is considered to be a livestock product and is included with

such commodities«

Food Grains -- These include the usual viheatp rye, rice, and buck^eat.

The procedure previously described for computing farm equivalent values for

processed joint products was used for ^eat« Wheat flour and wheat millfeeds

are inportant examples of joint products« For the other grains the nonfood

use of millfeeds turned out to be insignificant«

Feed Grains>- The supply-utilization of com, barley, oats, and sorghum

grains included both the use of grain as such and the grain-equivalents of

processed products« The latter were converted on the basis of physical

equivalents because the nonfood byproduct of milling these grains for food

is insignificant« We worked with total production of these grains for all

purposes, including grain, silage, fodder, hogged-off, and grazed« Farm

household use was added in with food use of commodities processed from

grains sold«

Hays and Miscellaneous Field Crops«- Hays include alfalfa, clover,

timothy, lespedeza, soybean, coirfpea, peanut vine, grains cut green, and wild

hay« The miscellaneous field crops included in the nonfood commodity subindex are sorghum for forage and silage, velvet beans, broomcorn, and hops«

Production data for hops include only the quantities marketed«

Vegetable Seeds«- Because production of vegetable seeds has been

reported only since 1939, production for earlier years was approximated on

the basis of the ratio of domestic seed disappearance in 1939-1A3 to production of vegetables« A supply and distribution table was developed in order

to obtain domestic civilian nonfood use«

Field Seed Crops«- These include all varieties of field seeds reported

by the Crop Reporting Board except rapeseed, mustard seed, and sunflower

seed, ^ich were put elsei^Äiere« A considerable amount of estimating was

necessary to fill in the gaps in reported data on production« This was done

with the advice of specialists in the Agricultiiral Estimates Division of

AMS.

Cotton*- The supply and distribution table for cotton on a calendar year

base was constructed from data on ginnings, mill use, exports, and August 1
- 31 -

stocks* Information on stocks of products processed from cotton was not

used, but data on raw cotton equivalents of processed items were added to

imports and eaqports of raw cotton* Domestic use of cotton in the index

represents the quantity of raw cotton reported by the Bureau of the Census

as consumed in mills, adjusted for the raw cotton equivalent of net trade

in cotton manufactures and the quantity destroyed* As data on military

takings of cotton products are not yet available, civilian use could not

be derived*

Shorn Wool and Mohair,- Because wool pulled from the skins of slaughtered sheep and lambs was included with meat animals, only wool shorn from

live animals was covered in this category. Allowances were made for imported apparel and carpet wool and for wool products and for exports of wool

products, except wool rags. Adequate data on military takings were not available*

No major problems were encountered in the case of mohair.

Tobacco*- Data on the supply and distribution of tobacco, including

foreign trade in manufactured products, were developed in equivalents of

faim-sales weight* Military troop use could not be separated from domestic

civilian use*^
- 32 .

Table U.- Domestic production of all farm ccnimodities, food

and nonfood, as percentage of their total utilization

and subindexes of production, 1924-5^ l/

Production as percentage ' Subindexes of production.

of their utilization ',» 19if7-if9tel00

Calendar :

year :

All [

farm \

conimod- '

ities ;

; Food !

! conmod- i

! ities !

1 N<»ifood ;

1 commod- ;

! ities !

; All

farm

; ities

t !

: Pood î

: conimod- i

: ities !

• 4

• 4

! Nonfood

! commod-

! ities

' Percent Percent Percent

1921* !! 9**.2 93.Í* 96.0 75 73 88

1925 !: 92.8 91.9 96.7 16 Tk 90

1926 i! ^.0 93.3 97.6 77 1^ 92

1927 i! 91.6 92.8 86.7 78 75 93

1928 !! 93.6 ^.3 90.1 79 77 88

1929 !Î 92.0 91»k 9l».7 77 75 93

1930 ! ^.0 92.3 102. U 76 1^ 87

1931 ! 97.9 96.0 108.1 80 77 92

1932 !Î 95.7 96.1 93.7 79 78 8U

1933 ! 90.i^ 90.1 91.9 71» 73 83

193^ ! &ï.k 87.5 87.2 68 68 66

1935 : 95.2 96.2 90.6 73 72 81»

1936 5 86.1 85.7 88.5 70 68 77

1937 5 99.9 98.8 105.0 ai 78 101

1938 i 97.1 95.5 105.6 80 78 91

1939 i 93.5 93.2 9l».8 81 79 90

19'íO i 95.6 95.3 97.l^ 85 83 93

19'H 5 9*^.0 95.2 88.1 88 88 89

19l»2 : 96.5 96.8 9l».6 97 97 99

19^3 î 89.8 90.1» 86.6 98 99 93

19W* : 93.2 93.0 9l».8 102 103 97

19»^5 i 91.9 92.8 86.U 99 101 92

1^ : 92.5 95.1 79.0 100 102 91

19^7 i 91.6 91.7 91.0 98 98 96

19tô : 99.5 100.3 95.6 102 102 100

19»»9 : 95.7 9l».9 99.9 100 100 lOl»

1950 ! 92.6 9l».7 81.7 100 100 9»^

1951 i 90.1» 89.8 93.9 100 99 108

1952 ! 95.U 95.0 97.3 105 101» 108

1953 i 96.7 95.6 102.5 106 106 110

195^ i 96.7 96.1 99.7 107 107 105

1/ See text for definition of production.

2/ Preliminary.
- 33 -

CHAPTER 3« MEASURINS SUPPLIES OF FARM COMMODITIES

This chapter is concerned with the measurement of each year's flow of

farm commodities from three sources of supply—production, imports, and

available stocks—into use in that year^ A section is devoted to each*

Subindexes of the master index of supply-utilization measure the flow from

each source. There are actually several subindexes for each flow. These

measure not only the flow of all farm commodities from that source, but also

food commodities, nonfood commodities, and other subgroupings*

To assist readers in using these indexes, we describe at some length

the economic characteristics of production, imports, and stocks that we attempt to measure« Problems encountered in the process of developing the

subindexes are illustrated, as are their solutions* The subindexes are

compared with other indexes especially designed to measure changes in production and imports of farm products* Apparently, no other index of stock

changes has been developed but the meanings of this group of subindexes and

the characteristics of the value aggregates from which they are constructed

are related to other data on volume of inventories*

The following sections outline the principal uses and limitations of

the subindexes as we now see them* Because one of the principal uses is to

describe ^at has happened, we illustrate with brief reviews of the major

changes in the amount and makeup of the flow of farm commodities from each

source in the last 30 years*

The framework of the master index required the balancing of each year's

supply with its use* Quantities of each commodity coming from new production,

from iïïÇ)orts, or out of stocks carried over from preceding years equal total

utilization or flow into the several channels towaivJ final use plus ending

stocks. Essentially we say that those supplies which appeared during the year

but were not in sight in the form of reported stocks at the end of the year,

disappeared into some channel for use* The reader should note, however, that

the total supply of farm coranodities flowing from American farms, from

abroad, and out of stocks is not available for use at any one time in the

year, but only over the course of each year*

A section of this chapter pertains to stocks* It contains details on

^y, in building the master index, we use changes in reported stocks rather

than total stocks* It also describes >Äiat kinds of stocks are included in

the category "available stocks" on the supply side of the tables on supplyutilization. Then, using changes in stocks from year to year, we proceed to

conpute estimates of total stocks available at the beginning of each year of

the 30-year period on a comparable basis for conqparison with yearly flow and

for other analytical uses* This is one of several examples in this handbook

that indicate the flexibility of subindexes within the overall framework of

the master index.

In measuring total supply of all farm commodities ^id their products, as

well as changes in supplies from year to year, the real problem was how to
. 31 -

add without duplication and in economic terms quantities of the great variety

of items, from soap to nuts, supplied by the agricultural economy for human

and industrial use» As described in the preceding chapter, we use farm

equivalent values in 19U7-U9 dollars for our common denominator» It is possible, therefore, to measure both the proportion of each year's flow of farm

commodities supplied by current domestic production, by imports, and by

change in stocks, and changes in the rates of flow during the years covered

by the index»

FLCW FROM CURRENT PRODUCTION 12/

The definition or meaning of agricultural production to be used in

designing an overall measure of production depends primarily on the use to be

made of that gauge. The index of production of farm commodities foíros an

integral part of the master index of supply-utilization of all farm commodities. It was, therefore, set up to measure the flow of goods produced by

agriculture into the agricultural system itself (internal transfers) and

outside the agriculture economy, (external transfers) (table h)^

Unfortunately, we have no good synonym for ••production" which can be

used to alert the unwary to the intrinsic differences between this measure

and that given in the index of farm-output or in the index of farm marketings

and home consumption. The somewhat hybrid nature of this index of production

of farm corcrr;cdities will have to be indicated by differentiation and by example.

At the outset, the "gross" character of this index should be noted. Thds

arises from the counting of grain and other commodities used for feed and

seed as part of production of crops of grain and again indirectly in output

of livestock products, including animals slaughtered. Such handling was

dictated by the desire to keep track of th.^ entire flow, knowing that we

could compute net measures as desired.

Definitions Used

Considering crops first, production includes the total quantities of

each crop harvested (except those abandoned for economic reasons) whether

marketed or retained on farms where grown. As we have already noted, output

of farm resources used for inputs for agriculture to produce additional output (for example, feed to produce milk) is double counted. But to derive a

net producoion index for comparison with other segments of the master index,

ilÎL«^''^?^^'^ """^^ *? subtract the duplicated elements from domestic pro-

?^ni?^; oIÍÜoH-.T P^^S^iP^ly ^^^d and seed, adjusted for such use of

imported canmodities. Pertinent data are given in table 5

Researoh Branch. Ag^^lwae^ilemäf""' '^" ^"^^<"' ^"«»^"
-35-

Table 5,- Indexes of gross domestic production of all farm

coxmnodities, feed and seed from domestic production,

net production, farm output, and volume of farm

marketings and h(»ne consumption, 192U-5l|-

Calendar

year

Gross production

1/1/

Index,

19^7-^9^100

As percentage

of gross

total

utilization

Feed and seed from

domestic production

Index,

191^7.49^100

As percentage

of gross

production

Net production

2/

Index,

19lv7_49slOO

As percentage

of net

total

utilization

!

Index

of

farm

output,

19tf7.If9BlOO

: Index of

: volume of

fazm marketings and

home consumption,

19lf7.1f9bi(X)

192!^

1925

1926

1927

1928

1929

1930

1931

1932

1933

193^^

1935

1936

1937

1938

1939

I9it0

19'n

19'»2

19^3

19Mt

19^5

igitô

19^7

19»»8

19lt9

1950

1951

1952

1953

195i>3/

75

76

77

78

79

77

76

80

79

7^^

68

73

70

81

80

81

Percent

91^.2

92.8

9'*.0

91.6

93.6

92.0

9^^.0

97.9

95.7

90.if

Qj.k

95.2

86.1

99.9

97.1

93.5

85 95.6

88 9i^.0

97 96.5

98 89.8

102 93.2

99 91.9

100 92.5

98 91.6

102 99.5

100 95.7

100 92.6

100 90.Í»

105 95A

106 96.6

107 96.6

89

9»*

88

96

95

93

89

89

97

93

77

80

83

80

89

9»^

97

100

no

123

no

no

108

102

96

102

lÓk

106

10«t

102

100

Percent

32.6

3í^.0

31.6

33.5

33.»^

32.3

31.1

31^.2

3'*.7

31.4

30.1

33.0

27.2

30.8

32.1

31.6

31.5

Sl.i^

34.8

29.9

30.6

29.9

28.8

26.1

28.3

29.1

29.3

27.'*

26.5

25.8

70

70

73

71

72

71

71

76

72

67

6k

71

61»

82

77

76

80

83

92

89

99

95

97

96

99

98

98

105

108

110

Percent

91.8

89.6

91.7

88.0

90.8

88.6

9L*k

97.2

93.6

86.1

82.9

9i».0

81.2

100.8

95.9

90.8

93.9

91.7

95.1

86.0

92.0

89.0

89.7

88.6

99.5

9>f.2

90.0

erj.k

94.2

95.8

95.7

68

70

73

72

75

Ik

72

79

76

70

60

72

65

82

79

80

83

86

96

9«^

97

96

98

95

lOi*

101

100

103

IS

108

73

71

73

73

7^jk

72

73

71

72

71

66

71

7k

16

79

80

82

90

9^

99

99

97

100

97

103

99

101

105

no

109

ll See text far detailed definitions. Gross production includes commodities used fear

feed QBd seed.

a, ^c^lides feed and seed.

2/ Preliminary.
. 36.

The output of livestock products was measured at the point of final

marketing which was considered to be the slaughtering stage for animals,

including farm slaughter, and sales plus farm use for such commodities as

milk^ As mentioned in chapter 2, for dairy products we used the total of

milk fat and nonfat solids produced* Skim milk fed to calves thus, in

effect is counted twice—as nonfat milk solids, and again in value of

calves when marketed.

The demand for information on farm food commcdities has been so

persistent that this set of subindexes was developed first. It includes

every farm commodity having any food use in this country» We put pulled

wool in with food commodities because it is part of the distribution of

products from sheep slaughter, but shorn wool is with nonfood itons* As

noted earlier, there is a discrepancy in our classification because

although linseed oil is not used for food in the United States, we put it

with food commodities in order to take accotmt of Department of Agriculture

deliveries of substantial quantities of linseed oil to Soviet Russia (and

some to Poland) for food use during and immediately after World War II. A

reclassification will be made at a later date.

Commodity Coverage, Form of Index, Weights Used

Details of commodity coverage are given in chapter 2, but we include

here some notes as a reminder before the reader proceeds to the comparisons

with two other indexes related to production. We excluded horses and mules

firom the subindex, viewing them as sources of farm power and, as such^

presenting ccmplications of substitution of other sources of power» Pasture

output is treated only indirectly as turning up in livestock production.

This represents a slight departure from the basic idea of gross flow but it

was necessitated by lack of data. Forest products, except maple sugar and

sirup, and nursery and greenhouse production (except minor quantities of

greenhouse vegetables), were ignored, partly because they are not generally

regarded as farm commodities, partly because of inadequate information.

Following the general methodology for the whole set of indexes, this

index of production of farm commodities uses changing quantities times fixed

prices divided by total value of output in the base period. As it is the

primary segment of the master index, only production of farrr commodities was

counted; that is, the processing of farm commodities was ignored except as

part of the statistical computation of allocating, for example, farm value of

wheat produced on farms in a given year to its joint products flour and millfeeds, later to be divided among the several channels of final utilization»

(See exhibit B.)

Weighted averages of prices received by farmers in the 36 months of

19Í47-U9 were used as price weights for the entire series, beginning at 192U.
- 37 -

Comparison with Other Measures of Domestic Production

'. of Farm Commodities

Farm productiot* can be measured in various ways and at several points

in the process of production. For individual commodities, weight, volume,

and value are commonly used as measures. To combine the variety of farm

products, tonnage and volume are rather unsatisfactory, particularly from an

economist's point of view. If prices are not changing much, current value is

a usefixl measure. Realized gross farm income cam.es close to being such á

measure during periods of stable prices. By using fixed prices with changing

quantities, constant dollar values are derived; they provide the most c<»iimon

means of aggregating data on production, especially for comparisons over time.

This is tíie basis used for the production subindex described in the preceding

section and for the indexes of farm output and of farm marketings and home

consumption.

Major differences among these three measures of production of fann products are the point at which production is measured, and, indirectly, the

timing. In effect, the index of farm output adds up the production of our

agricultural econongr at the time of production in the form of harvested crops,

net changes in inventories of livestock on farms (numbers and weight, less

allowance for feed inputs), plus livestock products marketed and used in farm

homes. The production subindex uses the same harvested crop output but does

not count livestock animals as being produced until they are slaughtered,

either for farm home consumption or after sale. The index of marketings and

home consumption totals all crops, livestock, and livestock products as they

are (l) sold, (2) put under CCC loan, or (3) used in the farm home.

To clarify differences and similarities among these indexes, let us

consider the fanra output and farm marketings and home consvimption indexes

separately.

The purpose of the index of farm output 13/ is to measure the volume of

farm production available for eventual human use. This measures production

in the calendar year in which it is produced and therefore includes all

changes in farm inventories of livestock. Farm output of feed is counted in

the year of harvest. To avoid duplication of feed crop production, a "product added" concept is used for livestock. This requires deduction of feed

consumed by livestock in the year fed. The farm output index excludes interfarm sales, fann produced power 11/ and sales of farm raised horses and mules,

as well as forest, nurseiy» and greenhouse products, as do its subindexes.

13/ For details of this index, see Barton, Glen T., »«^ 0°*'?«^'/^%?^'

Farm Production In War and Peace, Pp. $5-66. Bur. Agr. Econ. FM 53. 19U5.

mS Changes in glr^gdScUSTand Efficiency. Pp. 10 ^^J?;- *|^- ï?* Ser.,-!Í&3."'JÍ55ri^5U. Also dSicrifeed in fericulture Handbook No. 62,

^h^À^index of gross farm production which includes farm P^^^uc^^^P^J^^^

hasbeen developed for certain research purposes. It is no longer published.
. 38 .

The objective of the index of volume of farm marketings and home consumption 15/ is to summarize changes in quantities of farm commodities marketed

and consumed on farms where grown, which are included in the commodity elements of realized gross farm income. This index measures the quantity of

each farm commodity tóien it enters the marketing system in the form of sales

by farmers, when it is put "under loan" according to provisions of the Department of Agriculture program for price support, or when it is consumed in

the household on the farm where it was produced^ Accordingly, interfarm

transfers of feeder livestock, feed, and seed get counted twice* There is

no double counting of feed and seed used on farms where grown. Changes in

farm stocks not under loan are not included. This index inclxxdes net outof-3tate sales of horses and mules in States which have an excess of sales

over purchases; because such sales are included in realized gross farm income. Otherwise, its commodity coverage is quite similar to that of the

farm output index.

The marketings and home cons^lIrq)tion index has been developed in terms of

the following subdivisions: (1) Crops and livestock items, (2) marketings

and home consunption, and (3) food and nonfood products. The last division

is on the basis of major use as opposed to the classification for the two

subindexes of supply-utiliaation, ^ich puts all commodities having any food

use in this country under food commodities. This becomes particularly significant in years of unusual shifts in production and marketings of feed

grains, lÄiich are classified as nonfood in the marketings and home consuuç)-

tion index and as food in the food production subindex of the supplyutilization index.

All three of the indexes that measure volume of farm production at one

level or another use the Laspeyres formula and weighted average farm prices.

Both the farm output and the marketings indexes use 1935-39 price weighting

for 1910-39, and 19U7-U9 weighted average farm prices for 19U0 to date,

splicing the two series at 19liO. The production subindex of the supplyutilization index uses 19li7-U9 prices throughout.

On Choosing the Index to Use

To help the reader decide \rfiich index relative to farm production he

should use in the analysis of particular problems, the following guides are

offered:

1. Use the farm output index if your problem requires a measure of total

domestic farm production available for eventual human use, regardless of when

it is sold or used. Remember, it includes total production of grain and

poundage added to livestock even if still on farms.

l£/ Described in Agriculture Handbook No. 62, pp. 30-36.
- 39 -

2. If your problem involves measurement of the movement of farm commodities off farms and into farm home consumption, that is, a marketings

concept, use the index of farm marketings and home consumption. Recall that

this index was designed for use with gross realized farm income and that it

is not a net but a somewhat gross measure because of the interfarm transfers.

3* If your analysis requires the relating of volume of farm production

to supplies from other sources, or to the flow into specific channels for

utilization, this subindex of production-flow provides the best statistical

conqparison«

h. The new measure of production of farm commodities is conceptually

between the other two indexes» It uses the same crop concept as the farm

output index and "final" marketings of livestock animals, that is, count

them Tfihen slaughtered to avoid interfainn transfers. But watch out for the

duplication of feed and seed.

Summary of Major Changes in Production

Referring to the ratios of production to total use given in table U> you

will note the considerable stability in the relationship of production both

of all commodities and food commodities to their total utilization and in thai

for food commodities. The drought years of the midthirties were the low

points. The high point for both series was in 19U8, a year of substantial

stock accumulation. The significance of domestic production of nonfood commodities to total nonfood use varied much more, apparently because of greater

shifts in foreign trade.

Looking now at the production subindexes given in the same table, we see

that 193U was the record low year for both food and nonfood commodities and

195U the record high. Other significant points are the much greater rise froi

the 1920's to the 1950's for food items than for nonfood items, the sharp increase in food production from 19Ul to 19U2, and the drop in nonfood output

from 1953 to 19$U caused by the reduction in cotton.

The net production series for all farm commodities developed in table $

by subtracting feed and seed use from the gross production index shows

greater increase than does gross production over the years. In part, this

reflects the diversion of productive resources from the growing of feed for

horses and mules to other enterprises. The net production series runs closer

to the index of farm output than to the index of farm marketings and home

consumption•

For table 6, we subtracted the annual value of crops used for feed and

seed from the total value of crop production, and the values of milk fed to

calves and eggs used for hatching from the values of gross production of

livestock products. This handling was dictated by our flow concept; utilization is divided between livestock products and crops more from a marketing point of view than any other. The farm output index involves the

subtraction of the duplication of feed from the livestock sector, lAiich
- Uo .

Table 6.- Value of gross domestic production, feed and seed use, and net

production of crops and livestock commodities, 192li-!?ii 1/

Calendar

year

Crops

Gross :Used for

produc-:feed and

tlon : seed

Net production

Value Index»

19lf7-lt9«100

Livestock

Gross :U6ed for

produc-:feed and

tion : seed 2/

Net production

Value Index,

1947-49=100

1924

1925

1926

1927

1928

1929

1930

1931

1932

1933

1931»

1935

1936

1937

1938

1939

I9U0

19'H

19^0

19U3

19M*

19i^5

19^

19U7

19W

191*9

1950

1551

1952

1953

1951x2/!

Mil.

dol.

15,753

15,71*6

15,93^*

16,239

15,785

15,165

16,294

16,015

13,907

11,212

15,051

12,507

17,239

16,442

16,103

16,724

17,305

19,248

18,293

19,219

18,837

19,700

18,629

21,328

20,139

19,507

19,750

20,780

20,604

20,217

Mil.

dol.

Mil,

dol.

15,113 7,717 7,396

8,233

7,571

8,383

8,283

8,087

7,589

7,596

8,386

7,959

6,376

6,718

7,059

6,769

7,686

8,138

8,425

8,699

9,824

11,310

10,100

10,101

10,038

9,31*6

8,858

9,1*51

9,652

9,849

9,681

9,575

9,132

7,520

8,175

7,551

7,955

7,698

7,576

8,698

7,629

5,91*8

1*,836

8,333

5,1*48

10,470

8,756

7,966

8,299

8,605

9,1*24

6,983

9,n9

8,736

9,662

9,283

12,470

10,688

9,855

9,901

11,099

11,030

U,085

68

70

76

70

71*

71

70

80

71

55

1*5

77

50

97

81

71*

77

80

87

65

84

81

89

86

115

99

91

92

103

102

103

Mil.

dol.

12,698

12,948

13,002

12,991

13,051

13,151

13,358

13,300

13,731*

14,039

12,289

13,379

13,029

13,1*63

14,067

14,844

15,1*18

16,859

18,242

18,802

18,165

17,596

17,755

16,650

17,151*

17,528

17,648

18,170

19,002

19,527

Mil,

dol.

Mil.

dol.

12,977 1,1*29 11,548

1,442

1,1*99

1,529

1,501*

1,531

11,256

11,449

11,472

11,486

11,520

1,555 11,597

1.632 11,726

1,631 11,670

1.633 12,101

1,560 12,480

1,508

1,492

1,449

1,532

1,51*8

1,556

1,613

1,519

1,421

1,270

1,235

1,117

l,l4l

1,072

1,105

1,112

1,097

1,004

1,014

1,203

10,781

ii,8&r

11,580

11,931

12,519

13,287

13,805

15,31*0

16,821

17,532

16,930

16,1*79

I6,6l4

15,578

16,049

I6,4l6

16,551

17,165

17,987

18,323

72

70

71

71

71

72

72

73

73

75

78

67

71*

72

71*

78

83

86

95

105

109

105

102

103

97

100

102

103

107

112

114

See text for detailed definitions and descrip- 1/ Valued at 19U7-U9 farm prices,

tion of data and methods used.
- la -

lili3ÍÍ

t%l

m

È •

si

¿Es

p

'^

O

O

i^

I

III

jal

I"

Ö '^

I?...

3

§I§§IÍ l§|Í§||iiÍ §§|ÍiÍÍi§8H 88888 H H H H rH

OJVOHON^rO ^. O-zft-VOONh-OOVO OHl-ONUNHCVJOOOOO <n Oi VO O OJ

^^líNWNUNvo ^.vovo^:^7VOl>vovovo vovo UNíA ^^.5^ enojen cncncncnro

COONOJUNCr»^ ON OJ H VO O H H O O UN ^ VO O CO <nvo H H cn <n 0\xt fO fO CS

^-encoco CO CO 00 CO CO 00 o\oo ONco CO CO cdcóa\oooooo\o o^ddd

C^OJHlAfO^ VO 0J-* HIACVICO 0\HCVJ HCO H^ VO cn CU t-IP^ H t-ITV lAlTN ON

qoojcnwco «^ <>^ w cu en o. o-* OJ cu <o o o ^ H t-^ vo vo of <no\-5í-co o

ilí-li-lr-lrii-l r^r^^rir-iHr-iHHt-i HHr^r-iHHHHHH r^ r^ rH H H

^•^^J"^'^'^ VO ovo rojf H cno 0-* o ON en H lA ONCO <M cu o t-00^ oco

CO en co-^ en-* *?-^ **^-* -^ ^'^-^í' -* "^-* UMTNUM/NUNUMTM/N»TWO OO »A IA-* -*

o

q^o^H.^ vo^voenqcjq-^Hcq HCOOOCO en^covo^^ IACOVO^VO

eu oi cvi H ai (M cû cj H cj cû cû cj oj cû eu eu H H H cû oj oj oj eu oj eû eû eû eû eû

lAco lA.^* lA ON t^iAONOivovoeneuoir*- vo t^ o .4'H eu H IAVO IA COCOON H H

••••• •••••••••• ••••••••• •••••

COOXOGOCOCO CO 0\ h-CO VO VO CO o Î^VO VO »AVO »A lA^-4" lAVO C^ ^ VO VO t^ VO

c^GOiA 010-4- -^-euHcoH-^-cococo.* ooovoHcoHiAr-eueu t^o-^-iAcn • ••••• •••••••••• •••••••••• ••••

t^vOVOCOt^t^ vo vo h-vo vo CO vo vo t—t^ CO h-C-^ b-vo t*-vO vo vo vû VO t*-vO vO VO

-d-.enwvo t^o o\ ON iA-4" fn-^-lA oj r-en o IA H vo t-co os H eu .4

ç^T¿^^i^ 'íoc¿¿^d^sí^?4í4 ^t4<5^^.^«4-^.^t4 H ^ H t-i i~i t-i HHCUHfHfHHHHH Hr-iHHr-iHHHHH

ONen^- HiA

îî^^^^

o o e^ H 01^ t^-^- lAVO o lA^ 00 CO t^

t^l t^vo ^11^ tl t^ r>l c^ hl oNcô cô c«^ t^ t^

t^vo envo eniAo eu enH HONt^covo

t*-1—t^ t-1^ t^co h-1^ r*- c^vovovovo

NOVO lAlAlAlA VO «AVO 00 t*- t^oo vo CO t^ t^VO VO lA-d" lAVO VO «A lA VO tAlAlAVO

0

ON C^VO 00 t- ^- 00 t-- h-VO 00 eu ON ON H »A t^OO VOh-OJ^COIAOCO eu ONCO t^rA

0 H HH HHeueucuoicueu en eu en eu eu eu en

en 0100 OJ iA-4- lACO ^»Ah-HVOOCOH ^-OVOIAONt^HHCOCO h-o i-voco

eu 01 01 01 eu 01 oiojojeueuenoieneum eueneueueueueneneueu eu en eu eu eu

ONiAvo 0 H^O • ••••• H eu q e*^co »AVO ^7 eu 00 q VO eu ^ enco q -:t t^ t^ -* Hvo00 e^

Ail VOlAVOÎ^t^VO r-h-VO^.4- »AIAVO t^lA NO VO VO lAVO VO t^CO t^vo VOVOt^voiA

^

O H 01 en^ lAvo t*-co ON

0\ONONONONONONONO\ON

^^ ^1 ^n ^n ^1 ^H •"! ^1 ^1 c^

ill O

•H ^ •»

G) ^ «^ Q

0 Sî fl 'S

^S o n

tt S ^'-^ |8 ^

« Í 2 S

fS a PI

0) « 0)

43-8

« o a 's

« 4» _ o

^1«

||

u

0) o «

4?

"ON ON ON ONON'ON^'ON CK'ON ON ON ON ON ON «H «)

IH HH H H H H 1

si*

H » a r

o a u Xi r .

&•'^ÎSil 1 'S

euig " sa

^ 9 0» i

hué

S

^ I

«H 4>
. 12 .

follows from the "value added** concept used in constructing that index* Accordingly, the crop subindex of net production shows much greater variation

than the crop index of farm output* Because the choice of handling this subtraction must depend upon the problem being studied, value data are given in

the table as well as the derived indexes.

Finally, a few notes on changes in the commodity makeup of the gross

production index, illustrated in table 7. (Comparable value data are given

in the ^pendix,) Crops made up a slightly smaller proportion of gross

production of all farm commodities in the 19^0*s than in 192Í4-29. Oil crops

have increased greatly, cotton and hay and forage have gone down some.

Production of livestock commodities has been higher in recent years than

2$ to 30 years earlier. The meat animal group is up a little in relation to

the total, dairy products down slightly, but production of poultry and eggs

is up sharply.

IMPORTS 16/

Imports are another source of supply of farm commodities entering into

total flow. The subindex of imports of farm commodities given in table 8

measures farm canmodities coming from foreign countries and Ü. S. Territories

and Possessions that are combined with United States production to meet our

needs for agricultural products. It includes both raw farm commodities and

their major processed products. Because of some substitutability for

domestically produced items, we have put in coffee, tea, cocoa, and bananas.

But rubber and other gum products, raw silk, and vegetable fibers, such as

sisal, hemp, and abaca, are not included; these products are xmlike domestically produced agric\ü.tural commodities and are less interchangeable in

use with farm commodities than with manufactured or synthetic products.

How Imported Commodities Are Combined

Combining the imports of commodities produced in this coiintry and their

products presented no difficulty in the construction of this subindex. We

used the same weighted average farm prices for each farm commodity, and the

same system of ratios of farm value to primary market value, to adjust the

values of processed commodities to their farm value equivalents*

But such commodities as coffee and others that are not produced here did

present a pricing problem. We decided that the price most nearly comparable

in concept to our domestic farm price is the price at the first domestic

transaction level, usually the sale at portside. This Is the level at which

imported commodities become competitive with domestically produced commodities.

16/ Prepared by Robert J. Lavell*
.1,3 .

Other measures of agricultural imports have been developed from data on

the vieight, volume, and current value of individual commodities contained in

census reports on foreign trade. The Foreign Agricultural Service publishes

tvo overall measures, both of which exclude inshipments from U. S. Territories* 17/ The current value series is based on values reported in dollars

as exported from foreign co\mtries. The PAS jpiantity index, based on constant dollar values, uses average prices computed from the same data for the

base period.

Another overall measure of agricultural imports is published by the

Food and Agriculture Organization of the united Nations. 18/ This is a

current value series measuring foreign value as exported. Here, value of

our imports is reported in the exporter's currency vhich is converted to

dollars by standard exchange rates.

These three indexes do not measure changes in farm equivalent values of

agricultural products imported nor do they attempt to trace the farm commodity

content of processed products. They cover only products specified as "agri-

'cultural" in the census classification.

Classification of Imports

We have already mentioned one basis on which imports could be classified

for analytical purposes—whether they are similar to domestically produced

ccnimcdities. For analysis of the makeup of imports we can also separate

coïïar:odities accordir^ to the degree of competition with domestic products.

All imports of commodities domestically produced are in direct conç)etition

with quantities produced here. But even some of the rather dissimilar imported products should be considered in this coirqpetitive class because they

are so interchangeable in use with domestic commodities. Of those not

prod^iced coranercially here, sesame seed, imported tree nuts, palm oil,

babassu oil, castor beans and castor oil, palm kernels and palm kernel oil,

and copra are of this nature. This whole group of imports may be described

as supplementary to domestic production. On the other hand, bananas, coffee,

tea, cocoa, and carpet wool compete only indirectly with united States farm

products for consumers' dollars. We call them complementaiy to draiestic

production—they fill out our list of items to meet comparable needs. (See

table 9-)

Changes in Imports

Volijme of imports has fluctuated widely during the last 30 j^ars,

depending on domestic production, foreign production, level of economic

activity, trade barriers, and the state of international relations. Since

17/ Foreign Agricultural Service. Foreign Agricultural Trade. Monthly.

These two mea.«îures include rubber, raw silk, and the rough vegetable fibers.

18/ Food and Agriculture Organization. Yearbook of Food and Agricultural

Statistics: Trade.
195o we have been importing agricultural commodities at a rate that is about

25 percent higher than that of the late 1920» s. In the period 192U-5U,

imports varied in importance from $ to 10 percent of each year's utilization

of all farm commodities.

Imports of commodities produced here—those in the supplementary

category—have been more variable than imports of complementary items. This

is understandable, as supplementary imports are miach more sensitive to

changes in United States production, and the relationships of domestic supplies to domestic demand. Furthermore, they are often subject to some form

of réstriction on imports—import duty, quota, or license requirCTient.

Complementary imports, on the other hand, are generally duty free. Complementary imports, then, are affected principally by available supplies abroad,

relative prices, and United States purchasing power.

The Tariff Act of 1930 contributed to the drastic drop in supplementary

iiiq>orts during the early 1930*s• Then the drought of the midthlrties was

followed in 1937 by very large import commodities supplementing United States

production. Subsequently such imports declined. Diiring World War II,

changing needs and production patterns and shipping problems caused substantial swings in volimie of supplementary imports. For several years after

the end of the war these imports were relatively low, until world supplies

recovered.

Conçlementary imports were characterized by a rather steady increase in

volume up to World War II. During the war these imports also fell sharply

because of shipping difficulties. But immediately after the war ended the

previous trend was resumed. These imports come from countries whose production capacity was not danaged by the war, and this favored sales for dollars.

The makeup of imports, as measured by the categories supplementary and

complawentary, has included a decided shift away from the supplementary. In

the midtwenties supplementary imports accoxmted for about 60 percent of the

imports of all farm commodities; imports have been about evenly split between

the two categories since 19U5»

Coffee, a complementary import, is the most important valuewise. Sugar,

a supplementary inqjort, is next in importance. In some years these two commodities account for more than UO percent of our iirçorts of agricultural

commodities. Cocoa, bananas, carpet wool, and tea are the other important

complementary commodities, but their combined value is not equal to the value

of coffee. Cattle and calf products and apparel wool are the only other

consistently important supplementary inqports and these have varied over a

wide range. In 19li2 and 19li6 the value of imported apparel wool exceeded the

value of sugar.

Uses and Limitations

What this subindex includes and how it is combined are dictated by the

requirements of the master index of supply-utilization of all farm commodities.
-U5-

Table 8.* Indexes of Inports of supplementary and

complementary farm commodities^ 1924-^U 1/

•

•

•

• Svqpplementary : Complementary All farm

: conraodlties commodltiee commodities

Calendar :

year :

[Percentage

of all

'Percentage '

of all

\ \

(Percentage

Index, farm

\conmodities

iBiported '

! Index, jk Index, of

: 19l*7-lfr9=lCX). .1947-49=100! farm

Î commodities

Í imported

.1947-49=1CX)|> total

•utilization

Percent Percent Percent

1921^ i! 92 59 60 1*1 75 6.7

1925 !; 107 62 60 38 83 7.1

1926 ;: 112 62 61* 38 87 7.6

192T ! 107 61 65 39 85 7.2

1928 : lot* 60 65 1*0 81* 7.1

1929 : 122 62 70 38 95 8.0

1930 : lot* 60 65 1*0 81* 7.3

1931 : 85 5»* 69 1*6 77 6.7

1932 : 70 51 61 1*9 65 5.6

1933 : 85 55 61* 1*5 71* 6.5

193»^ : 80 55 61 1*5 70 6.5

1935 : IIP 58 75 1*2 93 8.6

1936 : 118 59 76 1*1 96 8.5

1937 : 137 62 78 t

106 9.3

1938 : 89 52 75 82 7.1

1939 : 96 52 83 \^ 89 7.3

19««) : 98 52 83 1*8 90 !•? 19ÍH : 132 58 89 1*2 110 8.1*

191^2 : 100 &^ 53 36 76 5.3

19»^3 113 59 72 1*1 92 6.0

19Uif : 130 58 87 1*2 107 7.0

19'*5 : 102 51 92 1*9 97 6.1*

19if6 : 98 kQ 98 52 98 6.5

191*7 : 99 50 91 50 95 6.3

19tó : lot* 1*8 105 52 lOl* 7.3

191*9 : 97 k6 loi* 51* 101 6.8

1950 : 121 53 99 1*7 110 7.3

1951 : 123 51* 96 he 109 7.0

1952 51* 98 hd no 7.2

1953

1951*2/

: 119

: 106

52

52

lOl*

92

112

98

7.2

6.3

i/ Supplementary commodities include those similar to farm commodities produced

connerciaUy in the United States and those that are interchangeable in use to a

significant extent with such Ubited States commodities. See discussion of imports

in text.

^ I^elJUnary.
- U6 -

ä

^

CO

•

«

-p

m

•P

&

•

-P

•

-P

•

-Pa!

•

P

4Î

•

-P

&

•

-P

•

-P

§§§§§§Í8§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§Í§§§§§§§

O O ON vo 00 C3D fn ON-:* O cr-) CVÍ O. r-. 00 OJ O ^/^^ iTi-^ ^ '1 s 'V' ^^« ^ "^ ^ '^

o')^ <^¡fñ^ocAoJOJH(ñoJo^CVJc>^r-¡rôo^)(v^r^ IHOJ trv-:t «C ro m cv; c^^ -^

^vC fOCVJ í^OCVí-4-r-i^-ro CsCC a\H ooroO rr^OGCcO O-d-cO 0<V t—oO «H iTv

CVJCVJWaiCVíOJCVICVirOCVJCVIiHHfHCVJCVJCViCUr-íCVJfHH'^iH'HCVICVIiHHCVJCVJ

<^ico cvi f^»vo 00 C^ (Ts^ cviONfncvj ooomt-t-"COCV}CvikrNOrH(TNr-imvo on r-co

\o lA^c^ LTKVO m^X) ON 00 c*-oo 00 i^ t^ o*» o^ c^' (^va'> cc co ao GO '-o oo t^ t^ t^ ^-co

O-:* CVJ OtriVûifNvcoOr-iir\CViir. o irN-d- ^- Oi ^O H ^t i.r> o OJ oo vc O t^-4" H t^

r-î r^ oív 0^ O^ C^ r-i lA ir*-:!- -^HOOOt^-miPvOOlAi^t^H OC^O^C^Jl^\C*- c^GÖ iO OjÍHHHHHCVJCVICVJaia'CVlWHCVIOJW

irsoO f*'^ <M ONOC LiMTiOVC mCVJ irst^rH C^H^O ONOO r-i ^O - ) CVJ CU OJ no H on-:t H

C-'-1^ t>-oÔ CO t^co CO oii'OcÔ l^r>^C^<:^t^C^iArr\c3 « *. -:* '.\t>-t—t—MDVOVOVO t^

£---:*'' ONVO 00 ONOO VO^-:*OOrHH»-lirNOCOOVO-^CVJCO rr)iHO^CVJ0JrH »T^OO

oc)OJHQoí\rHoívfAr-3 lA-^ 00 a\ oj oj oj oí CO on ch.oo Ô O O 00 vo rô-^ -^ H ':d

H C-- m-:t vovooo mcnoj mc^os t^^ (TiOO t*^ cvj oo vc-^ * O O (TN O i>- O 00 <X>

^ cn_d^ -d-cmrsoncvj^coCMGOt^-HHCoOt^-if C^i-OJ .-ior^cvjcviirx ir\vo h- ^- cr)mmmmmmcr\(Sl cr)cncr^ cn^ OO on CVl CVï CVI CVI f• CVJOJCVICVICVJCMOJCVJCVICU

.^ 00 vo OJ -=f UN-:f 00 C^-i* -:t cnONOHOsrOrHO on^-<^JcO-=^ O en r-{ J^ ^C fn H

on CVJ on irv*>o vo -if cvi cvj -d- oo irs-d- j^^^^\ot^ir\cr^(\¡ rHir^co mvo -:t <^ <^

rH H ^O 00 ro H -If ifsao 0\(Si.^ O cnCVJ ONH.cf-:t O onr-VOVQ CO o oot^ooow

-d- i/\-* rr)oococviH *HHHoñfôr^c^JlAocíi^ôo^C^J-*cooC)vOoÔoôcí> w\^

f^ ^^ f^ c~i ^H

onoo-it ojvo t^cvj ovoa\a\r-onovo mHoo H cn^c^ ror-ioo-ítoo irvirxHrer?

Q}

•H

P

O

O

ti

OD

•P

r-J

O

3

-P

II

o

a;

s

s

m

0)

•H

-p•H

ü

1

§*

1

u

< P

O

' Cattle

and

calves

r-4

05

CO

1

3

o
-Ii7 -

By measuring the part of total utilization that is not produced on continental United States farms, it gauges our dependence on foreign sources of

agrictatural commodities. This index of imports is part of the ijhole framework of indexes and has its ovin subindexes for supplementary and complementary commodities. Thus, it provides a useful tool for studying such problems

as the effectiveness of programs designed to change our import patterns.

You must always bear in mind that we measure imports by equivalent farm

value, not value as imported, and that our measure is in constant dollars.

These techniques limit the use of this subindex to measurement of vol;uue,

unless adjustments are made to incorporate changes in price. The value of

foreign trade in agricultural products is better measured by the current

value index mentioned earlier.

CHANGES IN STOCKS 19/

A measure of changes in reported stocks of farm products from the begining to the end of each calendar year was developed for the master index of

supply-utilization of farm commodities. Because our general objective in

setting up the framework for this overall index was to measure the annual

flow, we needed to know how much of the commodities used each year came out

of stocks accumulated from production or imports in preceding years. On the

other hand, if stocks were accumulated during a given year, we wanted to be

sure that such quantities did not appear in our total utilization for that

year (table 10)#

As our objective was to get a good measure of flow of each commodity

into actual use, we assembled all available data on stocks of both raw farm

commodities and processed products. As pointed out in chapter 2, our information on inventories of some processed items is rather sketchy. Even so,

we used all regularly reported series and developed a few others. Stocks of

raw and processed items were combined in terms of their equivalent farm

values. Because our method of determining such values is something of an

innovation, we remind the reader again that the farm value of the commodity

processed was allocated to its joint products according to their proportionate contributions to the total of their primary market values after processing, as shown in exhibit B.

What Stocks Are Covered

Most of the basic data for such computations on stocks were readily

available from the tables on supply and distribution of major farm products

developed by the former Bxireau of Agricultural Economics and continued by the

Agricultural Marketing Service. These are described at length in Agricxature

Handbook No. 62. But to give a clearer idea of the significance of this

measure of overall changes in stocks, a few important points should be noted.

19/ Prepared by Leva C. Taylor and Marguerite C. Burk.
. 148 .

By Commodity and Position^-- First, data on stocks have improved

considerablv during the years from 192U to 19Sh both as to coverage of

cominodities^ and positions, and as to frequency of reporting. A reasonably

good reporting system for inventories of farm conmiodities held on farms has

been evolved by the Department of Agriculture. Only a few of the minor

crops, such as buckwheat, broomcom, and popcorn, are unreported.

Coverage of wheat, corn, oats, barley, rye, soybeans, flaxseed, and

sorghum grains has gradually been expanded to include terminal markets,

interior mills, elevators, and wareho\ises, and, for wheat, merchant mills.

Information on stocks of rice on farms and in mills and warehouses on

August 1 is available. An unpublished series of stocks of rice on January 1

has recently been developed by subtracting reported disappearance from

supplies at beginning of the marketing year. Stocks of hay on farms on

January 1 are reported.

Information on stocks also includes reports of cabbage and onion stocks

in the hands of growers and local dealers on January 1. These reports have

been made since 1928. Holdings in commercial cold storage plants are s\immarized for fresh, frozen, and dried fruits, frozen fruit juices, fresh and

frozen vegetables, nuts, poultry, eggs, meats, and dairy products.

Some additional data on inventories are available from other Government

agencies aixi from private organizations. The National Canners Association

and the Canners League of California report canners• stocks of fniits and

vegetables and the Bureau of the Census reports wholesale distributors'

stocks. The Florida Canners' Association reports packers' stocks of canned

citrus juice and citrus segments. The Bureau of the Census also collects

information on stocks of oilseeds and of oil at oil mills and on sugar stocks

held by industrial users and retailers. The Sugar Branch of the Commodity

Stabilization Service reports sugar holdings by primary distributors. Some

information on coffee stocks is given in trade reports. The Tea Bureau, Inc.,

reports stocks of tea and the New York Cocoa Exchange reports stocks of cocoa.

Because our concept of flow of animal products begins with the live

weight of animals slaughtered, as described in the foregoing section on the

production subindex, we paid no attention to inventories of livestock on

farms. But we did acco\int for changes in stocks of such products as meats

and eggs.

In general, we conclude that current data on inventories of raw farm

commodities are reasonably adequate for purposes of the index. But as farra

commodities move farther from the farm level the adequacy of reporting on

inventories diminishes. Data on stocks of products processed frcan agricultural commodities are much less satisfactory than those on stocks of raw

agricultural commodities. Information is lacking on stocks of minor dairy

products; cigarettes, cigars, and other manoxfactured tobacco products; ^eat
- Ii9 -

flour held by millersj textile products in the hands of millers and

converters; and i*iolesalers' stocks (outside of public warehouses) of

processed meats, poultry, fats, and oils* Nor do we have information on

supplies of commodities actually in transit.

It is possible that inventories of unreported processed items may

fluctuate much less than those reported* Otherwise, reporting systems would

probably Have been developed*

Stocks of most agricultural commodities are reported at inqportant

periods with relation to a crop or marketing year, but not always at the

beginning of the calendar year as needed for the index* In some instances

satisfactory estimates are easily derived. For example, a reasonably good

estimate of December 31 stocks of cotton linters can be derived by adding

production and inqports from August 1 to December 31 to stocks of cotton

linters on August 1, then subtracting mill consumption and exports from

August 1 to December 31*

For potatoes, more complete estimates of inventories than are reported

may be derived for the end of the calendar year by adjusting the merchantable

stocks of potatoes in the hands of growers and local dealers to take into

account potatoes held for seed and for farm home use*

The effects of these deficiencies of stock data are minimized in the

supply-utilization index by use of stock changes during the year* As stocks

of each commodity at the beginning and end of the year are comparable in

coverage and position, degree of change is considered to be generally

reliable* When no data on stocks are used, we are actually assuming no

change* Although a comprehensive measurement of stocks in all positions

for the years 192U to date is impossible owing to incomplete coverage and

changes in coverage, stock series used in compiling the index are considered

to be reasonably satisfactory indicators of changes taking place in holdings

throughout the economy.

Bjy Ownership.- Stocks may also be identified accoiding to ownership*

Data on changes in stocks shown on the sipply side of our tables include

changes in holdings of farmers (both free stocks and those under price

support loans), inventories held by marketing agencies and processors

wherever reported, and stocks owned by the Federal Government which had

been acquired under price^-suppoirt operations and under onergency programs* _20/

Such stocks were combined for piirposes of this index because they will move

into utilization channels in succeeding years*

In contrast, coimiiodities held hy the Department of Agriculture after

being purchased expressly for later shipment abroad for our allies and for

2^ Bnergency programs include the livestock slaughter program of 1933-36

and the hay and feed program of 1952*
. $0 .

relief purposes under special supply programs are not treated as a part of

the supply available for future use* Rather, they are regarded as having

already moved toward final utilization and are carried as part of the

Department of Agriculture account on the utilization side* (See chapter 2.)

Such stocks were used with reported Department of Agriculture deliveries for

export to derive data shown under the heading "Department of Agriculture net

purchases for export."

Stocks held by United States military agencies are not usually available

for resale into distribution channels* Therefore, such stocks are not

measured in the supply-utilization index except as a part of the military

account at the time they are removed from the market* For those instances

in which military holdings were channelled back into civilian distribution

or for TJNRRA, as in 19li5 and 19U6, they were transferred from the military

account to the stock accounts—either commercial or Department of Agriculture

supply program, depending upon their ultimate destination—and then moved

into distribution in the year of disappearance according to Government and

trade information*

Problems in Measuring Stocks for Analytical Purposes

Stocks are commonly measured in terms of weight, volume, and value.

Wei^t and volume are poor denominators for combining unlike comaodities for

economic analysis; they reflect differences in physical characteristics

rather than cost or relative desirability. Value data are much more useful,

but usually they include values of all commodities held at all levels in the

distribution system and contain a mixtxire of raw, semi-manufactured, and

finished products* Accordingly, they mix the values of farm resources

incorporated in farm commodities and the values of varying amounts of

marketing services added to the original farm values. These difficulties

were overcome in data on stocks prepared for the supply-utilization index by

combining commodities in terms of farm-valu<* eqiiivalents snd in constant

19U7-U9 dollars.

In addition to deciding how and where to measure stocks, there is a

real problem arising from timing of data* As pointed out earlier in this

section, we often had to work back to Januarj^ 1 from reports on stocks held

at the ends of a nxamber of different marketing years* Thus, we achieved a

further degree of comparability.

The question of ownership, whether Government or private, is not only

difficult to ascertain for some commodities held on certain dates, but it

also complicates the use of stock data for analytical purposes. Privatelyovmed stocks held as collateral for Government price support loans will oîtm

have a different effect on market prices from those not under loan, depending

upon the relationship between market price?: and the "loan level." Inventories

of commodities acquired by the Commodity Credit Corporation under its pricesupport and emergency programs probably have even less effect on current

prices.. These types of holdings are lumped together in the available stock

category on the supply side of o\xr tables.
-51 -

The considerable inqproveinent in reported coverage of stocks during the

last 30 years mentioned in the preceding section complicates the analysis of

changes in stocks of farm commodities through time. But in all our data we

achieved comparability in coverage of stocks at the end of each year with

those at its beginning. Therefore, it was possible to use changes in stocks

to work back ftora stocks held at the end of 19514, conq[>uting comparable stocks

year by year to the beginning of 1921;. These calculated stocks are shown in

table lli.

Uses of the Stock Subindexes

A variety of indexes show changes in stocks of farm commodities and

their products and of the relative contribution of stocks to the annual flow

of such commodities into utilization channels (tables 10 and 11). As our

primary interest is in the contribution of stocks to annual flow, let us

first consider briefly how these indexes indicate major developments in the

period 192U to 195U*

* Contribution of Stocks to Annual F],ow.- A remarkably constant rate of

utilization ftom year to year has been made possible largely by drawing upon

stocks in years of reduced production or of lower imports or accelerated

demand. Such contributions to the year's utilization are indicated by

positive percentages in the first three data columns of table 10. On the

other hand, when new supplies outrun effective demand, the building up of

stocks provides an outlet for the surplus flow of that year and reserves

supplies for future years. This explains the use of negatives in these

three columns.

From one point of view, stocks are a balancing factor, and they are

residual in character. Actually, as indicated earlier, utilization is the

calculated figure in our balance sheets of supply and distribution of farm

COTimodities, but this does not impede the use of the data.

These data show that during the last 30 years, changes in stocks of

all farm commodities and their products amount to more than 3 percent of

total utilization in 1 year out of 3« Note the substantial flow out of

stocks in the drought years 1933, 193li, and 1936, and in the war year 19U3*

Particularly heavy rebuilding of stocks in 1935, 1937, and 1938 followed

the years of drought* In 1931, 19U8, and 19^3, total supplies of all farm

commodities notably exceeded the current rate of domestic and foreign demand,

and stocks accumulated much more than usual.

Describing Ups and Downs in Stocks.- The major importance of changes in

stocks of commodities having food use in the total stock shift is indicated

by data in the first column of table 11. The magnitudes of the shifts frcra

year to year can be demonstrated by relating ending stocks for each year to

beginning stocks for that year, as in the last three coliimns of the same

table. These data highlight the major developments mentioned in the preceding paragraph. The stock accumulations in 1937 and 19li8 stand out. The

earlier year preceded a recession in the whole economy. The last quarter of

19ii8 marked the beginning of the 19h9 deflation.
• 52 -

Short crops and exceptional demand in some years have resiilted in some

rather sharp changes from year to year in January 1 stocks» The contribution

of major commodity groups to changes in total reported stocks is shovm in

table 12* We have also studied commodity contribution to total stocks held

at the beginning of each year, using our calculated total s • We found that

stocks of feed grains made up about 30 percent of calculated total stocks of

farm commodities except in 1935, 1937, and 19íi8. Stocks of cotton have

varied significantly, amounting to 9 percent of all holdings of farm commodities on January 1, 192U, 19^1, and 19^2 and as high as 20 percent at the

beginning of 1939« One of the major changes in stocks has been the doubling

of January 1 holdings of oilseeds and their products•

Comparison of Calculated Stocks, Calculated Total Supply, and Total

utilization>> Farm value equivalents of calculated total stocks, referred to

above and given in tables 13 and lU, can be added to the values of each yearns

domestic production and imports to obtain a reasonably satisfactory measure

of total supply of farm commodities available in each year» Data in these

tables provide new insights into the relative importance of our carryover of

farm commodities and their products on January 1 and the relationship

between total supply and total utilization in each year*

We note that stocks of all farm commodities at the beginning of 195Í4

were a little higher relative to the year's total utilization than their

previous records in 1939-U2, followed closely by 1932-3U« The relationship

between total available supply as calcul.ated and total utilization provides

still another measure which may be particularly useful for study of changes

in farm prices and farm income. But considerable caution in using these data

is necessary, as stocks vary in degree of availability—and, therefore, in

the extent to which they affect current prices—as will be pointed out in the

next section.

Composition of Available Stocks.- Data have been developed for postwar

years to breakdown available stocks into several significant categories i

for price analysis, described in the section on ownership of stocks. Stocks

owned by the Ccmmodity Credit Corporation ^rfiich were purchased under its

price-support program (or the small quantities purchased and held for special

distributicn programs) have less effect on current market prices for farm

commodities than quantities held by farmers as collateral for CCC loans or

unencumbered stockig in the hands of farmers, distributors, or processors.

This is one of the objectives of the price-support program* The CCC is

directed by law to dispose of its inventories without interference with-the

price-support objectives. Disposal has been made through programs such as

the special export programs, the National School Lunch Program, and direct

distribution to welfare agencies and needy people. Disposal was also made

through sale of products back to commercial channels when the market price

rose above the support level. Commodities held on January 1 by farmers under

price-support loans may be sold to the CCC in the following period, or loans

may be redeemed and quantities moved into commercial distribution.
- 53 -

The value aggregates given in table 1? are in terms of 19h7-l9 farm

prices and equivalents of farm commodities, as for all other data in this

handbook« Direct comparisons of the several categories of stocks may,

therefore, be made with other information, such as data on production and

utilization.

Data on reported stocks, calculated to yield coverage comparable to

that of January 1, 195U, will be useful in projecting year to year utilization* Their range provides an idea of the supplement to new supply which can

be made available in years of low production or emei^gency demand.

Limitations of the Stock Data

Some limitations of the usefulness of the subindexes on stocks have been

noted, as in the foregoing discussion of the relative availability of stocks»

In addition, it is necessary to remember that some stocks must always be

retained in distribution channels for operating purposes. Their precise

quantities are difficult to determine, but they must bear some relationship

to total flow. Although data in table 13 show that beginning reported stocks

in 19U6 and 19U7 amounted to around 3$ percent of total use in those years,

we know that there was considerable pressure of demand on available supplies.

Of course, the commodity makeup of available stocks is important, and the

degree of interchangeability is limited. Very large stocks of grains are not

directly usable to meet heavy demand for meat in a particular year (for price

reasons as well as the problem of increasing livestock numbers) although they

may lead to larger livestock output within 2 or 3 years, if they are not held

off the market by the Commodity Credit Corporation.

For rather obvious reasons, we have developed our stock data as of

January 1. The significance of this date in appraisal of the situation for

individual commodity groups varies widely. But analysis of individual commodities is beyond the province of this index of supply-utilization.

At several points in this section on stocks we have noted that data were

developed on a rather specialized basis—farm equivalent values in constant

I9I47-U9 prices. Therefore, they are not comparable with published inventory

data, such as those on CCG stocks, because those data often include market

values of processed items and accumulated costs of handling, transportation,

and storage.

Finally, changing coverage of reports on stocks necessitate careful

analysis when using the stock subindex.
- 5UTable 10.- Percentage contribution of available stoclcs of farm cooimoditles to annual

flow into utilization, all commodities, food and nonfood, 192if-5^ 1/

(Minus indicates addition to stocks .)

••

•• Changes in available stocks

Calenäar : As percentage of total utilization : Food : Nonfood

: of all farm commodities : commodities :

EIS percentage:

of their :

utilization :

conmodities

year

: All

. Cüomiodities : ^°°*^ : commodities .*

Nonfood [

coomodities '.

as percentage

of their

utilization

: Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent

192U i -0.9 2/ -0.9 2/ -5.2

1925 : .1 1.0 -.9 1.2 -5.1

1926 : -1.6 -.6 -1.0 -.8 -5.5

1927 : 1.2 2/ 1.2 2/ 6.3

1928 : --7 -1.2 .5 -1.5 2.7

1929

: ^

.5 -.5 .6 -3.2

1930 i -1.3 .3 -1.6 .1* -9.9

1931 : -í*.6 -2.3 -2.3 -2.8 -IU.3

1932 : -1.3 -1.7 .1* -2.1 2.1*

1933 • 3.1 2.8 .3 3.1* 2.0

193í^ : 6.1 5.0 1.1 5.9 7.1*

1935 : -3.8 -1*.2 .1* -5.2 2.3

1936 5.1* 1*.9 .5 5.9 2.6

1937 -9.2 -6.5 -2.7 -7.9 -15.3

1938 -1*.2 -2.3 -1.9 -2.7 -11.7

1939 : -.8 -.5 -.3 -.6 -1.8

19^*0 -2.9 -2.1 -.8 -2.5 -1*.9

I9ÍH : -2.1* -2.5 .1 -3.0 .3

191*2 : -1.8 -1.2 -.6 -1.1* -U.2

191*3 : _ ,^1 1 1*.2 3.3 .9 3.9 5.9 19W* : -.2 .1 -.3 .1 -2.6

191*5 : 1.7 1.1 .6 1.1* l*.l 19tó : 1.0 -.7 1.7 -.8 10.5

191*7 : 2.1 2.0 .1 2.3

-7.1

-1.7

.5

-5.5

-7.0

191*8 :

191*9 :

-6.8

-2.5

-5.9

-1.5

-.9

-1.0

1950 :" .1 -1.3 1.1* -1.6 9.0

-1.8 1951 : 2.6 2.8 -.2 3.1* 1952 : -2.6 -1.7 -.9 -2.0 -5.6

1953 :

1951* ¿/ :

-3.9

-3.0

-2.1*

-2.1

-1.5

-.9

-2.7

-2.1*

-10.1*

-6.1*

^ràiA'^^^.^J^^ ^"^^"^ holdings of fanners (free or under pricrSíS^OTT

C^l'c^^Sii"^ r^"'r ""* P-°^«"°r^ ^^ Btocks acq^S by tL Äity

dS?ä ?S?SS^? ^ ^"^""^ ^ ^°^^*^° suRplyVograJ. CovSS^viies

2/ IäSS than O.05 percent.

2/ Preliminary.
- 55 -

Table 11.- Changes in value of availal^le stocks as reported and calcul ated snding

stocI<s as percentage oi calculated béginninp; 3 .ock:3 for ail

coiiîiT^odities, b7 food an-^ nonfood p:roup'-', 192!.i-íh L/

(Minusí indicates addition to stoclcs .)

<! Calc\ilated ending stocks as5 percentage

bTJOcK cnanges ,! of calculated beginnirs stocks 2/

Calendar :

year : Food !; Nonfood : All farm : Food !: Nonfood

commodities i! commodities .! commodities ; commodities !! commodities

Million Million

dollars dollars Percent Percent Percent

1921» Îi 5 -266 103 100 107

1925 !! 295 -267 100 95 107

1926 ! -19*» -293 105 103 107

1927 ! 7 38I+ 96 100 91

1928 ! '31^ ll<8 102 106 96

1929 I 168 -177 100 97 105

1930 \ 9k -1*77 104 99 112

1931 I -716 -689 113 111 115

1932 ! -525 1?? 103 107 98

1933 ! 86if IQl* 92 89 98

1931» s l,í*5l 316 85 79 94

1935 ! -1,219 120 111 123 97

1936 ! 1,470 127 86 77 97

1937 : -1,966 -829 129 139 119

1938 : -708 -567 110 110 111

1939 : -167 -99 102 102 102

19l»0 ! -688 -267 107 109 105

19ÍH : -865 18 106 110 100

19'»2 : -Mf3 -2U7 104 105 104

19i»3 : 1,3^2 358 90 86 94

iSlkk : lu -152 101 100 102

19»v5 s 1*63 2l*5 95 95 96

19tó : -263 688 97 103 88

19^7 : 790 ^27 94 90 99

I9W : -2,280 -326 120 130 106

19»*9 ! -569 -klk 106 106 107

1950 ! -536 588 100 105 90

1951 : 1,180 -117 93 89 102

106 1952 { -681 ,-351 107 107

1953 : -956 -630 110 109 111

106

«iiTfnort

195Í» 3/ : -853 -378 107

^ ——-—r^rrri—I'S

108

i/ AvaixaDJ.e stocKs incxuae noxaings uo. xcumc*» y,^^^^ w. ^ p«»mr.^ñ+-v

loans), of marketing agencies and processors, and stocks acquired by *^^^^° °!^;^ie,

Credit Corporation under price support and domestic supply P^°S^^- ^°iff! that

during the period. Valued at 1947-49 farm prices. 2/ Coverage c°^P«^^^J^*° *^*

of Jan. 1, 1954, computed by vorkiiig backward vith annual changes xn stocKs.

3/ Rre¡yi¿flaJüU
- 56 -

Table 12.- Changes in available stocks as a percentage of ai?jiual change of all

farm conimcdities, by coinmodity groups, 192^-5U l/

(Minus indicates addition to stocks«)

Calendar

year

Crops

• Fruits

• and : Hay, ' Other •

Food vege- ' Oil I Sugar : Feed :: silage,;* Cotton ' Tobacco^ crops •

grains : tables '

crops !, crops :. grains : and 1

y ; ^ :

2/ ; 2/ I forage :

Total

crops

192k

1925

1926

1927

1923

1929

1.930

1931

1932

1933

193**

1935

1936

1937

1938

1939

19'tO

19IH

19U2

I9UÍÍ

I9U5

19U6

1947

19kS

39it9

1950

1951

1952

1953

195»* 1/

Pet.

15.3

539.3

-2U.5

-IU.6

-82.U

-im.i

-U0.6

-8.5

5.Í»

29.1

18.6

-.8

9.2

-12.7

-20.0

31.6

-26.0

-68.7

-47.0

42.5

8.2

U5.8

21.k

-22.8

-7.8

-15.3

-i»53.8

29.3

-U9.0

-30.8

-25.7

242. q

-11.3

-8.2

-13-2

877.8

-7.6

-4.1

-4.7

4.5

-.2

.6

1.8

-3.2

-4.8

3.4

.6

5.5

2.6

-,1

40.9

10.9

-38.5

4.9

-3.3

-7.6

3.8

9.5

-3.4

-1^.7

1.9

Pet.

-32.2

-21.4

-3.7

-12.3

11.5

6/

-15.4

.7

-2.2

-3.3

2.9

-7.2

4.4

-5.0

-1.0

-13.2

-11.7

-8.3

-30.3

-.8

114.5

3.4

19.5

-6.1

-8.9

-6.8

-207.7

4.2

-2.1

-3.2

2.4

Pet.

-4.2

-10.7

-2.5

-3.1

2.6

-500.0

4.2

1.5

-2.2

-5.0

-.1

3.4

.4

-.6

-2.9

1.1

-1.2

-3.0

10.9

1-2

31.8

-1.3

-.5

-7.1

1.8

-1.0

-75.0

2.4

.9

-.9

-1,0

Pet. Pet.

35.0

^ -39.6

1,744.4

76.0

-39.9

-143.1

77.1

67.8

-124.8

31.0

-56.0

-24.6

-66.9

-18.1

-27.6

-45.5

44.5

-211.8

22.5

-78.4

138.4

-71.2

-9.7

-298.1

52.4

-7.9

-14.3

-51.0

Pet.

-106.5

— -757.1

-60.9

85.7

42.7

1,200.0

— -102.3

-41.1

19.8

21.3

12.3

15.6

.9

-24.4

-28.1

20.7

-19.3

23.7

-8.9

-.8

-24.5

5.3

15.5

-10.2

24.6

1.8

2.8

-3.0

-150.0

-7.2

10.9

-2.1

-4.9

-3.5

13.2

-1.2

7.5

-60.0

55.4

168.5

3.2

-15.3

-46.4

1,423.1

i*.5

-32.7

-39.3

- 15.5

Pet.

5.4

-175.0

-1.0

15.9

20.7

-622.2

-19.3

-8.4

8.9

-8.7

5.2

5.9

-3.1

.1

-92.1

-13.5

3.3

3.3

10.4

-130.0

-5.6

-25.8

-9.2

-1.7

-1.5

-63.5

-11.1

-12.3

1.8

-10.7

Pet. Pet.

3.1 -115.3

-39.3

-.2

.8

-1.8

-22.2

-.3

-2.2

-.5

.6

.6

-.9

1.9

-1.0

.2

-6.8

-1.6

-3.9

35.7

-5.6

-46.4

-.3

7.7

2.8 I

-.2

-3.1

-117.3

2.3

1.9

.6

lf.9

-214.3

-104.1

99.0

-59.0

-122.2

-105.2

-102,0

-118.6

114.5

107.2

-118.2

105.5

-106.1

-100.5

-98,9

-85.0

-90.1

-95.9

104.8

-i>36.'»

120.5

98.8

106.1

-103.9

-94.2

55.8

86.3

-93.7

-92.9

-99.6

See footnotes at eiwJ of table.

* Continued
- 57 -

Table 12.~ Changes In available stocks as a percentage of annual change of all

farm commodities, by conmodlty groups, 192U-5lt 1/ - Continued

(Minus indicates addition to stocks.ll

Livestock

Calendar ; Value of

year

: Dairy ! Meat i

Poultry

and

eggs

1 Animal : Total

' change in

available

: products animals : fibers î

livestock

: 8/ :

stocks

: Pet. Pet. Fct. Pet. Pet. Mll.dol.

192I* 1 -1.9 14.9 1.9 15.3 -261

1925

1926

1927

1928

i -7.1

: 2.3

: -2.0

: -2.2

353.6

1.9

1.5

-35.2

-32.1

-.2

1.5

-3.5

314.3

3.9

1.0

-4o.5

28

-486

391

-227

-9 1929 : -177.8 188.9 11.1 22.2

1930 i 1.3 7.8 -3.9 -„ 5.2

-1,405 1931 : 1.6 .2 .2 .» 2.1

1932 : 1.5 10.1 7.2 —. 18.8 -4o4

1933 : -4.1 -9.1 -1.3 ... -14.6 968

193»* : 1.1 -8.1 -.2 — -7.2 1,767

1935 : 1.2 16.9 .2 ••.. 18.2 -1,100 1936 : -1.8 -3.8 -.9 1.0 -5.6 1^598

1937 : .5 6.4 -.1 -.8 6.1 -2,795

-1,276

-266

1938 : -2.6 .1 1.6 1.4 .5

1939 s 11.7 -10.2 -7.1 4.5 -1.5

19'»0 't -.6 -12.1 -1.5 -.5 -14.9 -955 19^*1 ! -íf.5 8.9 -.1 -14.2 -9.9

yyy

19'*2 ! 7.7 4.1 1.4 -17.2 -4.1 -690

19^3 ! -.k -2.1 -.8 -1.6 -4.8 1.700

19*»^ ! 1.8 89.1 13.6 31.8 136.4 -no

19'^5 ! 1.6 -6.5 -9.5 -6.1 -20.5 • 708

19*^6 ¡! -6.6 15.7 1.2 -9.9 1.2 426

19^7 ! .7 -13.0 -2.3 9.5 -6.1 817 lSit8 ! -l.k 1.0 2.7 1.7 3.9 -2,606

191*9 ! -8.1 2.4 -9.3 9.4 -5.8 -983

1950 1 13.5 13.5 -73.1 90.4 44.2 52

1951 Î 6.4 -4.6 9.2 2.6 13.7 1,063

1952 : -4.9 -2.4 3.5 -2.4 -6.3 -1,032

1953 , : -12.4 5.5 .7 -1.2 -7.1 -1,586

193k 2/ : 2.4 -1.9 -1.0 -.1 -.4 -1,231

iûg agencies and processors^ and stocks acquired by the Commodity Credit Corporation under price

support and domestic supply programs. Coverage varies during the period.

y Ftiiits^ vegetables, potatoes, sveetpotatoes, dry beans and peas, and tree nuts.

^ Babassu kernels, castor beans, copra, cottonseed, flaxseed, palm kernels, palm oil (fruit

equivalent), peanuts, olive oil (olive equivalent), rapeseed, sesame seed, soybeans, and tung

ÛUtB.

it/ Cotton lint only.

|/^®J<5oa, coffee, tea, field crop and vegetable seeds, hops, and mustard seed.

M Less than 0*05 percent.

V ftlliminary.

ä( llllyiides hone honey in addition to commodities listed.
-58 -

Tatle 13- Farm value of calculated avaiO^bleJ«^! stocks and

calculated total supply of fann conmodltles, 1924-5*

Calendar

year

Mll.dol.

192lf

1925

1926

1927

1928

1929

1930

1931

1932

1933

193í^

1935

1936

1937

1938

1939

19'*0

19IH

lSik2

19í^3

19W>

19»^5

19tó

î^

I9»fr9

1950

1951

1952

1953

Calculated available

January 1 stoclss 1/

Value

2/

9,955

10,216

10,188

lO,67l^

10,28if

10,510

10,519

10,903

12,308

12,712

ll,7W*

9,977

11,077

9A79

12,27U

13,550

13,816

11^,771

15,618

16,308

lif,6o8

11^,718

ll^,Oll

13,585

12,768

15,371^

16,357

16,305

15,2tó

16,27»*

17x860

Index,

19U7-U9»100

Percentage

of

utilization

Calcvilated total

svtpply 2/

Valvie

2/

Percent Mil.dol.

72

73

73

77

Ih

76

76

78

88

91

81*

72

80

68

88

97

99

106

112

117

105

106

101

98

92

111

118

117

no

117

128

33

33

33

31*

33

31*

35

36

1*0

1*2

1*1

35

37

31

1*0

1*2

1*2

1*3

1*2

1*0

36

37

33

39

1*1

39

37

1*0

i*3

1*0,01*2

1*0,860

1*1,197

1*1,866

1*1,71*8

1*1,866

1*1,051*

1*2,588

1*3,357

1*2,320

38,859

39,791*

39,509

1*2,575

1*1*, 31*9

1*6,087

1*7,780

50,1*12

53,737

55,275

55,1*82

5l*,29l*

53,917

52,1*91

53,521

55,338

56,310

56,599

57,118

58,81*3

60,258

Index,

19l;7-lf^l00

Percentage

of

utilization

71*

76

77

78

78

78

76

79

81

79

72

71*

73

79

82

86

89

91*

100

103

103

101

100

98

100

103

105

105

106

109

112

Percent

13I*

133

135

133

13I*

13I*

136

11*1

11*1

138

135

139

132

11*1

11*1*

ll*3

ll*5

11*5

11*1*

136

136

135

13I*

132

ll*0

ll*2

ll*l

137

ll*0

11*1*

11*6

1/ Available stocks include holdings of fanners (free or under price sxipport

loans), of marketing agencies and processors, and stocks acquired by the Commodity

Credit Corporation under price support and domestic supply programs. Coverage conpairable to that of January 1, I95I*, computed by working backirard with azmual changes

in stocks. 2/ Valued at 191*7-1*9 farm prices. 2/ Calculated January 1 stocks plus

production plus imports, k/ Preliminary.
- 59 -

-P

•O

a

1.

u

« o

•s'S

^í 8

â§

11

O O

o

^^

I

5

I

a

•o

«I

4»

í

O

u

C^ O

H -H

•H 43

•P OS

0) (!f\

"I

I

os >

>51

0)

es 4 I d

0) d -H -p

ü 3 -P (d

(U o

Q) (!f\

I

I

ä

-3a

¡1^

u

ä

HHHHHMMHCVI H H H CM CVI CVI OÍ ÏQ H íá H í^í rí SS^sSww

>^ CO ro t- O en.

t^ CO Ö 00 coco CO 00 Ô5 CO t-COCO ONONONO OOOOöOONO O O O O O 3

HHHHHHH H H i=í H r=í ÍH H

CAmt-o mirvmoH H o\t^ mvo \o CM vo os m iH o a\oo H ^ oo o\^ H irîco

=0 oícîgo^oí0^33 3000^(^:3 3 ^-^^^j^^cij^of cj^^'^^^-^j^^

H mœ m m o ^ j* m

r^ H ri HrHr-{r-it-\Ht-ir-\ H

.^ S^ t" "Ö! iO Ç^ l^^ t-- LPV O t- IfN CVJ

vo t- S-co ^- ^- t-co b\ ON o\co co 00 ^^â^^S^^a^^s^^ss^

UNCO^H^OCO o ifNCVI o 0\vo ifN-d- CVICO 0\H H-:* O CVJ 0\CVI CM ir\ ON^ iKcb \r\

t^ CO-d" -*-:t rO-:Î- -4" IfN l/N-d" -4" -:* -4" ITN ITN ITNVO VÛVÛVÛVO LTNirNlfNlfM/MTM/N ITWO

VO -d- if\ irwo irv irvco Ot^ÇVlcOOcOOONHCVIH if\-^ m UN CM O H mcO O CVJ ir\

^ -d- -sh m t^VO if\ r- 0\V0 HHHifNQOJVOH

t-i-t—r-t-t^t^t^c^t-t^t^t^ t^oo CO co ON

cQ cvi m o Q qo g\ m UN U\VD O CVI

- • -• ^ o H CSVO t- H UN-

_ UNCO H -=i- ON H Ôl

t-mcvi t-uNH CM c^ KS^'.

) -* CM t- O m^^ m ONvo H

> o o ON mvp 0\ UN^ o ir\

* m H CM o -* m UN o\ m-dHHHHCMCMHCMmCM ONOOH m^ VOCOHmmCMCMHCM cnj± -d- J- vo tmmmmcnmcncommcM mmmfnmmm-d'^-*-*-*-5i--d--*-3-3-3--d--=iVO UN-* UN-it Vû vo UNCO o f- mvo o ^r ON ON o o CJN-d UN-d- UNmOHHCOOCM CMCXiCMCMCMCMCMCMCMmCMCMCMCMCM CMCMmmCMCMCMCMCMCMmmmCMmm

UN UN H m mco vo uNmONONCMvo ONCM

t-1*-1^ t-1^ t-1^ t^co CO t^vo C^ S^SS^8^^3^§§*S;S^^^3^S '^

mcQ mt^o-d-vQ mON-d: o 2>ONOO UN moco oovp-í 5? Q Oí CM CM H t-trcD^

t-vö t-vo Vû mvS r-co HuNONH-^HcMCht^^çoa-o^OH ONVO c^ H ^ u\

m m o CM CM vo -d" m o vo t- CM UN O O t^co uN-d-co UNUNO muNt^ mco t— m m

VOVOVOVOVOVOVOVO t-t*-VO UNVO UNt^t^ h-OO ONONCO GOCOOO ^ONpQONOH

-d" UNVO t*-co 0\ CXI CM CM CM CM CM

ON ON ON ON ON ON ONONONONONONCJNC3NON ONON*^ ON'^'ON'^ ON ON cK*^

^1

O H CM m-dHr-tHHHr^r^riHt-ïr-iHHHHt^ri

V,, w» w, wi w. w. w, ^. ON ON <

H HH ri H HHr-lH

-d- UN

C3N H

I'

O

1^

«H

n o

to

O tí

CO Ä

m 4^

o

ü O

S^

1|

(ü i^

•H 8

0) 05 il•H O

+> O

^ k

O -H

Si

p< s

Il.

(D O

<U O +>

Q) 1-1 U

^1

10

+>

u

O

¿^3

(Q Q> co III

<H O O

CO o g

TH O . •

Pf

§

""al

d 4^ 5 «n ^

••^ '«^ ^ ^ c*» >a (o ON ^

«"äs*'

4) ^1 W 4á g 4Í

H 4J ^

'S >» S-O H P ,0

•rl

OS 43

<: s -P > ü Ä

HI D« a'cvTimm

os o
- 60 -

Table 1^.- Farm vaille of available stocks of all taxm commodities;

by types, January 1, 19^7-5^ 1/

Total

available ;

stocks as ]

calculated ',

^ ;

: Held by CGC

for price

: support or ;

domestic

s\iRply

Drofcrsms

Under

loan

for

price

support

Unencimbered farm and

ccnmercial stocks 3/

Date

Value

; As percent-

;age of total

available

stocks

: Million Million Million Million

dollars dollars dollars do].Iars Percent

January 1

19kl . 13,585 Ul8 182 12,985 96

19U8 12,768 265 330 12,173 95

19i^9 15,37»* 261^ 1,295 13,815 90

1950 16,357 1,525 1,875 12,957 79

1951 : 16,305 1,824 981 13,500 ÎI

1952 : 15,2U2 1,151 752 13,339 86

1953 , 16,27»* 1,065 1,3»H 13,868 Ö5

195»* y !- 17,860 2,143 2,912 12,805 72

1/ Available stocks include holdings of farmers (free or under price support

loans), of marketing agencies and processors, and stocks acquired by the Commodity Credit Corpoiration under price suppozi; and domestic supply programs.

Valued at lSh^-k$ farm prices. 2/ Coverage comparable to that of January 1,

1954; coocputed ly^ working backward with annual changes in stocks. ^ Residual.

4/ Preliminary.
.. 61 •

CHAPTER h. MEASURIW3 FLOWS INTO UTILIZATION

The flow or disappearance of farm commodities and their products into

specified channels in each year makes up the utilization side of the master

index of supply-utilization. This chapter contains a section on each of the

channels toward final use. The channels are identified as civilian food use,

military takings of food comjnodities, domestic nonfood use, commercial exports and shipments, and United States Department of Agriculture purchases

for export. The concluding section provides a brief exT:)lanation of how we

handle the three phases of the Department's export operations, that is,

purchases, deliveries, and stocks* Subindexes of the master index measure

the proportion of the total ilov of farm commodities going into each of

these charinels (table 16) each year, as well as the changes in each stream.

The net flow of commodities during a given year from production or

iinpoi*ts into st-ocks available for use in succeeding years is taken into

account on the supply side of the master indexj it is not considered to be a

foriii of use* When stocks are so reduced that total utilization exceeds the

year's "new supply" from domestic fana production and imports, the use of

corranodities carried over from preceding years is counted as they flow into

the specified channels toward final utilization. The exception tc this

handling is the temporary accuirulation of stocks by the Department of

Agriculture to meet its foreign supply programs» In this case, we count

commodities as "used" in the year that the Department withdraws them from

commercial channels, because only rarely have they been turned back for

future use into another channel or category. They ordinarily are shipped

out soon after the beginning of the folloid.ng year. But the Department's

holdir^s of commodities bought under its price-support programs and special

domestic programs are kept with far-m and commercial stocks on the supply side

of the index until they move into one of the channels for domestic or foreign

use, as described in the preceding chapter.

Our meanir^g of utilization, it can now be seen, involves the concept

of gross flow. That is to say, grains and other farm commodities used for

feed and seed are coimted at the time of such use, and, in effect, they get

counted again when livestock and future crops to which they contributed are

used. But we shall show how these inputs back into agriculture can be subtracted from both domestic nonfood use and total utilization just as they

were subtracted from gross production, as shown in chapter 3> to obtain a

"net" measure.

The flow of products processed from farm commodities is measured in

the year of disappearance into the identified channels for use, in so far as

possible, rather than in the year of processing. Here, the lack of information on stocks of processed products results in some slippage between years.

One of the popular devices for studjring data on utilization is the

computation of per capita series. After some consideration, we decided not

to develop a per capita index of total utilization of farm commodities on
. 62 -

Table 16.- Index of total utilization of all farm comraodities and relative

importance of specified channels of utilization, 1924-5U

: Index

: of

: total

y •

Relative importance in total utilization

Calendar ' Civilian]

! ^oo<=i !

;Military

' takings

' for

: Domestic nonfood

! use 1/

; Commercial:

• exports :

ÜSDA

net

purchases year : utill- i ; Feed ; other ; and :

: zation, ;

use ' food ; and ' nonfood j

; shipments : for

.19U7-U9=100! use î' seed use '

to :

Territories: export

Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent

1921* : 77 52.7 —

30.7 7.1* 9.2 —

1925 ! 79 51.8 »•••> 31.7 8.0 8.5 - ^

1926 : 78 53.1 —

29.9 8.2 8.8 ...

1927 : 81 51.0 31.5 8.k 9.1 ...

1928 : 80 51.9 •„ 31.1* 8.1 8.6 ...

1929 : 80 52.7 30.9 8.5 7.9

1930 ! 77 55.0 ._« 30.U 7.5 7.1 ...

1931 : 78 55.3 30.6 7.1* 6.5 0.2

1932 ! 79 53.7 32.7 6.5 7.0 .1

1933 I 78 5k.h ..- 31.1* 7.9 6.3 ...

1931* : 71* 58.8 27.6 8.2 5.1* —

1935 !1 71* 57.0 .«>«. 29.2 8.8 5.0

1936 !: 77 56.7 29.0 9.8 l*.5 ...

1937 !: 78 57.2 — 27.8 9.9 5.1 >« *•

1938 !! 79 55.8 30.0 8.3 5.9 ...

1939 !! 83 55.8 30.2 9.2 l*.8

191*0 i 85 56.5 —«>. 30.U 9.5 3.6

191*1 : 89 54.3 1.0 29.8 11.2 2.1 1.6

191*2 J 96 50.0 3.1* 30.3 11.1 1.2 1*.0

191*3 Î lOl* 1*6.5 5.2 31.9 10.2 1.1 5.1 191*1* :

n «Ikl mm 105 1*7.8 7.7 28.9 10.1 1.6 3.9 191*5 Î 103 1*9.0 7.2 28.U 9.9 2.7 2.8

191*6 i

191*7 Î

191*8 :

191*9 :

loi* 53.3 1.9 27.7 9.9 3.8 3.1* 102 5i*.7 .2.0 26.1* 9.5 5*0 2.1* 98 55.6 2.1* 26.1 10.2 1.3

1.3

100 55.0 2.3 27.1 8.8 5.5

1950 ;

1951 :

1952 :

1953 :

1951*2/ :

103

106

105

105

106

5l*.8

53.1

55.8

57.3

58.^^

1.2

2.3

1.7

1.6

1.3

27.0

26.8

26.7

25.9

25.1

10.2

9.5

8.9

9.0

8.4

5.7

6.7

6.k

1.1

1.7

.2

.1*

.1*

1/ Includes military takings.

2/ Preliminary. ^
-63 -

Table 17.- Indexes of domestic use of all farm coamnodities,

civilian food use, and net domestic nonfood use, 1924-5^

(191^7.49=100)

:

• Domestic lise of all '. Civilian !, Net domestic nonfood

•

farm conmoditles l/ , food use [ use 1/2/

Calendar .

year j : Per ! Per : Per

Total ; capita I Total !! capita ! Total : capita

192U !i 75 96 73 93 59 76

1925 !1 77 98 71* 93 66 Ok

1926 ;! 77 96 76 93 68 81»

192T : 79 97 75 91 71 88

1928 ! 79 95 76 91 68 82

1929 '1 79 95 77 92 72 86

1930 : 77 92 77 91 62 73

1931 : 78 92 78 91 61 72

1932 : 78 92 77 89 5»* 63

1933 : 79 92 77 89 65 76

1931» : 75 87 79 91 6U 71*

1935 : 75 86 76 87 68 78

1936 : 79 90 79 90 80 91

1937 : 79 90 81 91 81 92

1938 : 80 90 80 89 69 78

1939 : 8U 95 m 93 80 90

191*0 i 87 97 87 95 6k 93

19'H : 92 101 88 97 106 U6

19»»2 98 106 87 96 112 122

19^3 : 105 112 88 99 112 120

19M» 106 112 91 102 111 117

19>»5 : 105 110 92 103 107 112

191*6 103 107 100 105 108 112

19»*7 : 101 103 101 103 102 lOl»

19tô 99 99 99 99 105 105

1^9 : 100 98 100 98 92 91

1950 : 103 99 102 99 no 106

1951 : 10»» 99 102 98 105 100

1952 : 101» 97 106 100 99 92

1953 : 106 97 109 102 100 92

1951* 2/ : 105 95 112 102 93 81»

1/ Includes military teikings*

2/ Excludes feed and seed use,

3/ ^^EÜSáEST^LL
-6UTable l8.- Average farm value of farm commodities used in 19^7-^9 and relative

in^rtance of individual commodities in selected periods

: Average

: farm

: value of i

' Relative isiportance in toteJ. utilization

!

Commodity : quantities; ! 195»*

: used in i 1947-49 j 1925-29 !Î 1935-39 .! 1942-45 i¡ pre-

: i9lf7_U9 ¡

: 1/ : ! 1

liminary

: Million

Crops : dollars Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent

Beverages

Cocoa : 202 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.6

Coffee : 810 2.1 1.4 1.8 1.7 1.8

Tea : kg .1 .2 .2 .1 .2

Total : 1,061 2.7 2.0 2.¿ 2.4 2.5

Cotton lint : 1,825 '^.7 7.3 5.8 4.4 4.6

Food grains

Buckwheat : 9 2/ .1 ^

2/ 2/

Rice : 178 .5 .3 .4 .4 .6

Rye : ^5 .1 .2 .3 .2 .1

Wheat

Total : 2,6è5

6.2

é.8 6.0

?.l

5.Ô Ó.5

^.3

5.0

Feed grains

Barley : 385 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.3 1.0

Com : 4,li66 11.5 13.1 10.7 11.9 10.6

Grain sorghums : 139 .4 .3 .3 .4 .3

Oats ¡^^ 2.8 3.2 2.7 2.6

Total 15.6 17.7 14.7 16.3 Ih.l

Fruits and tree nuts

Bananas ! 191 •5 .6 .6 .2 .5

Other fruits 1,057 2.7 2.3 2.8 2.5 2.6

Tree nuts ! 11*0 .4 .3 .4 •3

2.9

.4

Total Î1 1,388 3.Ó 3.1 3.7 3.1*

Hay^ silage, and forage

Hay ;• 2,242 5.8 6.2 6.2 6.0 5.6

Sorghtmis for silage : 30 .1 2/ .1 .1 .1

Sorghums for forage : 91 .2 .3 .5 .4 .2

Velvet beans :

Total : 2,5?! é.l

.1

¿.7"

.1

Ó.9

.1

é.é 6.0

Oil crops :

Babassu kernels : 5 2/ 2/

2/

.3

2/

.1 Castor beans : 2k .1 W .1

Copra : 12k .3 .3 .1 .2

Cottonseed : 3k3 .9 1.4 1.2 .8 1.1 Flaxseed :

Olive oiJ, olive basis :

184

Ik 0

.7

.2

.5

,2

.7

2/

.1

.7

.1

Palm kernels : 3 il .1 .1 2/ Palm oil, fruit basis : 17 il .2 .3

.5

2/

.1

3.7

9/ Peanuts :

Rapeseed :

Soybeans •

Simflover seed :

Tung nuts :

225

2

539

1

2?

.6

ä

2/

.1

3-9

0

.1

2/

.1

3.3

.5

2/

1.1

^//

2/

ri

2/

1.7

2/

1

Total l,50i»

Sugar crops . 3.V 4.4

Maple sirup .

Maple sugar .

Sorgo sinxp .

10

5

17 2/ 2/

.1

1.6

2/ 2/

Sugarcane and sugar beets : 2/ 5k2

18

i% .1 .1

Sugarcane sirup

..2/

1.5

1.6 1.2 ^•5 Total ! 592

.1

1.8

.1

1.Ô- -Ä- B l.é

aee rootnotes at end of table. Continued -
-65-

Table l8.- Average faim value of farm commodities used in 19^^-7-^9 and relative

iinportance of individual commodities in selected periods - Continued

Average

farm

value of •

Relative importance in total utilization

Commodity > quantities 1954

used in : 191+7-1^9 : 1925-29 ! 1935-39 : 1942-45 pre1947^^9 liminary

1/

Million

dollars Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Crops, continued

Tobacco : 926 2.k 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.3

Vegetables and other

food crops :

Beans^ dry 130 .3 .3 .k .4 .4

Cowpeas for peas Ik ^

Mustard seed

.1 .1 .1 H

Peas, dry

2

2k

2/

.1

2/

2/ 2/

2/

.1

Popcorn ! 8 2/ 1/ ^

2/ 2/

Potatoes ! 625 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.5 1.3

Sesame seed 2 2/ 2/ 2/ ^1 2/

Sweetpotatoes : 102 .3 .k .5 .4 .2

Other vegetables : 1,T65 k.5 k.2 k.S 4.5 4.6

Total : 2,672 6.9 6.7 7.6 7.0 6.5

Other nonfood crops

Broomcom

Field crop seeds : 1584/ 2/

.k

2/

.2

2/

.3

2/

.3 H.4

Hops : 31 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1

Vegetable seeds : 21 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1

Total : 200 .5 .3 .5 .5 .5

Total crops ! 21,287 ^.1 57.1 55.2 53.4 51.5

Livestock

Animal fibers

Mohair

Wool, shorn

:

: 501^

9

1.3

2/

1.0

2/

1.0

2/

1.2

2/ %.8

Total : 513 1.3 1.0 1.0 1.3 .8

Dairy products ; k,8^ 12.5 I3.U Ik.7 12.7 12.6

Honçy i 39 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1

Meat animals

Cattle and calves : i^,332 11.1 9.3 10.6 10.6 13.5

Hogs : 3,899 10.0 lO.U 9.3 11.5 9.2

0

Sheep and lambs •9 1.0 1.3 1-3 .8

Total : 0,500 22.0 20.7 21.1 23.3 23.5

Poultry and eggs

3.8 Chickens : 1,099 2.8 2.3 2.3 3.0

Eggs : 2,322 6.0 5.1 5.1 5.8 6.7

Turkeys : 257 .7 •3 •5 .6 1.0

Total : 3,6ÍO 9^k 7.7 7.9 9.3 11-5

Total livestock ; 17,661f k5.3 42.9 1*4.8 46.6 U8,5

Total all farm

CGonnodities ': 38,951 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

2/ I^BB than 0.0^ percent.

a/i|^|;*han 500,000 dollars.
- 66 -

account of the .hanging significance of e^^^^^^ ^^''l^^.lT^sZl^e'

population figure. But ve ^^^^/^^l^P^^i^^t^'foL Se a^d domestic nonof aU farm commodities, as veil as ^«^^/Jr^^^ '"^ takings of both food

food use (table 17 , even though some of the ^l^*«^ !!d for relief distriand nonfood commodities were for use of allied troops ^^/°J. f ¿¿^[¿J^^^Jj

bution to civilians in occupied and ll^^^^^\i:^lli.^f^^^^^^

of mUitary stocks in years such as those in the periods 19ai-W and ly^u •?!.

slightly distorts per capita rates for those years.

These factors lead to a slight overstate«ient of the P^^ c^Pita ra^s of

domestic use of all commodities and of domestic nonfood use J^^^^e years

,Ä.en such procurement was relatively large. But as data on food commodities

show, even^n peak war years military takings "«^^f^^'í^^íf f°%^^^ \. Í3

minor proportion of total utilisation of such commodities an any year. It is

Skely that military takings for use of our allies or ci.-ilian relief exceeded 1 or 2 percent of total utilization of these broad categories of farm

commodities in any year.

As on the supply side of the master index, the quantities of all farm

commodities and their products used in each year are aggregated in terms of

equivalent farm values in constant 19l47-l;9 dollars.

The major contribution which the subindexes measuring the flow of farm

commodities into utilization in each year will make to the analysis of

problems in agricultural economics may be their usefulness for comparisons

of rates of flow—among channels, through time, and with rates of flow from

sources of supply. We shall touch upon such uses in the description of each

subindex.

In table 16 jrou will note that domestic food use requires a larger

proportion of total flow of farm conrnoditiea now than 30 years ago. Feed use

is down some by reason of the great reducticj. in numbers of horses and mules.

Since 1929, eatports and shipments have been less important as a channel of

utilization for farm commodities than they uere in the twenties. This table

also highlights wartime shifts in use.

This index of supply-utilization provides a useful measure of -tiie changes

in significance of commodity groups in total utilization of all fann commodities. Table 18 shows the shift in emphasis trcm crops to livestock, and

the increases in coffee, wheat, soybeans, poultry and eggs, and cattle and

calves. It points up the decreased importance of cotton, com, and milk.

CIVILIAN FOOD USE OF FARM COMMODITIES 21/

Consumption of farm coimiodities for food by the civilian population of

the Tinited States accounts for the major part of their use. About $7 percent

21/ Prepared by Thomas J. Lanahan, Jr., and Helen M. Eklund.
.67-

of the total utilization of all farm commodities in 1952-5U and 6? percent of

only those commodities having food use moved into channels for civilian food

consumption. A few food items, such as wild game, fishery products, and

rabbits, are excluded from this subindex of the supply-utilization index, for

we do not consider them to be farm commodities« Details on commodity coverage are given in chapter 2.

This Measure of Civilian Food Use

As the derivation and limitations of basic data on civilian food consumption are described at length in Agriculture Handbook No* 62, only a few

notes on procedure are necessary here. In the absence of direct reporting of

civilian food use, we had to estimate apparent civilian consumption of most

foods as a residual, subtracting reported use for e^orts and shipments,

nonfood use, and military takings, and ending stocks from the total supply

available for the year (that is, production plus imports plus beginning

stocks).

Apparent civilian food use or, more precisely, disappearance into

civilian distribution channels, is not necessarily the same as actual food

consumption. By reason of the procedure followed in estimating such use,

some quantities considered as used in a given year could actually be additions to unreported stocks of products held by food processors, retail

outlets, or consumers. From year to year these are not likely to be of

imxch consequence, except in times when processors or users of commodities

esqpect supplies or prices to change markedly.

Because of the residual method of their derivation, the figures on

civilian food use could be subject to an accumulation of errors resulting

from inadequate data in supplies or any other category of utilization. This

is more likely to be a serious problem for individual items of food than for

commodity groups, usually, errors in estimates are counterbalancing,

therefore they have relatively little effect on the civilian v.se aggregates

for groups of commodities.

Quantities of individual farm ccanmodities and their products moving

into civilian food use in each year are combined in terms of farm commodities

valued at 19U7-U9 farm prices, as in other segments of the master index.

Farm values of processed foods were determined, in accordance with the general procedure already described, by dividing the value of each farm ccmwodity among its joint products according to the shares their processed

values had to the total processed value of all joint products. Accordingly,

the subindex of the master index properly described as the index of civilian

food use of farm commodities measures the amount of fann resources utilized

each year as food by our civilian population (table 19). It is affected by

shifts in the pattern of consumption from lower farm-priced to higher farmpriced commodities, as from wheat and potatoes to meat and broccoli. But it

is not affected by shifts to food products incorporating additional marketing

services, as to canned Spanish rice from milled rice, or piurchased cakes

instead of flour.
- 68 -

Per capita indexes of civilian food use of groups of farm commodities

were computed from totals, using estimates of the population eating out of

civilian supplies (table 20). 22/

Value aggregates for major commodity groupings of civilian food use

for 192U through 195U are given in the appendix. Our purpose here was to

group these basic data in so far as possible to peiwit analysis from both

the production (or supply) and the utilization (<or demand) side. But minor

differences remain.

Comparison with Other Concepts and Measures

of Food Consumption

The index of civilian food use is only one of several measures of the

flow of food into domestic civilian consumption that have been developed.

Vlhereas it measures consumption in terms of farm commodities and fixed farm

prices, other measures gauge rates of consunqjtion at retail or in family

households. These are in terms of physical weights of food at retail,

constant dollar values derived by multiplying changing quantities by fixed

prices, or in current dollars at several stages in the marketing system. 23/

Another indicator is nutritive value of the per capita food supply.

The index of civilian per capita food consumption 2U/ and the series on

aggregate retail weight of food consumed 25/ make use of the same basic data

as those used for the civilian food use subindex of the master supplyutilization index, plus data on nonfarm foods such as fish and game. Whereas

both take into consideration changes in farm commodities as they move from

farm to retail, the index of civilian food use of farm commodities does not.

The index of civilian per capita food consumption is constructed with

changing retail weights of individual foods and fixed retail prices; it

reflects shifts in those types of marketing services procured with food in

retail food stores as well as the adjustment from faim weights to retail

weights. The retail poundage series does not take relative costs or relative consumer pref^ences into consideration, so it is quite inadequate for

economic analysis»

Table 21 shows a cooç)arison of these two measures of per capita food

consunçtion, and of others, with the per capita index of civilian food use of

farm commodities. The two indexes measured in constant prices—one at the

farm level, the other at retail—have moved closely together. This seems to

indicate that base-period price relationships for many farm commodities at

22/ Agriculture Handbook No. 62, table 53, p. 190.

Aeicu??urS!^LnS;fr''p*' C., "Problems in the Analysis of Food Consumption,«

^^ST^^Sbi^^^^TT^I^L ^°^- ^' ^^' ^' ^^^^ 195U, pp. 10-19.

1/ Ibid!l p! lUU ^*^' ^" Agriculture Handbook No. 62, pp. 132-1^9.
. 69 •

retail 'U'ere similar to those at the farm level, particularly for livestock

products* Another inference is that the effects of the shift to processed

commodities, which is measured by the index of civilian per capita food

consumption but not by the index of civilian food use, seem to be partially

offsetting• For many foods, increased processing results in higher priced

food; but for others, because of lower transportation and handlir^ costs,

the result is lower priced food, for example, frozen orange juice*

Two measures of food consumption in terms of ciirrent dollar value near

the stage of consumer purchase are widely used for particular purposes. One

of these, published by the Agricultural Marketing Service, 26/ is the series

on retail cost of domestically produced farm-food products sold by farmers

and bought by civilian consumers. It is a byproduct of the work on marketing

margins* As published it covers only farm foods sold. Thus it excludes farm

food commodities consumed on farms where produced, imported and nonfarm foods,

and marketing services other than those from farm to retail. Food expenditure data published by the Department of Commerce come close to the market

value concept, with several minor exceptions. 27/

Both of these measures reflect changes in marketing services, changes

in market prices, and changes in form of farm commodities used for food, as

well as other factors. In contrast, the index of civilian food use considered here is concerned with measuring the quantity of farm commodities

moving to civilians for food in terms of constant farm prices*

Another approach to the measurement of food consumption is the use of

survey methods, in i*iich housewives are asked how much of each food their

families consumed in the preceding week. Such surveys as yet cover only

housekeeping families. Except for the panel surveys, they do not provide

information on changes in food use through time. But they are valuable

sources of information on consumption rates of various population groups

at particular points in time.

The choice of the measure of food consumption best adapted to use for

each problem to be studied depends on what aspects of consumption are to be

26/ Ibid., pp. 173-175, and current issues of The Marketing and Transportation Situation.

27/~See Ü. S. Department of Commerce, Office of Business Economics,

"National Income, 195¿ Edition," supplement to Survey of Current Business

and current issues of the Survey of Current Business.
- 70 -

evaluated. In problems concerned with use of farm resources the index of

civilian food use of farm commodities, either total or per capita, is

recommended. If a fixed amount of marketing services, as well as farm

resources, is to be considered, the index of civilian per capita food consiimotion should be used. If price changes, as well as changes in quantities,

have a bearing on the problem, a current dollar value series is called for.

The choice between the unadjusted series on retail cost of farm foods and the

Deoartment of Commerce food expenditure series depends uoon the nature of the

problem. If it has to do with all foods and all marketing servjxjes, use a

food exoenditure series» If it is concerned with farm produced foods as sold

at retail, the AMS retail cost series is «le correct choice.

Uses and Limitations of the Subindex

on Civilian Food Use

One of the most important uses of the index of civilian food use probably is the indication of the relative significance of domestic civilian

demand for food compared with other channels or demands to which our farm

commodities flow. Over the period for which these data are available

civilian food use has ranged from a low of about Ii6-U9 percent of the total

utilization of agricultural products in the middle 19iiO's to the high of

about 57-59 percent in the middle 1930's and in recent years (table 16).

In the forties, our greatly enlarged military forces and foreign aid programs made large demands upon the available supply of agricultural products,

leaving a smaller proportion available for civilian food use. The two peaks

in relative importance of our civilian food use resulted from either the

decline in our commercial exports of agricultural products while total utilization decreased—as in the middle 1930's—or domestic nonfood uses and

military requirements decreased in importance—as in recent years~while the"

grand total was increasing.

This index describes long-term shifts in domestic demand for farm

resources utilized for crops and for livestock products. As shown in

table 19, the importance of livestock products in our civilian demand for

farm commodities increased from 192U to 195ii, lÄiile the enç>hasis on crops

was diminishing. Some of the more striking changes inside these groups are

decreases in use of food grains and potatoes and increases in use of poultxy

and eggs.

When we are able to develop the necessary data, we plan to study the

changing structure of demand for various types of processed and fresh products within the overall framework of this index.

By adjusting the index of total civilian food use to a per capita

basis, as in table 20, we see how well our supplies of farm food conmodities

have kept up with our increasing population. ^ It is iimnediately apparent

that in 195U they were proportionately larger than they were 30 years before.

Similarly, this subindex of the master index of supply-utilization of all

farm commodities provides a useful tool for working with projections of
- 71 -

future requirements for farm resources. Prolections for major commodity

groups on a per person basis can be worked back to fann commodities and

these can be readily compared by commodity groups with present, and possible

future rates of production for the same groups of commodities/ For this

purpose, this index is conceptually much to be preferred over the index of

civilian per crepita food consumption as that index brings in the extrar^eous

element of marketinp; services*

Finally, by careful handling of individual value aggregates for imported

foods and for domestically produced foods, it is possible to obtain a relatively satisfactory estimate of the degree of self-sufficiency of the United

States in supplying the farm food needs of its civilian population. As sho^^

in table 22 and figure 3, around ?0 percent of the civilian food used is

domestically produced» Most imported foods are complementary rommodities

which cannot be produced in this country and v*iich have no close domestically

produced substitutes readily available. Data in table 22 also indicate the

trend in the quantities of imported commodities used. Although imported

foods make up a small proportion of the total civilian fcod use, the ext,€ait

of food importation is followed with much interest because of wide variations

from year to year occasioned by changes in the weather, prices, international

situation, and other causes• Table 23 shows the variation in the importance

of imports in consnodity groups.

These major limitations of the subindex of civilian food use of farm

food commodities are apparent. First, as it is an overall aggregative

measure it reflects net effects of a variety of changes in food consumption.

This is both a virtue and a fault, how^ever, depending upon one's needs.

Second, it excludes all marketing services connected with moving farm food

commodities from the farm to consumer. Third, being developed with fixed

prices it cannot measure changing preferences that are reflected in changes

in price relationships among farm commodities. Accordingly, it is only when

the index is combined with some measure of farm price changes that it is

useful in studying trends in farm incomf* which come from changing demands of

our ci.vi.lian population»
- 72 -

31;?^

ê^

I

I CO

>4S

0) a

fj (0

CO o

(0

0) -p

«D O

n

o

•p

1

0) S O

*^ ^ o

%j c0 o

O 0) O

ü -P

•f ss

^

.8

o VI 0>

«nVOONOOO-^HOr-HVOmHWWOOC^OJUNHVOOOH^H^^ONOJ hi-co

t- cnvo t^oo aivo o\ o o cvi t- cu m^ rovo Ií> IA cu ir^ ai^ cr^ H c^^co <^ ^7 ^ 'O

^^co t^c^t>-aS(O t^cocococoaícooOGOoococooocococo t^co t^t^^-1^ í*-1^

•^ if\ i/N-d" -4- -=!• -d* ir\-^ ^ -:;f vo irwo trwo ^ vo irv-* mvo ITíVO r^ h- t^ i>^ í*^ ^^

0\-:l- ro H O O iri 0\ ON C-CO H O C^ CJ\00 t- t-vo Of -=Í H H IT^VO lAVO ^ ^ *0 "í

cû<ô(noôrôonrôcûojojcûcncôcûcûoJcûcûojcûcûcûcucucucucuc^ cucu

curoo\ooroirNO\Hoocucuir\oo\o h-vo t^co ^-^-u^-c^^ H cu H H o\ C> o\

(noôojrôcn<ncurô<ncncn<ôincûrôojojcûcûojcûcûcucû CUH

t- H H 0\ cu CO H iTiCO ON 0\ o ON H IT^-^f CUcnCU-íf COCUcnCUlTi 0O-4- ^ IfN lAVO

HCUCUHCUCUcÛcÛHHiHcÔcÛrÔcÛcÛcÛcÛcÛcÛoJCÛcÛcÛcÛoJCÛ^

vovovo iTNHOOoo (nirv-;f cu-4- moo ONI/NON-^-VO H ITNVO ONO t^co irvoo í«- lAvo

-d- ^ lf\-:t ií\-^ -;t lA^ -;í ^ lA^ lA^ lA^ lA^ ^^^^ lA-:t ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ J¿

h- irxvo c^co t^ c-vo m IíN^ en (n CU OJ CU CU en irv-:t cncncucuHHHHHOO

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

vqoqco en CJN t-uMAvo-:t o-^t mcu^ H O\CO cJNC^fnvo^ HCUCUHCUOCOCO

•••••••••••••••••••• » • •

ifNiAir^uMmrMnuMAi/MrvüMrNirvirNm^-*-*-:t^-:^^^^-:t^^^ <n<n

CO -:t <^C0 t7C>COC)OHCJNt--t- COVO t- t--C0 OVOOCUOVOC^O^OVOVOVOH

en en incoen^ en-=j-^^' c^JJJJJJJJ ^JJ ^JJ ^JJJJJ

VOVOVO t^vOVO b-t^VOVO |s-t^t-vO l^t-VOVOCOVO ir. lAVO UMíMTNVO VO IIMA lA ^^ ••••••••••••••••••••

HH HHHHHH

t

I

8

O

0)

CO

la

•^. ITN jfffMMS^H o H CI en-sf lAvo t^co 0\i ^

.Q H <^í ro-^
- 73 -

O ni

11Bo

ü I

If

«I

si

o n

08,

3

§1

5

SS!

I

í

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§8888888888

t*--^ H O CM VO 0\ O CO ON^ t— 0\C0 CO O O COCO ir\ a\^ CVJ ONVO ON CO H CO fO hfwvo VO Í—VO ir\ irwo ^- t^co co if\-^ irsvo t^vo c^ O\oo OOOOCOCQCO CÍVONO\C> Ô

vOVOvovovOVOVOvOvOvoQ5vOVOVOVOVO'OVOvovOvO^OvOv3vSvûVOvOvOf^t^

•p

I

»

PI

C--CO CO CVJ o 0\-:t 0NCVJ^0\0NHOC00JCJir\CVJ-ii-ir\O-^OOVOHC0C0V0O

^ ^ ^ UMTS-:!- iTN-zt ir\irv^^ UMTN^ irMrMf\vO c^-vo t^^o vo vo vo C^ C*- t^ t*-00

h- H CVl COVO H 0\-:t CO^ CVJl/NOl^HMD Oü^HCO^-O^OCOU^HO^ t—vo o bhlvo lAiA-ci-^ co-^ lAvoco CVJ irvrô-:t-:ivo UMTN iTNVO CO invo irMf\-:t CO-^ >0 »A corocococococococococooococococococococococorococococococococo

CVICVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJOJCVJ

o C>\-^ t-VO -:!• -^ ^ H VO CVJ ro COCO Ot--vOCOir\HO\H COVO CVJ H CVJ i^vo -:t to\co o\ o\ en C7\ C7N cy\ ovco 00 co 00 co ONCO CO CO 00 o\co g^^^SgSSSS

CVJOO^ D-CO o HCVJVO <nO\00 CO COVO COOCOOO Oir^OJOJCOCO ONCJONVO HOJ

I

5?^

¥

^

lllllllllllsllllMIMIII ONO H CVJ CO-:t

W.V^,O>O>O>ONON0J jy &S R lA ir\ iO
-7UT^le 20- index of civilian per capita food use by ca«odlty groups, specified periods

(^IQkl-k^ ^ 100)

Commodity groiip

3rop8

Beans and peas^ dry 2/

Coffee, tea, and cocoa

Food grains

Feed grains 3/

Fruits

Oil crops h/

Potatoes and sweetpotatoes

Silgar crops 5/

Tree nuts

Vegetables

Total crops 6/

Livestock

Dairy products

Honey

Meat animals

Poultry

Total livestock

Total civilian use

1925-29 1935-39 1942-45 1946

117

72

129

136

93

83

134

116

63

92

126

85

114

99

97

107

122

105

80

95

99

91

87

115

91

73

92

100

93

78

100

86

73

"55'

90

100

100

loir

105

1952

102

100

1953

loT

102

1/ Preliminary.

2/ Includes cowpeas for peas.

3/ Includes com sugar and sirup.

$/ Includes peanuts for all iises.

5/ Excludes com sugar and sirup and honey.

^ Includes popcorn and mustard seed in addition to crops listed.

Table 21.- Selected meastires pertaining to per capita food usage, specified periods

195^

1/

127 127 115 111 116

82 109 95 96 87

112 110 96 91» 93

120 nh 95 93 92

92 107 96 93 95

99 103 109 108 45

lao 113 8k 89 89

92 86 99 99 100

71* 89 108 109 ^

107 110 ^ S - S- 101 107 97 97 96

102 107 99 ^

98

92 98 107 106 109

121^ 125 118 103 95

100 103 98 103 102

110 108 126 124 132

105

102

Measure 1929 ; 1935-39 I9if2-it5 '. 1952-5»^

; i/

1. Index of civilian food use of farm commodities :

(Food utilization measured at farm level in terms j

of 1947-49 farm prices) : 92 90 100 101

2. Index of civilian per capita food consxmiption :

(Food consumption measured at retail level in terms :

of 1947-49 retail prices) ; 91 91 99 102

3. Index of retail weight of per capita consumption

(Physical quantities of foods consumed measured at :

retail level, based on total poundage) ! 101 98 105 98

u. Index of per caç)ita retail cost of doTnestically

produced fann foods purchased by civilian consumers

(Based on AMS series on food marketing bill, in

current dollars)

!

: $5 la 63 109

?. Food expenditures in current dollars as estimated by

the Department of Comraerce, per capita index

:

: U9 36 65 120

1/ Including preliminary estimates for 195U.
-75-

Table 22.- Indexes of total civilian food use of domestically produced commodities

and of imported commodities and their relative importance^ 192U-3U

Civilian food use,

index. 191*7-1*9=100 Percentage of civilian food use

Calendar '.

year

• •

Iinported '

commod- iDomestlcally;

Imported commodities

• Conrplefood

use

: produced ities

, 1/

produced Supple- mentazy

: cocmodities: ; commodities mentary ; 2/

Percent Percent Percent

Í92U : 73 7k 69 91.8 3.5 l*.7

1925 : 71* Ih 71* 91.1* U.l 1*.5

1926 : 76 75 80 90.7 1*.3 5.0

,1927 : 75 75 77 91.0 U.O 5.0

'1928 : 76 75 79 91.0 k,l h.9

1929 : 77 76 m 90.5 1*.3 5.2

1930 ! 77 77 83 90.7 l*.3 5.0

1931 : 78 78 78 91.3 3.6 5.1

1932 : 77 77 71 92.0 3.1 1*.9

1933 : 77 78 71 92.1 3.0 1*.9

193»* 79 80 71* 91.9 3.3 1^.8

1935 76 75 93 89.1* lf.8 5.8

1936 : 79 78 97 89.3 l*.9 5.8

1937 81 79 91* 89.9 k.6 5.5

1938 80 79 88 90.5 3.8 5.7

1939 8l^ 83 90 90.7 3.6 5.7

l^

I9IH

!

:

87

88

87

88 92

88 91.3

90.9

3.1

3.5 H5.6

191*2 : 87 89 71 93.0 2.6 k,k

191^1 : 88 90 6k 93.6 2,k If.O

I9W : 91 93 73 93.0 2.5 l*.5

19>*5 ': 92 91* 71* 93.0 2.2 k.6

19I16 : 100 101 89 92.3 2.0 5.7

191*7 : 101 102 93 92.0 2.6 5.1*

191*8 : 99 98 103 91.0 3.2 5.8

191*9 : 100 100 lOU 91.0 3.1 5.9

1950 : 102 102 106 91.0 3.6 5.1*

1951 : 102 102 106 91.0 3.6 5•^ 1952 : 106 106 no 90.9 3.7 5.1*

1953 : 109 109 112 91.1 3.5 5.1*

1951*3/ : n? 112 108 91.7 3.1* 1*.9

1/ lie proportion of inrports \ised for civilian food was assumed to be the same as

irctt domestic production where no better measure was available.

2/ Includes coffee, tea, cocoa, and bananas. See discussion of imports in text.

y P^liminary.
7Ó -

o

UJ

U

o^ t-

>

1 UJ

1

'

2

lu o

z

UJ

3

Oí

<

UJ 5

VILIAN

m o

o

IMOD/T/ES TO ANY

G

ED C0MM0D/T/E5 AN

-I

<

D

H-

-J

D

y

os:

o

<

00

V • il

1 * *lJIDOOv%%M

C5 Q

y^íáíSSw^ cw ! i/)

1 1^^^^^^z^^ 2 Î

1

en

. Q. >cS^¡S<¡«|i^o^p 3 >-

r^

to Q.

. 3 1m^m û. o

6

LU

z

3 */>

u. Û

c

D

>

\ i

^^o^^ ^O^^ o

O^

EST/CALLD BANANA

TH DOMES

-iv^fc^^

oo 3

UJ

S Jpœ^^^^u^^^ ""

15 ^

°5 !ü .

t/> O

0)

0

>

E

Pí^ftsJ

WITH

COCO

IN Uí

CTION

UJ IL <

z 1Ä\SSSc^T SofiuuOC

IN USE

. TEA.

EABLE

PRODUi

UJ

^^s^^ ^o^^

Oí 0

u.

uu

UJ

\ •1^^^^o^^m

SOU

;1^^^ O

CO

Os

INTERCHANGEAÍ

UDES ONLY COF

E ARE INTERCt

LEMENT DOMES

U

<

U.

O

Z

UJ

»J^fQQQsXXX

o |ä* XKKYYYY . ^ r ^ ^

• ^CO'éV'O'J •- U ä 0- K

I* ^Ko2í2o 1 O ^ ï D oi:

vi^OOOOOO ^ Î K U1 <

• insDOOOOO * < Q.

HJ l!isDv^!!C<!rS UJ

flû o c2 c"\

Û

•

i/)

4^ CN J •

3
- 77 -

Table 23.- Proportion of food used by civilians which was linported,

by selected connodity croups, in specified periods 1/

•

•

Item :

:

1925-29 '! 1935-39 i'i 1912-U5 '

>

t 19h7-li9 : 1952-5U

; ^

Percent Percent Percent Percent Perçoit

Crops '•

Coffee, tea and cocoa J

Fruits Î

Oil crops 3/ '

Sugars and sirups k/ '>

Tree nuts !

Other crops 5/

• 100.0

! 27.3

i 27.0

t 72.8

: 59.5

t 1.5

100.0

25.8

37.2

61.5

55.U

1.7

100.0

13.9

U.5

6U.0

36.3

1.0

100.0

22.5

8.0

65.8

50.7

1.2

100.0

22.5

12.1

69.5

56.2

1.2

Total crops 'i 25.3 27.1 20.8 26.6 27.0

Livestock products, total 1 .8

•

1.0 .5 .6 1.0

Total civilian food tise : 9.1 10.1 6.9 8.7 8.8

1/ The proportion used for civilian food was assxaned to be the same as fron

domestic production ^ere no-b«^7ter measure was available.

2/ Preliminary.

¿/ Includes peanuts for all uses.

h/ Excludes com sugar and sirup and hcney.

5/ Includes com sugar and sirup, vegetables, dry beans and peas, potatoes

and sweetpotatoes, popcorn, and mustard seed.

MILITARY TAKINGS FOR FOOD USE 28/

A subindex of the master index of supply-utilization measures the flow

of farm commodities to military agencies for food use. It summriaes withdrawals or takings of such items from commercial distribution chaimels in

each year, beginning 19la (table 2U). Data for earlier years are net available. Most of the data on deliveries of food products to the Armed Forces

are obtained from reports regularly furnished the United States Deparl-ment of

Agriculture. Some suppleraentaiy estimates are necessary to cover local prccurement for fresh comnodities in some years and for it ans supplied daily,

auch as bread, fluid milk, and ice cream.

28/ Prepared by Harry Sherr,
. 78 -

Militaiy takings include food supplies for the ^rmed Services a^^

overseas post exchange services and some items for cornmissary J^^^^^^^^*^^

Arrr^od Forces^ They co^^er supplies for use of our ^^^^''TT^ITJ^^^^

allied nations fighting with our troops during World War II, ^^J^Pf^^^^^

for civilian relief in liberated and occupied area,<.. In recent y^J^^^s^^f^

to commissaries and other outlets operated for irAlitary personnel have been

equivalent to less than a fifth of the value of ihe food P^^^ff^.^^ "^Í^^

tary can^s and stations in the United States. Although much of this food is

used by vives and children who are coionted in the civilian popula.tion, we

believe that such civilian consujnntion from military' takings is offset by

consumption of food included in civilian supplies by membera of the Armed

Forces who live at hornee or when on leave.

Only recently has a reporting system been established to supply the

Department of Agriculture with information on military takings cf textiles.

Eventually, it is hoped that historical series can be developed, to cover

military use of all nonfood farm commodities as well as food items. Meanwhile, military and civilian takings of such commodities are combined in the

category domestic nonfood use of farm commodities. Major problems in reporting and in conversion to farm equivalents are foreseen for processed items

such as oils in paints, cotton in tires, and for tobacco in cigarettes that

military personnel buy for their own use.

Military Takings Not a Measure of Annual

Food Use by Our Armed Forces

In using the index of military takings of farm commodities for food use

we must remember that it indicates only the magnitude of withdrawals from

domestic supplies. Military takings do not even roughly measure consumption

by or distribution to members of the Armed Forces during specific periods of

time. Changes in the index from year to year reflect not only variations in

current needs. They also reflect the building up or use of stocks at home

and abroad, differences in types of commodities purchased for military

personnel in wartime and in peacetime, changes in extent of foreign procurement for use abroad, and changes in programs operated by the military

agencies, as for allied troops or for civilian relief.

At the time we set up the framework for the master index of supplyutilization, we carefully considered the matter of subtracting rough

estimates of military takings for civilian relief from total military

takings in order to separate this quasi-export segment from our "domestic"

military takings. But such programs as civilian relief and feeding of

allied troops are significant parts of United States military programming

and are essential to our national security. Therefore, we decided that the

flow of fann comjnodities to such programs was properly measured as part, of

the flow to united States military agencies. Because of the expected need

for separate figures for some purposes, we provide in table 25 the comparable

value agPiregates for total military takings of farm food commodities and for

military shipments from the United States of both food and nonfood commodities for civilian relief programs. These are in terms of farm commodities
-79 •

valued at 19U7-U9 prices. Takings and shipments for relief are not directly

comparable for the years 19UU-U7 because of the unreported diversions of

regular military supplies to civilian relief use and occasional troop use of

relief supplies* Also, there is some problem of timing because supplies were

not always shipped immediately after their delivery to military agencies.

These value aggregates for civilian relief shipments are considered further

in the export section of this chapter, where they are combined with other

types of exports.

Although we have no adequate data on military takings prior to I9I4I, we

know that takings were not significant in total utilization, except during

World War I, a period not covered by this index.

Military withdrawals of food from domestic supplies rose sharply from

I9I4I to 19UU* The number of persons in the Armed Forces was increasing

rapidly. During this period heavy procurement was made for current use of

troops stationed abroad, for building up domestic stocks needed to maintain

^ an uninterrupted supply of food available at all times for domestic use or

overseas shipment, and for the building up of large stocks of food abroad

so that interruptions in the supply lines would not hanger military operations.

Military procurement for civilian relief in liberated and occupied

rreas began on a small scale in 19U3 as the Armed Forces of the allied

nations moved into the Mediterranean area# Civilian relief was supplied

from stocks for troop use maintained overseas or purchases of st^le foods

made specifically for the purpose. Separate reports on actual deliveries

were begun late in 19UU, but even the data for 19U5 are of doubtful value

because of unreported diversions of supplies between programs.

Military takings of food declined a little in 19U55 tben dropped

shaiply in the following year. Return of military personnel to civilian

status proceeded faster than supplies could be used up. Some of the

itdlitary stocks in the United States were sold as surplus in this country

through commercial channels, some were transferred to ÜNRRA, and some were

used to supplanent the heavy shipments of staple foods for use in the

civilian feeding program in liberated and occupied areas administered by

military organizations. 29/ Although military shipments for foreign aid

programs during the immediate postwar period continued to be quite

significant for staple, less expensive foods, they represent only a small

share of total utilization of farm food commodities.

Significance of Military Takings

Military takings of farm food commodities were most significant in the

total food picture in 19UU. Procurement was cut sharply in 19U6 when

accumulated stocks were^ being transferred and used.

29/ All such transfers were carefully noted in o\ir commodity tables, as

described in Agriculture Handbook No. 62.
- 80 -

Table 2U.- Index of military takings of all farm commodities for food use

and relative importance of cramnodity groups, 19W-54

Cal.endar

year

19^*1

19Wf

19^5

19U6

19'*7

191+8

19U9

1950

1951

1952

1953

195»» V

Military

takings l/

Index,

191+7.1+9=100

1+2

151

2I+7

366

31+0

87

91

105

105

56

112

82

77

65

Percentage of

total

utilization

Pet.

1.0

3.h

5.2

7-7

7.2

1.9

2.0

2.3

2.3

1.2

2.3

1.7

1.6

1.3

Dairy

products

Pet.

16.8

10.5

-12.2

12.1

itr.6

9.^

7.2

8.6

9.2

8.8

12.0

11.7

13.2

Relative importance in military takings

Fruits

and

vegetables

2/

Grains

Pet.

18.5

15.7

13.6

13.0

11.2

10.1

9.^

16.6

11.1

9.7

13.3

13.5

10.9

11.0

Pet.

k.2

2.9

3.7

5.7

12.9

22.4

43.6

47.0

h9.1

19.9

9.2

10.3

11.0

6.9

Meat

animals

Pet.

1K).6

lf9.8

h9.5

k3.6

lfO.8

40.1

29.1

17.9

17.1

40.7

45.9

42.1

43.4

46.0

Oil

crops

Pet.

0.9

.9

1.0

1.1

1.1

.2

.3

.7

4.4

2.8

1.2

.8

1.5

1.0

Poultry

and

eggs

Sugar

crops

Other

foods

3/

Pet.

13.2

9.7

11.1+

13.3

13.0

15.9

6.9

8.7

5.^

11.8

13.8

16.1+

16.8

17.3

Pet.

1.7

2.3

2.2

2.1

2.6

1.1

1.0

.6

.1+

.9

.9

1.1

1.0

1.0

Pet.

l+.l

8.2

6.1+

7.2

7.8

.8

.2

1.1

3.3

5.1

6.9

3.6

3.7

3.7

Total

food

use

Pet.

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

1/ Includes quantities shipped for civilian \ise in liberated and occupied areas.

2/ Includes fruits, vegetables, potatoes, sweetpotatoes, dried beans and peas.

3/ Includes coffee, tea, cocoa, bananas, and honey.

U/ Preliminary.

Table 25.- Farm value of total military takings of farm commodities for food use and of

military shipments of all farm commodities for civilian supply programs, 191+1-5** l/

Calendar

year

191+1

19^*2

19»*3

191+1+

i^3

19'*6

19'*7

191+8

19't9

1950

1951

1952

1953

1951* V

Total military takings for food use

Crops

Farm

value

Percentage of

takings

Livestock

Farm

value

Percentage of

takings

Military shlpnents for civilian supply programs 2/

Food commodities

Crops

Mil.dol.

107

387

570

908

1,037

258

I+2I+

591

617

182

302

208

181+

130

29

30

27

29

36

35

55

66

69

38

32

30

28

21+

Mil.Aol.

257

901

1,5'*6

2,221

1,872

1+88

352

305

279

293

656

1+98

1+72

1+22

Pet.

71

70

73

71

61+

65

h5

3k

31

62

68

70

72

76

;Percentage

Farm . ^^ ^^Q^

value

Mil.dol.

;shipments

TcT.

1/ Valued at I9I+7.I+9 farm prices.

3/ SS?r ^"^*"^®^ processed in preceding years.

5/ Preliminary.

61 53

308 71

197 79

337 81+

572 92

1+69 91

32 92

7** 99

38 97

35 95

7 100

Farm

value

Mil.dol.

Livestock

Percentage

! of food

¡shlpnents

55

126

52

65

h9

h6

3

1

1

2

3/

hi

29

21

16

8

9

8

1

3

Nonfood

commodities,

farm

value

Mil.dol.

1

26

12

21+

3/

2/
• s,' .1 •

The commodity makeup of military takings reflects the postwar civilian

supply program quite vividly. In 19U5-U9 the purchase of food grains was

e^anded to provide food for the civilian population of liberated and

occupied areas as inexpensively and with as little impact on United States

civilian food supplies as possible* The shift in emphasis from livestock

commodities to crop items during those years is evident in table^25. Since

I9U9 procurement has been principally for troop use and takings of livestock

commodities have been proportionately larger*

DOMESTIC NONFOOD USE 30/

Measurement of the use of both food and nonfood commodities for nonfood

purposes is likely to be one of the most important contributions of the

master index of supply-utilization to the analysis of problems in agricultural economics. By food commodities 31/ we mean all farm commodities having

any generally recognized food use in this country. They Include corn, oats,

barley, and even pulled wool and hides, as these are byproducts of the

slaughter of meat animals. All other far-Ti commodities are called nonfood

commodities. Domestic nonfood uses of food canmodities—-such as feed, seed,

alcoholic beverages, pulled wool, and leather—have been aggregated with

domestic use of nonfood commodities, like cotton, tobacco, and inedible oils,

to form this category and subindex (table 26 and figure h.)

The handling of nonfood commodities presented no particular difficulties

after we had learned how to separate food and nonfood uses of food commodities. One of the most difficult problems encountered in setting up this

whole index of supply-utilization was how to allocate the farra value of a

commodity processed into a food product and one or more nonfood products

among such joint products. Wheat flour and millfeeds afford a good exaraple.

We did not feel justified in putting into the food account the entire farm

value of wheat milled for domestic use. On the other hand, the physical

milling ratio of 72 percent flour to 28 percent millfeed went too far the

other way. We resolved the dilemma by using the ratio derived from the

millers' calculated return for flour to their return from sales of millfeeds.

Exhibit B provides another example of the allocation procedure.

This device for allocating farm values among several end products

permitted us to measure at the farm level the significance of end uses which,

taken singly, were relatively minor, but which added to significant to tus.

For example, in 19^2 the domestic nonfood use of food commodities amounted

to 26 percent of their total utilization here arxi abroad. If we exclude the

rather obvious nonfood uses of the feed grains for feed and total seed use and

32/ Prepared by Robert J. Lavell. ,, ,, ,

„31/ Subindexes for food commodities are described in Agriculture Handbook

No. 62.
82 -
. 83 -

alcoholic beverage use of all grains and exclude pulled wool, we find that

our allocating device permits us to put under domestic nonfood use about

3 percent of the value aggregate for total utilization of farm food commodities which otherwise would have had to be put under domestic food use;

Gross and Net Flow

The concept of total utilization, which we use in the index of supplyutilization of all farm commodities, is the gross flow of farm commodities

each year through the agricultural economy--from production, imports, or *

stocks to the several channels into final use. Some of this flow goes back

into the agricultural economy for use in future production, as in the cases

of feed and seed. In this sense, our total utilization is a "gross" figure,

as described in the production section of chapter 3. By subtracting such

transfers back into agriculture, we obtain a measure of the net flow out of

agriculture into domestic and foreign human and industrial use. Both

measures, gross and net, are useful for analyses relating to domestic nonfood use. Data on commodity contribution to domestic nonfood use, including

feed and seed use, are given in table 26. Information on net nonfood use in

this country is developed in table 2?.

About 35 to UO percent of the total flow of farm commodities and their

products has gone for domestic nonfood purposes in the last 30 years.' Peak

usage came in World War II because of proportionately heavier demands for

feed for livestock feeding and the great expansion of industrial needs*

Since those years, the relative importance of nonfood use to the total flow

(gross) has diminished. The reduction from the beginning of the 30-year

period to its end has been largely in feed, particularly for horses and ^

mules.

When we exclxide the use of farm commodities as production inputs back

into agricxilture, principally for feed and seed, we find that net nonfood

use in this country in the last 3 decades has varied between 10 and 16 percent of the flow of products of agriculture into direct human use and industrial use«

On a per capita basis, net domestic nonfood use of farm commodities is

about 10 percent higher since 19^ than it was in the late twenties. This

is mainly due to increased tobacco consumption. Overall use of cotton and

TOol is about the same for the two periods, and the same is true of industrial use of fats and oils. These two groups, however, have lost much

ground to synthetic products since the peak per capita consiimption in the

middle 19U0»s.

Significance of Ma:)or Categories of Domestic Nonfood Use

Feed now accounts for about 70 percent of our nonfood use of farm

commodities. In fact, each year since 19^0 more than 25 percent of total

utilization was for feeding purposes in the United States.
- Qh -

Actual use of agricultural commodities for feed has fluctuated widely,

depending on the demand for meat and the production of feed. From its low

point during the drought in the middle 1930«s, feed use rose sharply to a

peak in 19ii3, then declined rather abruptly to fluctuate at a slightly higher

rate than that recorded during the late 1920»s. The relative importance of

feed use declined about 5 percent from 192U, with only minor fluctuations.

Since 192li there has been a steady shift in the type of feed used. In

195U about 7 percent was byproduct feed, in 192li h percent. The largest part

of this increase has been in soybean cake and meal, which parallels the increase in the production of soybeans.

The use of farm commodities to feed horses and mules has declined from

about 20 percent of all feed used to about 3 percent. 32/ This makes more

feed available for food livestock. In this period, the number of food livestock per person has dropped, but a greater proportion is fed concentrates

and other harvested crops • In addition, the quantity of concentrates fed per

animal on feed has increased.

Total seed use rose steadily from the middle 1920's and tended to level

off after 1950. The rate of this rise was about the same as that of total

utilization; consequently the relative importance of seed rofnained at about

2 percent. On a per capita basis seed use has had a downward trend.

Improved seed as to germination and yield, greater use of fertilizer for

bigger yields, and decline in per capita consumption of grain for food have

all contributed to this decline.

Of the other nonfood uses, textiles and leather, industrial oils and

soap, tobacco, and alcoholic beverages are the only important ones. Textiles

and leather have about the same relative importance in total nonfood use as

the total of all the others mentioned. In the middle twenties about oneeighth of nonfood use of farm commodities was in these products. During the

depression there was a decline to about a tenth, followed by a steady rise

to a peak of more than a sixth in the early years of World War II. Since

World War II they have declined slightly in relative importance. The use •

of farm commodities for industrial oils and soap has remained stable at 3 to

U percent of nonfood use. The use of tobacco increased from 3 percent of

nonfood use in the middle 1920" s to more than 5 percent in 195Ui smd during

the sarae period alcoholic beverages increased from less than 1 percent to

more than 3 percent dxiring World War II, then back to 2 percent.

32/ Jennings, R. D. Consiamption of Feed bj Livestock 1909>U7. Circtilar

No.). 836, U. S. Dept. Agr. December 19U9, and unpublished data for more

recent years.
-85-

3

»d ß

s.

§8888|88888aÍÍÍ8888888888888888

vomcvjfnH^-cvjHONO\cvioc^ooovo-4' oirvOOJt^mo^oiTNirwoco .=* NSu Si d-ä d Su SL St9P. 2> 9. ^ Sil ^ S^-:^: i^ ^- w^ cvi m m ir\ ir^^o ro ITN IP^VO VO ir\

3

«

^ H

I

H ^

»4

h-.^>0 00 CO vo 00 CO o C--CO OOCVia\CVJmHHHOJO\CVJOC\JCVJm ir\^ ro t- ^ (r>

o H H HHHHHH'HHHHHHHHHP-ÎH

ONHCVJCVJmHC^mC^OOMTs ONONVO OO UMTXC—C—ONCVJ H UN t^\0 ITv D^O HO

ir\ t^ 0\ C^QO H o 0\^-ONO\0 O-:t00C0OC0 ITvfOirv l/\-:t -ih UMA lA-:t ITv ^ ^

d''*'HH'*'*HHH

ir\ ON O ONVO CVJ0NHCVJl--0\CVJHHC0O ir\00 ^O ^- iPi l>-CO H-=fCVJCVJOON c^o

ON ITVVO CO VO C>^ l/NVO t— ITN-ïf rH lÎNQO t^OO CO t^^O ITNVO VO VQ C^ ^-V0 VO C— ^- r^oT)

HHHHHHHHHHHCUHHHHHHHHHHHi-lHHHrHH HH

O ON-:t t— l>--;t CO CO ir\^ C- H ON-;J- -:t O ^-O CO VO ^ oO-d" 00 CO t^ t--CO H C^ GO O

a\a\OO0ÍvOCC)C0 r^O^kC^OHOJONr-îrî rÔcÔr-î HrHOJrHOJOOJOJiH ri ri

HH H HHH H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

^ t*-co t^O COCO C^HHco omo cvi^vo o ITNOCO ont—O-^î uMrN-d- OJ vo m

t^ ONCO ifNONt^ONONH o ONcnc^fnc— ir\^ cn^ co vo ^o -^ m <n^o -^ -^ ro oô^

•vO vo *vO vo vo vo vo ^O C^ t*-^ vo vo vo vo vo vo vo ^0 vo vo 'O vo ^O vo vo vo vo vo vo ^2)

0\^ vo ITN o vo 00 H CVJ H ONCO CVJ ITNVO CVJ-ïfCVJOOOOHCOOJCO cncO or» I>- ON ON

HHgrÎHOJHHcOcOcOoJcOcOcÛoJOJOJOJHcOoJOJOJC^

H cr)0\H mvo -d- 'vO t^'O OO-^-VO HHOVOUNONCVJt^O^O UN^O t^ O C^ cO i/N

^ j:t-=t ^ J^t-i J:^ ^ en cÔ-sÎ -;Í^JÍ^-íÍ-=Í-=Í-^^ ITN-zt UMTN UN ITN ITNVO UN lA lA

UNCncO VOUNOONC^ONCMUNOOCOOOHVOOOCVJCVJUN UN^ m H t^UNCO CO Q ON

V£) UÑ'¿ UN UNVO VO t^^¿ t^ <y\cÓ t^'Ô VO VO UN UN-:t CVJCVJWHCVlOJHHqqHCVI

OVO UNUNOJ HVO-^f-^t H^ CVJ C—OCO ONH-:t HCO H ONVO O^ O ONVQ -^ CO ON H

UNCO uÑ^ í^uÑvo UNCO \>-cñcó COc?icôOJ cû Q-4;CO tr^ <£>-! ï*^-! ï>'i>-l-î

Ht-HONUN^oxoOJ cooq ooq ^7*?-^ ^9-=Í 'i 9 ^'^ ^^^ ^ ^"^ ^*0

oí CNCO ON oík CÑ f^cO ON GN uÑoO 00 t^OO oÑ ON H H CVI ONCO í^ !í^ ÄiT^ Î^'A ÍRA S

¿ss^ssââ^s^^s'^sâ^^gggga^SB^a'aQQ^^ H H H H H

CVJI

ifNVO trCQ ONO HfJJCO-^

ONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO^ aioJCVJCVjQjcvj(n(r^rocr>rofn(j}çoco p;j-^-^-^-ä^-ä^-g;'g;,l3^'as ON ON ON ON ON ON

Hf-iHHHr^f-iHr-{r-i ?i?i^)^)^^)UH'^'^H':^H^'^r^'^
- 86 -

•H

-P

•W

g

O

o

<H

-4-

<*H l/N

O 1

-:t

0) CVI

(0 ON

:3 H

TJ .-^

O nd

O 0)

O)

to

O

^ t

o fu

•H

-P •d

(0 0)

<u g 4<i

Ti a»

3:3

4^ p

0 H

P y

A

Ö Û)

•H

CQ (U

a>

9

3

»rt

u 0

0 0

•0

Q

a

4-1

0 p

0 s

S ^ 43

p >^

SI 'S

^ 5

0) »d

^ S

p

^

0)

0:

H

•3

-SI

O)

(U

H_ »0

o (Ü

s- -

0)

g §

d 4J 3

•H

là

Q> 0 M

0 ^ -P •H

U 0 H

<D •H

04 •P

O

o

5:

ON

I

•H

3

O

»d

U G

0) G

G

Ü

8

EH

n

4^

P H

»d -H .5°

•H »d

u

(0

0)

H

•d

0)

CO

û)

^5

vo ^-^-cvl !>-fo ONI-Í-irv (n^ 00 I-O>OJVOOONOHC^I>;.ONONHOONOJ

OHHC^HCUOoáHHd^

CVÍ CVJ • •

CVJ H

ONVOOO H CO CVJ CM H-d- I/NJ-OO O H ONO-ytVÛ OJ CVJ rj ^-00 ?{|:Q ô( 2 ^C^^ 2^ 9

r-ïr-ir^r-iHHHH

0000000000000000000000000000000

o o

o o

•H H

o o

o o

O 80 Q o o

0000 8888888888888888888 i-l f-i r-i r-\

^ cn^ Lf^-=^ -d--d--:f oo-d- irv ifNvo vo t^vo c^ Oseo 00 ONCTNCJNOOHOJHCVJ ca\

o H rH .-^ rH —I r-i rn

o\HOJcvjcvicvic--c\Jt^oo\Lr\o\ ONvo 00 liM/ND^c^ONOJ H-^" !:— O vo t- O r^ o

CVJ mrooofommoocvj roonmrorompofnoocnro ro-^- -4- xj- --t -í -í**- -=r irv ITMTN

fO CD CVI H H (OVO ON LfN-íf H ifN o m ON^ -4-Hi-ICJNOOO-4-lA í^--:r OJ VO «iMA

irNl/NlfNirNLTNUMrvLfNLrN ITNVO VO VO VO LTv li^ LTN lA LA-^ IPv LPv LTV LPs UN LTx Ü"N LfN LTN lA J/\

^"í ^«^t^O^^ C^H C--VO ^ C7N CVI 00 COCO Ht—CVIOCVJCOt*-HirvCVIONHCJN

CO CO rn <n 00-rf (n en CVJ en fo {T^ (n (n (v^ rn cr» ro có CVJ 0Ô fo (^ rñcJ

cnoNCOvqiAiAvo ONCVJ t^-cvj IACOON^ CVJ ^ CO ON cn^ VO 00 ONONLAI^-VO H t-cvi

í^íí;r?;!?-ír?HHocucncnJAu.c.^^^:v^

UNONCVJONVOHlAlAONVOO^D^UN^HONlAínONCVJ HLr>HcnONCVIC-CV|VO^

t;^^PP^P^^^-HOg^CV.HO¿¿0^^¿

^^ ^-t lAlAvq 10":<^VO C^ H ONCDVOOO ^^ ^^ ^. ^-^ ONH^^ tAO o o

HCVJCVJHHHHHCVJCVJcÔfAcVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVJCVjCVJOJ

I

0) 0)

o S^lSlSs^^íí^^^^S^^S^aJÍ^l^^a -íí^ tCO ONO H CVJ cn^ H H 2í2í2í2> 2>?>^cy>cK ON ON ON ON ON a\ 0^0^"^-SL IAÎNIAIAÎN HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH2Í2í2>2>2>^^^
37

Other Measures of Nonfood Use

The only other measure of changes in the nonfood use of farm commodities

that we have found is one developed by Rex Daly of the Farm Income Branch of

AMS. 33/ He combined into an index the per capita disappearance of cotton

and TOol (as measured by mill consumption), tobacco, and industrial oils,

using average prices in 193^-39 as weights. This index excludes feed and

seed and a variety of minor nqrifood uses. But this admittedly rough measure

compares rather favorably with a per capita series constructed from our data

on net domestic nonfood use* Probably the reason for this is that Daly" s

index used the same basic quantitative data for important commodities that

we used, except for some adjustments we made for the export of processed

products of these commodities*

Uses and Limitations of This Subindex

As demonstrated in the foregoing sections, a major use of this new index

of domestic nonfood use, whether on gross or net basis, is to indicate the

relative economic importance to agriculture of the demand for farm commodities for nonfood use* We know of no other aggregative measure of this group

of demands on agriculture, although farm incomes from cotton, tobacco, wool,

feed grains, and certain oilseed crops are sometimes totaled and conq^ared with

total farm income.

This subindex may prove to be a useful tool for evaluating the success

of the development of new uses for farm commodities* We have not yet

explored this area.

As in other segments of the master index of supply-utilization of farm

coinmodities, the index of domestic nonfood use provides the framework for

the analysis of projections of particular demands for farm commodities and

their net effect on agricultural production*

We must, however, note certain limitations of the index, arising

principally from the nature of the basic data used and from the form of the

index*

First, owing to lack of data, we failed to account for several minor

nonfood uses of farm commodities. But for all significant nonfood uses of

joint products of food commodities, statistical data were developed, if

necessary. This is an area in which we shall have to be particularly

watchful to incorporate new uses and their pertinent data as they become

significant.

33/ Daly, Rex F* "Some Considerations in Appraising the Long-run Prospects

for Agriculture," Studies in Income and Wealth. Volume Sixteen. A report of

the National Bureau of Economic Research* Princeton university Press,

Princeton, N. J. 195U. Table A-U, p. iShe
- ee -

Second, nonfood use of some conanodities, such as wheat for feed, is

calculated as a residual. Accordingly, the nonfood account receives errors

accumulating in other parts of the supply and distribution table for such

commodities. The extent of such errors is impossible to judge even after

extensive study of detailed data on each commodity. Such evaluation is

beyond the scope of this handbook.

The use of constant 19U7-U9 primary market prices in the process of

allocating farm values among joint products is likely to be more critical

for this subindex than for any other. Price relationships for some joint

products of far:u commodities have changed significantly in the last 30 years,

contrary to our use of constant prices. But we suspect that most of the

changes have been among the nonfood joint products rather tínan between food

and nonfood, so that our major subindexes are probably not affected significantly. Supplemental studies of this index number problem as related to

nonfood use may prove necessary.

Finally, although we recognize the particular importance of processing

and other marketing costs for farm commodities and their products irtiich go

to nonfood uses, they are omitted from this subindex as in all other pairts

of this master index. Our set of indexes has been designed to study only the

supply and use of fann resources, not their combination with resources of

other parts of the economj'-.

EXPORTS OF FARM C0>M0DITIE3 ^

Measurement of total export of farm products requires the combining of

all kinds of farm commodities shipped out of the country in many forms.

Because the export market is a significant outlet for commodities produced on

farms of the united States, one of the subindexes of the index of supplyutilization of all agricultural products provides a readymade index of such

exports. It covers farm commodities shipped in raw and processed forms to

Territories of the united States and to foreign countries 3$/ during the

calendar years 192U to date. Problems encountered in preparing the basic

data are described in chapter 2. As in other segments of the master index,

exports of the whole gamut of farm products are combined in terms of the

farm value of the agilcultural commodities they contain.

Processed products were allocated the proportions of the farm value of

the farm commodity which their processed values bore to the total processed

value of all the joint products. (See chapter 2 and exhibit B for a detailed

description of the procedure.) For example, flour exported in 19^2 was

valued at 83 percent of the farm value of wheat used in milling it, because

the processed value of flour accounted for 83 percent of the total value of

flour and millfeeds produced as joint products.

W Prepared by Robert J. Lavell and Marguerite C. Burk.

3§/ Shipments for the use of our Armed Forces stationed abroad are excluded.
. 89 -

For this index of exports of all farm coniRiodities, we combined three sets

of value aggregates developed for the master index: (l) commercial exports

and shipments, (2) deliveries by the united States Department of Agriculture,

and (3) a special set to measure shipments of farm commodities and their

products by our Armed Forces for use of civilian populations in occupied and

liberated areas• Department of Agriculture deliveries for export and military

shipments for civilian use are combined to make up the subcategory ''Government deliveries*" All commodities moving through coTomercial export channels,

though they may be subsidized directly by the Federal Government or indirectly by Government loans or grants to receiving countries, are classified

as "commercial deliveries."

The use of 19Î47-U9 farm prices throughout gives the value for each year

in constant 19U7-U9 dollars. Thus, changes in the index derived by comparing

yearly values with the average yearly value for the period 19U7-U9 reflect

changes in quantities exported and shifts among commodities as from lower to

higher farm-priced items. The index is not affected by changes in prices

among farm products or in the price level for all farm products, or by shifts

in exports from raw to processed items.

Table 28 contains the e:iqport index and percentage relationships of

exports of fana commodities to the total annual flow of all farm products

into channels for utilization. In addition, we include indexes of the

Bubcategories "commercial deliveries" and "Government deliveries" previously

discussed* Indexes of food use and nonfood use of farm commodities exported

are given in table 29* This classification was developed item by item on the

basis of our commodity specialists' knowledge of general usage in receiving

countries of ccnmodities imported from the United States«

Measuring Exports

There are several measures of different aspects of aggregate agricultural exports* The following discussion of some of the characteristics of

agricultural exports that have economic meaning is included as a guide for

deciding what measure is most suitable for a particular problem.

One frequently measured characteristic of exports is weight. But total

tonnages involve the complication of internal shifts in commodity composition

and lack the characteristic of price weighting that is necessary to give

economic significance to an aggregate of many commodities. From time to time

total tonnages of farm products exported have been calculated. But such

figures have little value for most economic analysis.

In an attempt to measure exports in terms of quality along with quantity, the food energy content of all commodities having food use has been

occasionally calculated. Except in periods of great need for food, as in

19li6-U7, this measure is unsatisfactory. Not only is it unsuitable from a

nutritional standpoint; it also excludes nonfood farm commodities.
- 00 -

Another common characteristic used as a measure of exports of farm

commodities is acreage of cropland required to produce the con^odxties. A

measure based oiHthfTcharacteristic is regularly calculated and is useful

for certain purposes. 36/ This measure, however, does not take account of

labor and capital used on farms to produce commodities exported.

For most economic analyses, a measure of value is needed—one totaling

quantities times prices. Depending upon the problem under study, the choice

lies among quantities and their related prices at shipside, at the farm level,

or at specified intermediate points in the marketing process as well as between current or constant (base period) prices.

Current value of products as they are exported is widely used to

describe "the movement of farm commodities out of the country. The Foreign

Agricultural Service publishes a value series of this type 37/ which does not

include shipments to United States Territories. But many factors bring about

changes in the dollar value of e^qjorts—change in quantity and in price,

shift from raw commodity to processed product, and change in freight rates

from farm to port, to mention a few.

To remove the effects of change in price, a fixed set of prices can be

used. This yields a measure of changes in quantity or volume.

The place in the marketing process where the volume of e^orts is

measured is important for the analysis of particular problems. In studying

volume of trade, quantities and constant prices at shipside should be used.

The revised FAS quantity index of agricultural export trade is such a measure 37/. But if the problem is related to demands on the farm economy coming

from foreign sources, it is necessary to exclude the effects of changes in

amounts of marketing services exported with the "raw" farm commodities. This

is accomplished by valuing the farm equivalents of exports in terms of farm

prices, the procedure used for the new index of exports of farm commodities.

Using the Index of Exports of Farm Commodities

The form and structure of the index of exports of farm commodities were

determined by the requirements for building up the master index of supplyutilization of all agricultural products. In this framework it measures the

volume of farm commodities exported abroad or shipped to our Territories from

year to year and the relative importance of this movement in the total utilization of all farm commodities.

.M^ k A. f ; Agr. Agricultural Outlook Charts 1955. October 195h, p. 22.

Produit?;« onÎVÎf'î ^"""^S^i^" Economics RÜiiíi^h-Sí^ch. Changes in Farm

^^^TTS^i—.^TÏ^i?^/?^ 3- PP- 13-lf^. July 195U. (PÏi;^ud7T ~

37/ î'o^eign Agricultural Service. Foreign Agricultural Trade. Monthlv.
- 91

-

h. LU u <

:D

S

'Z. < -J ^ < è> -J 3o 3U

UJ ÙL ^ O

tt:

<
92 .

Table 28.- Indexes of exports of all farm cammodities through conmercial

and Government channels, with percentage coniparisons, 1924-54

Calendar

year

Total exports

and shipments

to Territories l/

:Percent-

: age of

zation

Index,

Through commercÍ£ú.

channels

Index,

19U7-1^9=100

Percentage of

total

exports

Government deliveries

Index,

19U7_49=lOO

Percentage of

total exports

USM

deliveries for

e^^ort

Milltai^r

shipments

for

civilian

tise

1921^

1925

1926

1927

1928

1929

1930

1931

1932

1933

193í^

1935

1936

1937

193Ö

1939

1^

19'H

19'^2

19't3

19Wf

19U5

19l»6

19»^7

19W

19lf9

1950

1951

1952

1953

1951*2/

88

85

86

93

86

80

68

66

70

63

50

k6

hk

50

58

51

Percent

9.2

8.5

8.8

9.1

8.6

7.9

7.1

6.7

7.1

6.3

5A

5.0

h,3

5.1

5.9

k.a

39 3.6

38 3.1*

50 1*.3

78 5.9

78 6.0

93 7.3

108 8.3

10l^ 8.2

92 7.5

104 8.3

90 7.0

111 8.U

91* 7.1

83 6.3

91 6.8

142

137

lUO

150

139

129

110

103

111

102

81

75

71

81

91*

82

63

38

22

26

34

56

81

102

88

110

118

11*5

11*3

123

138

Percent

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

97

98

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

62

28

21

27

37

U6

60

59

66

81

81

91*

92

95

9

6

36

95

162

150

155

152

108

99

91*

1*3

56

ll*

18

13

Percent Percent

3

2

38

72

79

68

1*7

k6

27

19

18

18

IT

5

7

5

- 5

16

8

13

22

16

1

2

1

1

2/

«>rt «îtîn ?n í«íi!T f *^°'^ffi»l exports and shipments and USDA deliveries for exSíÍed Z îîbîSÎL\^^°*''^%fJt^^^"«^^« "il"^y shipments for civilian use in oc cupied and liberated areas. 2/ Preliminary. 3/ Less than 0.5 percent.
- 93 -

Table 29*- Indexes of exports of all farm commodities

for food and nonfood uses, 1924-514' 1/

Pood use Nonfood vise

Calendar ]

year Index>

19U7-lt9«100

Percentage

of total

exports

Index>

; 19U7-1*?'100

Percentage

of total

e:q?orts

Percent Percent

192lfr : 60 1*1* 137 56

1925 : 1*3 33 158 67

1926 1*3 32 161* 68

1927 50 31* 170 66

1928 1*0 30 168 70

1929 1*1 33 150 67

1930 i 36 31* 125 66

1931 :- 31 31 126 69

1932 26 2k 11*8 76

1933 : 19 20 ll*0 80

193^ : 19 21* 105 76

1935 '. Il* 20 lOl* 80

1936 : 13 19 99 81

1937 : 18 23 108 77

1938 : 28 31 112 69

1939 : 28 35 92 65

19H0 ': 19 30 76 70

19'H 36 61 1*1 39

26

26

19it2 : 58 71* 37

191*3 : 90 71* 56

19IA : 95 78 1*8 22

191*5 ! 102 70 77 30

19tó : 107 63 109 37

31* 191*7 : 108 66 97

191*8 : 97 68 83 32

1*2

191*9 : 95 58 120

1950

1951

1952

': 68

: 100

: 81*

1*8

58

57

128

131

111

52

1*2

1*3

U6

1953 : 70 5l^ 50 105

126 1951*2/ : 71 50 y^^

1 / T , , ,-^ 4. +« Ti q Territories, USDA deliveries 1/ Includes commercial exports and shiiments to U. S- -^«^^^L. iii^rated areas,

ior expon^and military shipnents for civilian use in occupied ana xioera

2/ Preliminary.
- 9l -

m stua^ the cha....^n the i^» gu ^^^^ ''^l.'^.T.^J^WÂ.^

exports of fam cciranodities in 19>3 leii uexow WIB *« i^ ^^t^ ~ . , ^ 4„ Toc:)i Thmitrh the voliune is about tne saPie, ex-

^S^ rrrfi::rsÄ.t^ÄTotal aa.^ ^or fann co^noaitie.

than they were in the twenties.

Looking back over the last 30 years one is vividly ^^^"^^^ f."^^llllf

of the dep^ssicn during the thirties, along with repercussions of the havdeySmoot Tariff Act, on foreign demand for agricultural commodities and of shipping problems in the early years of World War II.

The index also highlights the upsurge in exports at the end of World War

II, when farm commodities «ere so badly needed in the war-devasted areas, and

again in 19^1, when the wheat crop failure in Argentina opened many markets

and the Korean outbreak affected other commodity markets. It was only in

these years of extraordinary happenings abroad that the export market reclaimed the relative importance it had held before 1930.

Changes in makeup of exports of farm ccmnodities during the period

covered by the index are as pronounced as chaiiges in volume (fig. 5)* "he

most drastic change in makeup was brought about by the eiltical shipping

situation in the early years of World War II. To get more effective use out

of the limited shipping available, livestock was fed here and the meat shipped to England rather than ship bulky feed ccmrriodities. To this same end

e:q>ort of high food value products such as dairy products and eggs was vastly

expanded.

The relative importance of major comraodity groups, in terns of farm

values figured at 19U7-U9 prices, varied widely. For example, cotton made up

about two-thirds cf the farm value of exports in 1933. In 195U it accounted

for about a forirth. Meat in 19ii3 made i:p about a third of exports, in 195U

about a tenth. Table 30 lists the relative importance of major commodity

groups in our exports in selected periods.

Table 30.- Relative importance of major commodity groups in exports of

farm commodities in selected periods

Commodity 192^-29 : 1933-36 *. 19U2-li5 Î 19U7-U9 1 1950-ÎÎU

Percent Percent Percent Percent

Cotton

Grains

Meat animals

Tobacco

Dairy products and eggs

All others

Total

h9

19

12

11

1/

9

61

6

9

lU

1/

10

Total : 100 100

1/ Included in "al3 other" category.

13

Ik

30

9

20

lU

100

21

la

6

9

8

100

Percent

25

36

9

9

7

lU

100
- 95 •

Before ve close this section a few words of caution about this index

should be given* It does not reflect changing dollar values arising either

from shifting relationships among commodity prices or changes in the general

level of farm prices• It does not measure the total significance of exports

of farm products to the lÄiole economy, since it excludes the costs of marketing services* And finally, it does not measure the competitive position of

our farmers in the world market, as the effect of Government assistance,

which has been rather large since the days of lend-lease, is not measured

separately.

In conclusion, we wish to emphasize the point that this index measures

only the quantity of farm ccmmodities exported, not exj^ort demand for commodities produced on farms in this country. The latter requires taking

account of changes in prices received by farmers and prices paid for coraroodities e^Tiorted*

EXHANATION OF DEPARTKENT OF AGRICULTURE ACCOUNT 38/

A Department of Agriculture accoiuit on the distribution side of the

index of supply-utilization of farm commodities was set up for a special

purpose. It was to measure annual takings of such commodities from

commercial channels by the Department of Agriculture expressly for subsequent shipment abroad under foreign supply and special exi^ort progranis. 39/

Quantities thus removed are designated in the master index as "Department

of Agriculture net purchases for export" (table 31). They are derived by

adjusting the Department deliveries for ex^.^ort by the change in Depai^tment

stocks. These estimates have been checked with procurement data for major

commodities UO/ and found to be quite reliable.

As noted in the section on stocks in chapter 3y the Department has

acquired stocks through (l) direct purchase to support prices, (2) deliveries

of collateral which had secured price-support loans, (3) domestic emmergency

programs, and (U) special purchases for export under various programs such as

lend-lease, UNRRA, and current supply and foreign economic assistance pro«

grams. Only those stocks acquired by purchase for eaqport—with a few minor

exceptions—are used to derive the measure of net purchases for export.

Stocks not expressly acquired for this purpose are included with commercial

and faiTO stocks on the supply side of the master index under the heading

"available stocks"; they may be returned to distribution channels under

favorable price conditions.

38/ Prepared by Leva C. Taylor.

39/ This category probably will be dropped in the future, when foreign

supply activities of the Department cease.

W Procurement data are in terms of contracts let. Infomation on

deliveries against such contracts are not available on an annual basis.
- 96 •

A problem arose in the selection of stocks for the Department account

vhen we found that prior to January 1, 19U7, Department stocks of each commodity were not specifically divided between those hela for the price support

and those for the export supply program. For the years 19U1-U6, Department

stocks of barley, corn, grain sorghums, oats, rye, wheat, potatoes, peanuts,

cottonseed, flaxseed, soybeans, cotton, tobacco, shorn wool, and mohair were

included in the category "available" stocks along with commercial and farm

stocks. Department transactions for these commodities were for price support

purposes almost exclusively. Whenever Department stocks of such commodities

were used for export, they were shown as purchases for export in the same

year in which they were delivered. All other Department stocks were placed

in the Depar-tment's export stock account because they i^re used principally

to meet export needs. 10/ Beginning January 1, 19l7, we divided holdings of

all individual commodities by program, using only stocks reported as acquired

through the supply prograirt of the Commodity Credit Corporation to derive net

purchases for export.

Deliveries for export represent exports to foreign countries and shipments to Ü. S. Territories from Department holdings in the year that their

export was reported. But Department purchases for export measure the

quantities at the time they are removed from market, though they may not

be shipped out of the country until later. We considered purchase for

export to be the proper stage at \rtiich to gauge final distribution to get

proper year to year residuals for civilian disappearance. Whenevc^r supplies

acquired under price-support operations are exported, they are registered as

purchases for export in the year in which they moved out of the country, not

in the year of actual purchase, unless these were identical.

The commodity composition of the Department's net purchases for export

has changed with the needs and conditions of the times. During the war years

19U1-U5 net purchases of meat animal products represented 36 to Ui percent of

total purchases. These were halved in 19U6 and since then have amounted to

no more than 7 percent of the total (table 32). In contrast, use of food

grains for export increased after the war, accounting for more than half of

the total purchases in 19li7-U9. In 19^2, when Department purcliases were

greatly reduced, food grains accounted for 93 percent of the total • That

year large quantities of wheat were shipped to Greece and India» Net p\irchases of poultry and egg products in 19Ul-iiU and also in 1950 and 19^1

amounted to lU to 2$ percent and were minor in other years except I9Í4.6

Ul/ Quantities moving into domestic use or to the Armed Forces were

subtracted from purchases in the year of reported distribution and added

to the civilian disappearance or military takings. For details on individual comino»üties, see Agriculture Handbook No. 62.
• 97 -

(12 percent). Takings of dairy products for export have fluctuated rather

widely, ranging from \0 to 19 percent of total purchases in 19Ul-U^ and

dropping to a low of $ percent in 19!i7. In 19^2 and 19^3, when total Department purchases for export amounted to Ifess than one half percent of

total utilisation, purchases of dairy products, chiefly nonfat dry milk,

accounted for 33 and 6U percent respectively.

Table 31.- Indexes of Department of Agriculture deliveries

and net purchases for export of farm food

and nonfood commodities, 19Ul-!íU 1/

(19U7-U9=100)

All farra < ! ]Pood î Nonfood

Calendar [

commodities îÎ conoodities ; coitnnodities

ft 1 k

year \ Deliv- [ Net pur-' ;; Deliv- * Net pur- [; Deliv- 1 Net pureries 1 chases ', eries [ chases ] eries * chases

19la : 68 82 61 75 150 209

19U2 : 170 22U 150 20U U25 588

19li3 ! 289 318 262 236 6U3 900

19là : 2U9 2U7 2li6 238 29U hlU

19U5 Î1 206 17U 203 165 252 350

19U6 iÍ 231 205 20U 173 581 803

19U7 iï 128 1U7 118 lUO 266 268

19U8 ir 83 75 88 78 19 21

19U9 Í 89 79 95 82 15 12

1950 t 72 68 77 71 11 15

1951 !: 89 lOU 95 109 8 12

1952 t 19 16 21 17 ^ K

1953 : 27 28 29 30 ^ ^

1951i3/ : 23 2U 25 25 2/ 2/

1/ Deliveries for export differ from net purchases for export because of

changes in U3DA stocks held for export and transfers to other channels of

distribution,

2/ Negligible.

3/ Prelljninaiy.
- 98 -

Calendar

year

19^1

19tó

19^3

19^

19^5

19^6

19^7

19tó

19^*9

1950

1951

1952

1953

195*^ y

Table 32.- Percentage distribution of United States Department

of Agriculture net purchases of farm ccanmodities for

export, by commodity groups, 19^1-5^

(Negatives represent transfers to other utilization channels.)

Crops

: Dry :

Bever-:beans: Food

ages : and : grains

:pea8 :

Fruits

and

nuts

Oils

crops

1/

Potatoes:

and :Sugar

sweet- :crops

potatoes:

Vegetables

Feed

grains Cotton

2/

Tobacco

Other:Total

crops;crops

Pet.

0.1

.2

1.6

.7

Pet.' Pet. ' Pet. ' PctT PctT Pet. Pet. !Pet. Pet. Pet, ¿»et. Pet.

5.1

1.8

3.3

2.3

-.8

.5

.5

2/

.9

1.0

2.2

2/

0.2

1.5

3.8

h,l

23.9

32.7

66.6

77.0

52.0

31.5

» 7.3

19.U

5.1

1.6

3.0

1.2

l.lf

-.9

.1

,h

3.7

-.9

h.l

-31.7

.5

1'

0.2

1.6

3.8

1.3

.3

.1

,k

3.1

9.8

15.8

5.5

9.0

0.1

.1

.1*

.7

.k

1.1

1.0

-.8

2.5

.1

0.8

l.lf

1.3

1.1

.7

2.1

1.5

1.2

.3

.5

5.2 13.3

.8 6.9

.7 8.2

.7 ^.5

2.5

2.8

7.5

i*.7

28.7

15.»^

10.3

10.9

3.3

1.9

8.0

18.7

8.7

.,k

.2

6.6

6.0

3.5

•3}

.5

— 31.2

0.1 23.3

.h 32.2

.7 2l».3

1.8

1.6

.3

l.k

-.2

.4

.1

U2.7

5Ö.0

85.5

87.9

86.7

5U.6

73.7

88.1

60.1

30.3

Calendar

year Dairy

products

Livestock

Meat

aniniELLs

Poultry

and

eggs

Animal

fibers

Total

livestock

Total

USM

net

purcbases

19'H

19'*2

19í^3

19'A

19'»5

19tó

19^7

19'*8

19»^9

1950

1951

1952

1953

195'* V

Pet.

16.7

llf.8

9.8

10.7

19.1

8.7 k,e

8.0

5.5

23.5

10.6

6.9

33.3

63.9

"MT

35.5

42.3

M».3

lK).l

37.»*

21.7

1.5

1.0

1.6

5.8

1.2

6.6

5.8

Pet.

16.5

19.5

13.7

2i*.9

.8

11.6

8.5

3.1

5.1

15.1*

H*.5

5.0

Pet.

1.2

.7

Pet.

68.8

76.7

67.8

75.7

57.3

U2.0

1'*.5

12.1

13.3

1*5.»*

26.3

11.9

39.9

69.7

Pet.

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

x/ includes cottonseed oil. 2/ Cotton lint only. ^ Less than 0.05 percent. V Preliminaryr
- 99 -

a

»

I

0)

u

o c

p a

H 1 1 1 1 1

O 1 1 1 1 1

•O 1 1 1 1 1

cd 3 00

•H +5

•3SH -ri »O

3^

i.^ c

(0 -I:

S

S

t •

tig

(O I .

•p q tí

•O o

I

u

I CO Q I I I I I I I I CVI COI I I I I I I I mv^ *

I I I I I I I I ITNJ

•« «^ «^ ^

H CVI H H H

S?l§5Hs rovo p rocT) IA

iilllllOOQiilillllOHCJ 0N-* í^ CO O CO H 0\ h-

««•«»« l^^l lililí I -51- H ONVO COlf\CO UMfN^ IÏNH C^IC*-| •* »k •* •» «v

GO lA

H t-i H rA H

I I I ! ! I I I I 1 I I I I I i I CM OJ CVI ONVO t- \r\j± o -^ H -:t CVI H

'•• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CO CO ITN-d- CO 0\ O ^ 00 CO ON CVI I 1 I I I I I I I I •• I I i I I (nH ICVIHS I I I I

I I

H h- coco t^- woo J; H 0\J± t^ \f\CQ CO 0\ ^- 0\Ç0 VO VO CO CO t-

-ci- 3^ \í\a 00 H CO CVI ON-dh VÛ 2F lf> ^

if\-3- cOifNOO ir\CVI b-jrf-sfVO O ifNON »S§l

CVICVICVICVICVICVICVIHCVIHHHHHHHH

VDOO líMfN IfN

CM t^t-COVO •^ »^ »^

HHHHCMCMCMCMCMCM

líMTw O -^ H CO 0\-íf CI ITi CO CO COVp

- _ b-00 00 CO CO CO CO CO ^-^-C0 00 00 o H COIACOCOCO t _ - -

CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO

_\vovo co-d-cp CM co^-vû-

> VO ir\00 o CM 3 VO CO CM VO I .8^5

Q mco^co <

CSCM COOiOG

t^ IfNlfNO lf\< •CO 0\ CO CM 00

OS

CO

CO lACO CO CO t^VO IfNVO t^ ^- t^co 00

^vocq

COHVO>

C^-sf t«-H 0\COir\Hlf\pCMHt^ CO-rt 0\ (

COCMlfNHHCMif\QHCMpO-5hVOHHo

CO CO^ if\ O O CO CKVO -;|-COt^HWtf\Ho

' <^-^ 00 CO lf\ CO ir\CQ ON CO iHCOCOVÛHCOCQOOO ON

-sfHCMCO OOOCKlTiCMtd Si| il ?l ^ 21 d d ?i Su S 9 il :^ d ^ i?^ ¡ííT»íííA^ »^^^^^ Í?

HQCM-^-d-QCM-ÄfCOCMt^CMCQVOQh-COCMCO lACp H Q ITNV^ J* OvqO O ITN vO

VO CO CO coco í-OpVOVOCMt-OHQNH ON^ o.^-^JC?öl-Ä ^jrf iO^-ljCiîS

S^Ä^CM^HS^ &;S flS^Rï&8 f^^'NS t^c5 cnf^H^Ö «vico ÖNH

C5NOOHHHOOOO00C0OOOCM CJO^ ^-

CM COCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCMCM COCOCOCOCOCOCOS55S^^^S5!S55!

H 00 NO H t^ ON^ ITN^ i

Hi

iTNt^O Q OCO VO ^-VO CO CM CO CM vp

>^ w w, w, w ^ K^ Ch O H Ö CM H O 00 lAVp ÇOCO

t- H lA C^ CM CM ONCO VO C- H t*--:h 00

•^•«•«•^•kl I I I «kl

8ÇO IfNVOVD

H H H CM I I

;H QOO'iAVO ÇOC^ ;,.

' >55 cr^ o o lA CM •V I •* »k «v »v

CM r-i H t-i f-i

I III

lO^ ^9 H lACOC

ON^ CO

* COCO

COt-VOCO O t*-v^ ONCVI CM CM^ q COVO CM ON 5;-J--

HlncnvöVO t^^ CM f-VO 0NHHCOirvC--HCM ^".tX•H CJ^ÇM

«^ <ñCM CM ÙSW O P0\S5^ÄC0 H COCOONO-d-OO lAVO lf\ ^-VO OiCO ON

CO^

VX) H

ONVO

•* •% »^ n m, n "^ "v "v •* •* n •» •* •* »v •* «v •* •» Z* ^7 ^7 ^V J? ^V jJ? ^V ^7 r\t rît HCMCMCMCMCMCMCMHHHCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM

Q H -d- VO ONVO VQ CM VO H H

ÇK ir\ ON çOCMCOHiAH^iA

O-^VO C^CMCO COVO COVO CM

lA

'^

^ lAVO t^OO ON o H CM CO^ LAVO t--00 ON

ONONChCriCACA üNöNONONONONONONONg»NONU>U>V^Ai^^ ON ON ON CNCNON ON ON ON ^^^?> ON 2^ 2> S^XÍ S" 3" S" S" H

O H CM CO-dh

lA LA lA LA LA

ON ON ON ON ON

iH rn iH »^ rn

3 O •

p

iÜ *^TÍ O

p fO CO «o

CO g m

.s "8

10 n

0) 0)

ig -. ^1

P q O I

.•al«!

pao 3

o g «

O (O tí 0) (O

0) o -P

W H +> o ü

•O Q>

(Oí

I

_ d a» 001

o -p

pif ti tt 10

e,*^

I ta

ON pf

0) I 7 M« V

Si^ « « "^-s 01 H «H o J tf

> 4^ ^ d O

0) d (O -p o p)

a VI -P 3

o CO o o 'H C

VI d) 'O 'O o

cQ p« 3 ^ d p

Pi 0} oS M

•H > d S'^.

'S s d

0) ;0 o d *H tt

tt 'H H W H

»tí ^í o Q

• *H G^ d d

<U P4 <U^^Pf rd

4^ -^^

«H

a

Ö d

o á 'S á

tú tí o o

o 4^ M

.. -p - "

"3 ® ri B

•H o 6 o o

o ^4 ^

D 0) H d -p

o d pí CO

CO s o a>

o »g ^ »o

CO

3 (O aS

CQ «H

o Ö ^

o o CJ

CO _ o

^ »tí Ü

s:s o .

o 'O

0)

(O

CO

(U 00 r-l

ü fH Pl

g3

sil d 0} CO

d ça ^

CO

CO

II
- 100 -

iiiiiUï^sijiiiiug^tiltgSSSHSâ

H H t-^ i-i

' ' ' ' «TvirKï r* ^ ^ ^

I

I I I I I

I I I i I

I I I I I

I * !

I I I

I I I

H H r-i H

I en SN ir\ (Tí O>^ VU t- rp Ch CVI

cnH I <M H H I I I '

I I

g IHHÎS«a3HSâISHSSIll§§&§

3

H H H rH I

JvoTr\o\HO>t>-ONLrN tr-:^: d rf rÎ v9 ) u^ C^ ON o H H t*--=l- o CVJ H eu o VO

•^ »^ «^ »x •»

CO mcvj-cr o

o\\o o i^ c\i cvj (ö o CO CO vo ON ip^vo cu-^

ww woíaiaiaicvicücviojaícvjcvj

vo ir—00 S O ON

V5-* ON cu LTN cu

C^CO t^CO 00 00 C-^00 00 00 C^vO l^ ^- t^oÓ'cO CO H H H H

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1

1 1 1

1 1 1

I (nçQ vo ON I vooo H eu

cocu r-) H

r-Î0?CO'cU

Q\ t^ t—CO 00

pi

i^ o cr^U\j^\Û «£Nt--p ont I H C\ ,-i rovo o Jt- 00 ffH t

t eu o eu ir^ LTs t^-:T if\0\cnc

JÏONtivOlfN

vovovovo OcOLfNC3NCUCUC7NÇUir\ ir\\Q 00 0" s?

t

-?il

5^3

II

P ft w

11^

eu irNt«-oo m^ i/N^vo LfNHCo ONONITWO UMO^ONCî

ONCO^ ON H eu i--* <

eu o ONiTNCU r ^ - 00 m o ON CO iTN i£N-3:

_. . _ t^euH-d-ooir\C?NCU

-4" uMfNv/MrMfMrNiíM/Ni/\-îf COiTv-:*- ifwû t-CJNH-:!*-^-* mmeu enço-s:-3:-S^7ÍA wajaiaiojcueueueueueueucueucu«cucucn(^fornro(nrocncr^

"^ iC-^ ^--^ 00 ^ vo ifN-:t H ON O '^'^ ONC3N t^VO ON '"'— — •-

eu I • m H t^ u\cB ^eu ^

t-{ H r^ rA

•« »v I I I I

SuNcneucuroeuQO ONVO 0 H >£ on vo-*^^NOvo ovcovo coco CO iOií> f^^S«â-^"^:5« t-eUlfMTNHVÛ CjNCO

eu

1

Ü

CTMTN'

eu ITN

CO ON CO O UN-* 00 Jit

'^ ÎD ÎD ^^"iQ COCOl/NCO

> 00 00 O CÖ t~- ITNVO VO HHeU00O\ONCU3-ON

CO CJN H eu eu H cojb- ^T W «r*ONU>HC0Q0p I ON d H W CÔ CO-Ï -4- 3

H H HI-ÎHCU HHH H HcJeu eu HHHeurÎHcucJHcueueucs?cvreucucj

\r\ o ifN^ i*- »D Q f*^ '^ <^-=f ^- o CO covû ^CUQONirNHOvovûON covo o Q\ < Ld ^ii>0^5<ï?i^-a:3- eu cooOvOCD^t-eU ifNCOjO^ e-oj Heu P^Ävi^< a\9,:> lAvp eu ITN CO.* IfN ON IfNVO IfNlfNC^OCUVO UNCU ITNCO H ON CO-d" Î- CU 00 -* «

CO CO CO CO-d- CO CO.* -d" eu H eu H -:!• -sf IfNVO t*-OHCUHCUOCU«-IHHCUCOCO

cucucucueueueueueucuevJwcucucucucaKiînînAîof^

o H eu CO-:t

UMTvlfNlfNUN

ONCJNONONCJN

t^ rA r^ r^r-i

a 3B oo I S

43 qn o • X ^

•H T: -p M W «3

c* <U «H 09 Q

•PO •

I g H a p

I CUl^ H H o

rw cû O "^

^ PI *

»0 eu p g^ «

au Pi, vol

••^ * -^ .. b

loo's-^

«d "d p3 u ;^ k M

il

fo 3 s d -H

rMï

& S3 •d ri 0) jd II

M M s p «ri H^ .»^

4^ ;s

11
- 101 -

ID

0>

vol

ï

OB

Q)

&

M 0)

o &

o ç^

•p S-dl

o

o a

I a

II

•p 0}

a m

31

§

S3 01

4* ^5

ri

5'

I

I

ê

U

S!

I I I I

I I I I

I I I I

I t I I I I I I I I

I I I I I 1 I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I

t C-< 7:^7::i^M

I

I H H-s^ 0\0N mv

COH H CVI H

! t^OO cOHh^ M MM

I I I I I I

I t I I I I

I I I I I i

I H H OJ CVJ lAOOOO

no ! Î^T^T^'ÎH

O COOO ONITV

VOCO VQ ÇVi t-^,

a\o\ufN

CVJ mt-- _

COfOlAlTs

o lAfOOXOO H ir^cvi-d- H

H o H o\a\

H coçy m o\oo ip^ t— c^ H

J- i£\cq OVO ONQ J; Hcq t^ OO H ro mvo C^GO CO H

CVJ H CO

0\.co CA

H H H H I I H H H H

öS CO CVJ-rh m t^ CJ\ 8k H oo'^vo S^ CVl

t-VOJ^VOV <ncO O -5l--:f-=fvOHOa)CVJ0N

CO ro ro-d- oo-if

-* H «^Ir-vo 0O-* < ^ -H cuco ^^O ir\<

• CVJ eu m<

>vo ro

>^ ON.

oooo CO rom-:t en-* ro-dVO ro i/\^ CVJ eu m Ö O vo '

Jd- l/M/M/MrvLfMr\LfN ITV-ZjCOITNH 0\

O^-CO-if O

CU CO CO CU ON

ir\ir\i/\ iTN-*

f- CO ITiCO VO cu vo H CO o CO

O cu ON CO cu

líMTv cu o ON

irVLfMTVVO UMTV ^ ^ ITVlfN-^ l/\^ ITV-Zt líN UMTN LfNVO ll^VO VO UMTv ITN VO VO VO VÛ LTN

O cu CO o Lf\

cu C*-ON ufN iH co-d- CO CVI o-d-

^ Ö QJ VO H m O CU rH t:rvo ir\ (35 03 o H CU cu CT\^ 00 ro

ITN IfNCO ITNVQ O CU CX> O ON

f-l CO o C3NCO CU CO CO H jEr

-d- b-ONO t^O iPvON ONQO

^

00 c^ cu ^ VO o t- ONCO ON C-OD CUOrHCVJCUQJVOCJN -d-VOHHcOHHCOiTi « cu CO H cu VO CO^

gC-H OOp

H ITi CO t^

ITNH COVO CO

CO ON ON COVO 00

VO CO H CU CKvQ

CO^xf^ CO^

IfNH ONOJ COH

ON ON ON ONO H "

ITiONONO COC^-

COCU H COCU CO-

> VOSO 00 ONVÛ 00 H CU ^ fc-^ ¿t Q

hi/NC^t*- O VO VO VO u^ C*-00 O 00 CU

I- IPk CU CO ^ VO U^^ -d- ITNVO l/N IfN-Sf

t^VO-d-VO vp

O H cu t— ON

VO UMfN^ CO

\r\ o\^ 00 CO COVO iO H JÄ^

cu H 3- ON o H i/NCO ^ CO

CJNCU t-VO ^-t~COVO H o CUOtTNCUxfCU H-ífVOQO COH < ii^

.*u^u^l/^^u^ jttAj*J'tfiJ'^ir\u\u\ IA UM/M/M/MTMTM/M/N u^ ir,vovOM3i^

ÍB)

W W ^ íu W W ON ON ON 0\ ON ON H H H H H r-l

O H CU CO-d- irvvO t^OO ON coîncocncocococococo

ONONONCJNONONCJNONONON

Q H eu CO

ON CJN ON ON"^ ON ON ON*^ ON HHHrHiHrHr-li-lrlr-|

O H CU CO-dITv ITMIM/N LTV

C3N ON ON ON ON

rH rH rn iH rH

ly and

eludes

means

thBiercia:

iîS ss g p «HO

^ cul o

o p a +>

_^ • H 3 CQ

Q) CQ PI 0) 0)

?: ! 8 -ä g •H a -P u titat

0 far

to s

minusawn f

g -p a ^

p »d »H Q} si rom q juste addit Her

s wit

H ^ ra 0) m

?i CQ i ^ CJ<

'S § tíf^A +>

O 0) -p

d 3 ^ CD <; C ÇQ CQ

SON -PO)

-* • M Oí

o I ra

0) o • •

8.d o

Pl CO -

OQ _

0) o <

•o »-ri

«> «J +> «y -t^ h <a o %¡

ät

?^á

8ïi U„„

^||^^¿

•H 8 p 0) »d 3

^ 5 o S S "d

•d o o 3 1-1

I a •tîg' io ö p.^

8 "d ij o " _

aS-ÖgfS 0)

CO P4 ijg

:^

^si^

?í Í5 oí rä o
- 102 -

o u

en o

U o rt

s «s Ö*col

Sä u

g o

o

o

o

O

O

VI

^.

o H

P -^ O n

'S 3

o o

&&

a >»

a -p

o -H

?^O

o

:5l

O

0) 0)

S

&1

VI g

O O

O

I^

•35 Ö 4* O

S-Ö 'S

0) tí O

> tf VI

:5i

I

H Pt—,

'O CQ

o"

•H 4)

PH h

ä

:d

3e^l!§SffSgäsS§|sSS|§|||HSS&S-äS t-VD CVJ

»»!5Ä^"»i5^''^"»iiÄii^"^''^''^ii^"^"H"S^

CO CAO ^s^s » ai cu Of vo ONVX) UN <nvo :3t fe: J9 ?? îi Si ^s^ass

vovot-rHif>fc-ocu co^ en CM ON-* Q VRv^f^-äl '^

VO OJib irvcvi oviJNHvocvi q\o\cvi H.C?J^Î^ FX i}\v3 !Î\ ir\vo vo t- t^-* vo ^ uMfN t-vo 00 vo ir\[33<

) vo or» 0\ H vo <0 H vo C--CQ

_ - - '^ONÖlVOCMfpf-i

) ON o 0\ GNCSeo ChO O C7\0

t^lTiVOCO-*

t—lfN

vooD CVJ o ro<n HCQ OVCVJ ovcvj Q gkjni W><!?PQ^CQ OJ H ^

cvi oN«â)'(n^ ,^05 00 oS'A^t-o'î^CÎ îAlr\"P-UN CKvôJt if "c^cvi^vo

JHHCVJCVICUHHCVIHHCVIHCUCMCUCUCVICUCUCVJCVJCVIOICVICUOIOICVJCVICU

VO H COCO

_ GO CJ\-dh <V TJ ^a^ Ä. t*- ir\ IS\\Ù ^ -;*• PO CVI îl*:00 C^ UMA

CSI-2.o>g.HC0 ^> 3 uSir\ Ä

CM

QO-* tr\<nj* ONt-vo irvONiíN-sí- ">-* ">S! ^^ ÄJP^

_\ o ö\vö -i-^Hvo^Gövoo"?! ^ <r>^ ñivo' H^ H -* Ob vovo a\Çi.vQ.t::-Q cjs cj vq .1^ q ir\-^.Q "N-^ .Q Hd Q^ S^çKcr

CO 00 H mí--cCi t- cu o tr\ro ocu-*cucufOt^ifNornHvoH CO lAvo i-\ ií\(nir\

-í U> lí> U\ lí\ U\-5h IfVVO-* CU UMOUMÍMIMT^UN VOVO VO VO VO IfV t-VO VO VO VO VO VO

a\co <nifMf\cu uMíNfrooi m^ t* if\ t^ ir\ oi owo m moQ o cu vo co t^co yo cvi

h-t-oo-d- ovcuoo o\b\ooo wôôvo-d- HCM ONQjvo ^-o\Q5 <nvo coJdtvo cSo H

OVONCAOOrHHHHHCUrnHrOcn enJ- .* >S t^ h- C*- cFvVO t*-VO VO iTi UN i^vo

H rí i-T cvT cu cí cí oT CM cí oT oT cící cu cí cu cvT cu cí cu oT cvT oT o?

HCO CUVOVp cu t-H

Q5 HCQ^OCSrOH

H cu IH H cu H cu cu cu H cu H H r i^^^^a^äi I (n

I Si

. . _.k u> 0\ eu -sh CÖ rovo -d- Ö - -

I eu H H H fO eu eu CO-d- ir\VÛ C7V ?^.^cocoH^^ir^coH t^H eu H

* coocQcQ vo eu

o eu o o o cu •i n n n •« ^ •«

rA i-\ r-\ r-i rA H r-^

H-d-^o Lp»mH irse

-:t cu o ro-d- OVOVO VO 00 VO t-vo P-cMm^MMui^s^m I ifvvo cu Lr\

i r-i irv-d- ON

i r-l o o o

\f-iHHHi-\r^Hr-irr\r-i

CQ 00 ^ UMfN C3N-d- cu ^ H O^ cu 00 -d- CO t- o b-VO V

o trvcua- pa^^7^r>VD i

3^0 H f^cü» Îï^^^S^ • o H t-CO l^'Ä^SS? H cu ON,i l?\^VOVO t-oco t*

.^ cu H t^ ^-SD Si'9. ..

HHHWCVIHW« H H H"H H cíe« H^H^CUOTH^W OlVcocíworcJcrcJcvi

o

•d; ií>VO t>-00 C3NO H cu rO-d" IfNVO t^co o\

r-i r-\ r-i r-\ r-i ^ ON ON ON ON ON ON ONXK ON<K ON ON (

o\ o H eu (n-d-
- 103 -

0)

all

•3 i^

o

^-CQ cnCVIHHHcOO-*0\ONO\0\rO t-^ GO 0\ CVl CVl líNVP UNO^COCQ pOiCQ

H CM m^ irvvo t^oo t-OD t^ l^ í- t^ t- t^-co 0\ 0\C0. VO if\-í, CVlHOQHHHrj

• CI CO >VD CO

CVICMCVJCUCUCVICVIOJOJCUCUCVIWCUCVICVlCUOJCncOCOCOCOCOCO CO-d- -d* -* J- -¡T

O CVJ CVl VO CO O-* coco CO ^ 00 J- H H C^iO <ï} ?> C^-á^.^-i* .^n í

VO VO VO VO VO VO VO VO VO'^VO" C^ U^VO VO VD VO" t- t-00 ONONCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOONON

co^ irvcoH-=f C^co ^r 0>

I CVl, coc^ cnirs

ON coco VO H ^'O cu -d- COCO ,Q «P 5^ ß!. 'ig, |0^

0\ SÑ OH H CVl fnit -^^^COCOCOCOUMA

c;; ^^-j^j^^^^-j^s^^^^sssj^^^J^s^^^^^^^^-^f-^-^^^

^l/NVOt^cO 0NOHCVI(O^«£N'OC^c0 0x2aïï2?â^^â^SS'^i^^S"^

HHHHHHHrHi-1f-lr-lr— H t-\ r-\ H

§•??£.

-.-^vol Q »O

SI'S ."

M 4> ^

•O «O <1> tí d d tí (tt O

' •» SUS ft H «H

CO bùP 'O
- loU -

I

"Sel 10

EH ^ O »H

ü

O

1

t

I

I >i

tí H ro

4£ Pí4£

O e fl EH o 0

P< o

ü

o)

o

8

0)

's

o

§

pp

w

<u n d

H »tí 0) Tí

4^» g > •

ü ü s

H

•

H

O

tí •H

s» S

•

H

ä

O

Tí

5

•

-i

^Sí^ Sí Sí Si 515* P^^ ^--^ - ^^ 5l Ö 5*^ í;^^ ~ ^^ 5lS^ 8^^ VO

H^ w' cí ííÍJ íi íí ^ H" H*^ rí w cj cj CU oT oí cJ cJ cu oí cu cu cu cu cu cu cu cu cu cu

^â§S^^^€;â&âS^^&Siî^^aP^H^^ÎÎ^cu3-tro<ncr;^^cu

^&Sâa^S<SaSâ!S^&?Î^Ei§Sïï5gl§SS^§t!^8i|&

S( S^Ä & Ä ÄS S^ ÎJ^âi S 5 K5 K KiR &S ä5^ Si líí Ä Kí&S^ iS(ä «

vo t-J- rovo H t^H COHCX5 VO ON^O CJ cvjcvj3:-*cvit^cvj-=i'VX)vD-ít^^'^""

H H fH H H H I H H I CVJ aaa!=ISäll^SSa3l§

VOvO CVJ O VQ ÇVI

lACVI CVI H o^o

ON CM ifN ON LfN-=f tl d j. ^

H b H LOÇP JEÍ Q SP cjJ je CVJ <

J H CVJ or»

CDOO VO

a\cvjo-^QtrÇQcvjvo os^co Qco trOè Q>f^^^ÇÔ^ cvj H H

' ' ^ CO o Oxeo t^ l/^OJ lAC^OvfH CJ\GO vovo t^vooo H ir\C0 O

H H rH CM , HIHHHHHCVIHHHH

. . ONOO l^â ONCO

HHHCVJHHHHHH

t^vo rovo rovo CVJ 0\ _

H m-sf (n rotrx or> o CO

&R5IS o a^

líMfN Q o m^ Q irv

O tr\^ CO i/\ ONOO -* '

irxt^H CVJ cvjvo CVJ3-^

O S 5 rO-^ ITN t^co CVJ Lf\

COCVJ CVl rOOJ IfMfNUMTNfO

H H H H H

OD-^fuNt^lfNÔN-.-.^ _.

VO t^ t-h-t-00 b-VO LfVVO

^5r <^d ^^JÖiOCvj Qo ^>OQ >OQ LTsvoopcQ roa^< vHVÖ C-VOC • VO ONirvir^

H O CVJ 0-5f CVJ-d-CO

- , CO H H m-* vo CVJ CVJ

irv irs irvvo vo t^ t- I^OO C*-

C^ CVJ-St 00 CVJ ifNOO Î^t*-

vovooo H J-vo C7^l/^-d•

r-^ r-i H

^8

»^ ^ HcooococvjcococvlcviH

on H .OJ ON ON

-:t irvvo ir\ o

CVJ CVJ CVJ H H

IfNVO O\00SCVJ SL î^ iO^ SH ^-^ ^ ^°9 o^-=^ <o oj cn^ co ^EXÎS^IratvvJrHmH oovo on H (n o vo OJ co

ooooxf^onooonooonononooin cn^ ci co ooTo cvj-4-' cnlñ:^' <^^ 3- ^t'

ir\ir\cvi^trvonaj-sr t-vo >^ o\m ir\co onONCVJ J" on

•as

o fHSI^BÖ^S^^^^^-'^ "îïl

b>bNö\b<cK(j<b<&^

HHHHHHHHH.-4HHHHHHH
- 105 -

Table 38•- Equivalent farm value of changes in available stocks of all farm

comraodities, by coînmodity groups, 192U-5U 1/

(Minus indicatest addition to stocks. )

•

• Crops

:

•

•

Calen- |

dar 1 Food ;

• Fruits!

1 and :

i

! :

5

; Oil ;1 Sugar'

!

; Feed

Hay, ;

\ silage,;

» «

! !

4

î

: Other ; Total

jear \ grains'! vege- :

: tables;

: ^

; crops ' crops'' grains

!

i

' and '

' forage

! Cotton!

: ^/ :

! Tobacco ! crops

; ^

'. crops

Mil. Mil. Mil. Mil. Mil. Mil. Mil. Mil. mi. Mil.

: del. dol. dol. dol. dol. dol. dol. dol. dol. dol.

192U i UO 11 -8U -11 «.».• ...• -278 lU 8 -301

1925 Î 1^1 68 -6 -3 •«. »«« -212 -U9 -11 -60

1926 ! -119 -55 -18 -12 «•« —.• -296 -5 -1 -506

1927 ! -57 -32 -U8 -12 137 —« 335 62 • 3 387

1928 :: -187 -30 26 6 -90 •«« 97 U7 -U -13U

1929 ! -37 79 6/ -U5 157 — -108 -56 -2 -u

1930 • -156 -29 -59 16 292 ..^ -393 -7U -1 -UoU

1931 I -119 -58 10 21 -560 — -577 -118 -31 -1,U33

1932 !! 22 -19 -9 -9 -578 ••.. 80 36 -2 -U79

1933 Í 282 Uli -32 -U8 7U6 •«« 206 -8U -6 1,108

193U : 329 -U 52 -2 1,198 «.• 218 92 11 1,895

1935 ! -9 7 -79 37 -1,373 ... 172 -U7 -10 -1,300

1936 : 1U7 29 70 7 1,29U ... lU 9U 30 1,686

1937 : -356 -90 -lía -17 -1,565 ••« -682 -86 -29 -2,966

1938 : -255 -61 -13 -37 -31U -2li6 -359 1 3 -1,282

1939 : 8U 9 -35 3 -178 63 55 -2U5 -18 -263

191*0 : -2liB -6 -112 -11 -173 -85 -33 -129 -15 -312

19la : -582 U7 -70 -25 -23U -7 112 28 -33 -763

19U2 Î -32U 18 -209 75 -31U -169 -8 23 2I46 -662

19U3 : 723 -1 -13 20 757 90 127 176 -95 1,781

19là Î 9 16 126 35 -233 • 17 -66 -1U3 -51 -260

19U5 : 32U 77 2U -9 159 -72 392 -liO -2 853

191»6 : 91 -16U 83 -2 -33U 105 718 -110 33 U21

19U7 : -186 llO -50 -58 1,131 15 26 -75 23 867

19li8 : -202 -87 -231 US -1,855 72 -UOl -UU -1* -2,707

19U9 : -150 -75 -67 -10 -95 -29 -U56 -15 -30 -926

1950 : -236 1 -108 -39 -155 -78 7U0 -33 -61 29

1951 : 311 101 U5 26 557 -77 U8 -118 2U 917

1952 •• -506 -35 -22 9 -82 113 -337 -127 20 -967

1953 : -U89 -7U -50 -lU -227 -3U -62U 29 9 -1,U7U

195li2/ : -316

!

23 29 -12 -628 -60 -191 -132 61 -1,226

|¿See footnotes at end of table.

Continued -
- 106 -

Table 38,- Equivalent farm value of changes in available stocks of all farm

commodities, by commodity groups, 192U-5U i/ - Continued

(Minus indicates addition to stocks.)

( Livestock

Calen- ;

dar í

year ]

; Dairy '

• products

Meat

animals

' Poultry I

' and eggs '

' Animal

; fibers ;

! Total

! livestock !

: ^ ;

\ Total

; change

! Mil. dol. Mil. dol. Mil. dol. Mil. dol. Mil. dol. mi. dol.

192U !! -5 39 5 -.> liO -261

1925 !: -2 99 -9 ... 88 28

1926 !! 11 9 -1 ... 19 -1»86

1927 -8 6 6 ... U 391

1928 !Î -5 -80 -8 -92 -227

1929 ! -16 17 1 ... 2 -9

1930 ¡ 5 30 -15 ... 20 -38U

1931 22 3 3 ... 29 -1,U05

1932 ! 6 la 29 ... 76 -liOU

1933 !! -Uo -88 -13 ... -llil 968

193U ! 20 -lU; -li ... -128 1,767

1935 !! 13 186 2 ... 200 -1,100

1936 !Î -29 -61 -15 16 -89 1,598

1937 i 15 180 -2 -21 171 -2,795

1938 !! -33 1 20 18 6 -1,276

1939 ! 31 -27 -19 12 -U -266

19lí0 ! -6 -116 -lit -5 -1U2 -955

19la 1! -38 75 -1 -120 -8U -8U7

19U2 1 53 28 10 -U9 -28 -690

19U3 -6 -36 -lU -27 -82 1,700

19UU :: 2 98 15 35 150 -110

19U5 i 11 -li6 -67 -l43 -1U5 708

19l<6 Í -28 67 5 "la 5 U26

19U7 ! 6 -106 -19 78 -50 817 19U8 ! -37 26 70 U3 101 -2,606

19U9 ! -80 2U -91 92 -57 -983 1950 !

1951 !

1952 !

1953 !

1951i 2/ '

! 7

! 68

-51

1 -196

! 29

7

-1*9

-25

87

-23

-38

98

36

11

-12

U7

28

-25

-19

-1

23

11*6

-65

-112

-5

52

1,063

-1,032

-1,.586

-1,231

lol^«^ iî i^v!ir ^""^f^ ^°^^^«' °^ ^« *" <^^^ or "»^der price support

îrSit CoL^Sii^n^^''"^!^ ^^ processors, and stocks acquired by the öLnodity

vïîes SS ÎÎe\ÏÎÎS '^''1°^ '^^T* ^ ^^'^^^^^^ «'^PPly programs. Coverage vSt^î^^Îatoïf ±O/T;^^ ^T P''^^^" ^ 19i^7-49 used throughout. ^ Fruits,

ieraeS cásSÍ S!^: sweetpotatoes, dry beans and peas, and tree nuts. 3/ Babassu

and tung nuts, k/ citton lint oxlv %/^l^ h/^ 1^^' ^®°®^ ^®^' soybeans,

table seeds, hops, and mstaSd ifl' t/ ^VÍIJ^^^Í^V ***' ^^^^^ °'°P ^ ^^«®-

inary. 8/ inclSd^s honriT^Stlin I aí^oJÍSesli^ía^^^ ^'"^^'^ ^^""-
- 107 -

ITS

0)

m

a> •

H H

^

•g •

bO T

0) ä

>

•

H

O

0) tt »O•

%4 7i f—1

^

lf\

«

o Q. tr Ç^ ^>cQ QQ. Ç5 »A^ H Q t- H if\vo -5 lA t- cnj± ifNvo t- cvi CO f- P- en ir\ cn^ vo vo v3 en CO en o\co HcoHHcnot-bcviS t--vo vo P-t--(ü S\ o

m

•^•i«V«V«\*i«V*V

liMfM/MfNUMfMfNUMIMrMfM/N lf\VO IfNVO VO M) VO lf\VO VÛVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVO C^ 1

1

Ü

CÛ Ü

a 4^ oa

0) <u a> G g G

cS Ei oS

•P -P G «g G

P4 g Pi

Pq

3-

P QVO OJ IfNON

CVI^ COVO t-H SI H «S ONCVI CMrowvot--*AOHt- covo <

' -j- 0\Q ONOO l/NVO "

•3-^M5 UMîMTNVO

r-4 §1 ^ COVO t^HCVlHOJ ONCVJ Q Î-^ 0\ Q ONOO IT^VO ÍPiOOJ^COÍVÍrOLfN ON^

cJ cn<M CM cvj <n^ cnc*S(ncn^^-ii-3--*vo IALT^UNVO t-co i-^-vö P-t^t-t--c

gcvjvod^

Ht-{r-\r^r^rArAr-\r^r-ir^rirAHr-if-{Ht-\HHr-\Hr-\r^rAHr-ir-\r-{riH

0-:tVOOVOCQVOVOCUCVI t^lTNÎ«- t«-^ UM- ITNIA lf\^ <

t- t- t- t-VO 05 VO t- t-VO VO 0\C0 Q 0\ Q O H 00 Î-^ i H H

CVi mONQ 0\^QQ Q l/NVO t—VO ^-4- Q QNVO CO ir\^ OQ

lf\j* on O 00 ONOO ON t^-d- t-OHOOONONHOOHVÖ -:* UM/MÍN,S-:t IfN-d- -4- 3^ UMfÑ UN UNxf -:* UÑ^ -;J- ^ .

^TQ HÎ*T-^ 'P-Î t- H UN Q ON

o HVO t-CVJVOOO^

UNUNOJ t—UNVO t-a\

UNUNUNUNUNUNUNUN

t— CO CVI COCO -si- VO ON t—

r-._ . _^... ^Hcvj-d-tr»i>»i>Ç^ uNv^

UN UN^ UN UN UN^ UN UN UN UN UN UN UN UN^ ^ UN UN UN UN^ UN UN-d* ^ -zf ^ -* -d" -*

CQVOVO t-COCU t--*VO UNO ONVO UNCO CO H CVJ .. _ _^

O CM VO CVI COCO OOH^CM^VOOOH ONOO H H H COG

^00 ON W ON ONj

t^-CO-d- ON^ C—-

CVJ COCOCVJ cocot F CM coco.

1- ^ lf\ COJ- o CM CT\ COOO UNCO H UN H O

h Ôl CO CM 3- UN J- OOOQCMOOCOCMf-OOCO h^j*xi-a-^3-3jF \r\^ IfN UN UN UNVO

CM ^^00. Vu tCMCM COQO Q H CMJ ON 0Ntf5 _.-_ ^_ CM,, H- -

UN CM UNVO t— O CM UN ON t-VO^ CM HVO W ÇQ OD ÇQ^iO f^.Qii ^ SC?

_. ... . ^ . H ^ <Ö H H UNOO ^ H^ 0\ a\ S O CO CK ON O 00 t*-coH ^ ON ON COCO UNVO ^ ON

CJNOOONOcKOOOO

Q CM t-VO CJNONO O-d- CM H

M5 ^ UN t—00 00 00 t^ UN UN CO

CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM

t-\ rH Hr-\

0>^H HCM COi-ONCOCMVO UNCM UNO W b-CQ Ç^ Q! ï?

jW O UNOOO

VONONkON ON ON

ONUNO\H00-=i- H ONONCMVQQvq ONjOv H t" ON

ON J- ?-HOÔiHOQHH^H COÄ ON ON Q

OÑOoSoO ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ONOO ON ONOO CO 00 Ov

O CO ON

ON ON ON

b-t—UNONCMOOVOVO t*-UNQ

ONit <OH Q UNCO t^ UNOO V5

UN UNVO VO VO VO VO VO VO VO

t-J- 00 UN ON CM CO UN g\^ VO CO V^ ONQ UN

g^S'8 8

- H cotr ^

O O O ON

r-\ ni nir^ r-\ rA

8!.SSg: CO covo Q vq ço OJS5a§3âllS^ssSSSSS

^

ÇXI W CM &ÇM CM ÇO ON ON ON ON ON ON ON

H CM COj- UNVO r-oo 1 en ro co^ ÇO a? 5? C? ,w,^\ONONONqNONONONON

QNOHCMCO^

ON ON

0) H

•§

+>

O

a

(0

0) I

sO

o

CO
- 108 -

(¿H

Vi

0) o

g ü

•si

o lf\

IS

d o

CD

g.

ON

I

4^ (0

O O

I

pa

51

Pi

0\ l/N 1^^ Q CVI^ cocu t-CVJ

VO OMfNH u^ t^Hc

iTN-ît- H ON^ -:t enV4D ir\i— r- i^co 0\(

) \0 CVl OO o iTNVO CVJ o Vu H SP ON ^7-d VO OO ir\v^ ^- H ^

o CVi 3-d- CVl CVJ coco-3- UNVD H-ÍÍ- mVu OMfNt^CVJ H OMfN

(n

Q CVJCQ

s 3 s s s 3 3 ;:j Hl d d 3 d d d d ?l 2i ?i ;HH H;=I7=I7:I^ H

CO en ro^ j--d--d- LTN if\ Lf\vq vq

H 00 CVl CVl b- t-co CVl ir\CO -4- Vû C3N en H ^--^ -^^ Qp ^

. ._ __.._. ovoc^cocvivo cnvo o ir\oo t^o ^-r^u^o^-^-

t— r-1—coco Gocöcococococococx)co ONONOH^CVI (nrococj-^* if\^-^-hCVlcnV0^iAO0NCVJOQ-=Î-,, - ^

çnv2 c^fnHHÄHirNCfvcviovö^-ro 8^

HHHHHHHHHHHHHH

O H vo ^ ON t-co xi- t^ H <n CVl mo

en-* Ht^QcnHirNOirN0NCVJt-< 0\ C^ t—VO VO VD VO t-00 0-=f (nONO

0(nt^HocvjQHpav(np \f\^ o o

^c- CVJ ^' o^ H t^iA^S irNV_ ON3^. ON CVl eu ITNONCKV

• 00 CVJ C^C^lTNt^HVO ITNOO ITN l/NVO CncO -

UMfNLfNir^l/NI/NlfNlfN ITNVO VO LTN UM/N ITWO VO VO VO VO C^VO t*- C^ C^ C^ C^ t*- t^CO 00

ÎQ-^ !£VSO 00 ONHOCVI t^ONO-:!- HCVI-d" ON cnoO <nO00 t^t^b-CVI IfNOCO CVl

rooncncnfncninfnmcvjcvi en m cn> ^ cn^ fh^\3^ !ï ih encn^-S^^SS.

^^Ô l>-ONt*-Q ON iTN-zt ir\o^oo H t^H ONCTNOven ^-c

^ OJ UMTN l/NVO t- ON CVJ CTNVD H H 3 VO H VO ON o 5^<» < 5! 5 l/MTN l/NlTi ITN l/N^ ^ CO CoJ? ir\?\ lfN>3 ir\ ITV f^ N1^ O H H CVl cn-:JVO CVJ H HJ; ir\

H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H'^H^H'^H^ ci OJ'^CVJ'^CU'^CU^

"ri-^^.^.^A^A^A^^ cvi^vb-vb'ÎKvo Plil^^^u.

CVl CVJ CVJ CM CVJ CVJ CVJ CVl eu oi CVl cJ^cu-^ci <;;cv:îc;;cvîcvîr;;(.:îcvî^

v&Hvq ^îu !

VO i-l H H <n<

! ii> iO iO ^- ^<X) eu ^

î eu s ^^'^ ^'^ ^ ^

o cno ON

IBSUi: H H H r^

so 2D o C^^ <n fn rn

.Il .II'S S" S" ?>?>?>?> <^ ^.ww. HHHHHHHHHHHHHHÎ^

O H eu <n-diCM£Ni£>W^'^

•sêl

.s h s

Ö "8 ä

H^

m> -HH

P ç>

<U -H tí

§1"

to §

«i^

tí 0

OQ H s

(U 0 (U

ÍÍ 0

0 PI

CO p

10 ?i Í!

4^ n

^ »o

tí 0 'O

Pi

CO d 3 lude vili sug

0 -H tí

tí Ü ^1

H r 0

0

CQmake

udes

H

•Hm0

(0

«•8:^1

0 0

h 0^ H

a tí m fl

tu £

0 0 0 T

CO CQ H E

0) p T

tí Ä Î5 n

0 *^ *** t

8 V« dfi

«1

0) tí e "^

•0 0 -^vo^

;á ^ CO

H CO 0)

0 0 ^ •

tí H +» »d

H 0 «H <I)

tí -O +ï

«H Q CO Sn^jd

E-4 u tt

CO *d u

oS * 0 ^

<u «0 0 0

f*"-* «H ^

•H 0

for

od 0faxm

on t

CO 0 «H

g Ö g «g

CO r lO ri

0^ a 0

>o i 0 *o

S B <H 0)

0 H H

^gll ;! r â
- 109

-

ID

0)OS

3:51

i-: ^ S,

•H^

Ss

0)g

1

111ni

COo

SH Cû IIIm

de-SSS

10 I

d CQ

Sä s -tí

5äO

no

g CQ

Sä

Säd CO So

•HO

d 00 d CO

Sä s 'tí

encovó ON voS H CM

ro CMHH

ONVO U\VO vû

¿At*- t-ooco

LTNOO VO VO OJ ^ 0\t^vO if\

H cvim cvi

ir\M3 iTi^ CO vo

H oí "älvS W'â8

VOgN^VO

vo

^ooco ir\^ -5f CO 00 t- IfN

00mH ö\N t-a\^oo o\ vo CMVO ovo

IfNOOrj rj 0\

*^^8I^ CM CVI eu t-0\

OO CO

COCMVOo UTN

3^-ÎCM OOONÇjSirN 0\-S 0\OT ir\ HVÔO-it H CM CM H H H 3" CM CM CM H H

lAoo ONco VPtr^H' H cot-t*- t-vo cnçM. H CO H CO-^ .

-SÎ-OO CO CM 00

OVCO C^t-co

tr SPSS'

COHH

H CM CO CO

>l

H f-i r^ rA r^ f^ r^rA r^

OH CM CO-^

rAH riH t-i

ONHS

(0

d)

P4

PI

2S

•tí

(D

0>

•H>IPI

01

(0

0)

•H

•H

-P

CO CO COq
- lio -

a

M O

11O o

(O

Q)

-H

S

1

1s

'S

d

o

s o

11

o

o

EH

0)

p ><

o

s?

CO

fe

CO

O «H

o 4^

^ i

En y

O <4-l

O

o

+>

(O

_ o

'd u

o O'

•HCÜ

O

-5f VÖ 00 o C^-=í- C^ H ON <n ir\ H 1{N

i fO OJ Lf\ H H ÇVJ lA O .^ ^

I COCO^ iTNO O COO\vO-:t -:ta5

H C^COJ- 0\j

s -It vq H H c

r-H CM lAHC ! J- H Oil OcO C^lr^CVJ

ON

,-jCVJHCVlCVICVJr-|HCMCMggrjHrj-_j

0\ 0% 9S ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

CVJ co-d- m C*- UMA LfN-íf CO^-*-d; -^ -:t fO

^-oo^ûocvJr^mcvJvOO ip^ tr o^ ^-i^oQ mcnoJ vo cor!?S99. ç^pt ÄäS^SS

Sí^S^Í^S ^.^ET^S-^^^^^-^ ^

H r^

crjo coiA-d- m

H H »^ r-\ H H

ONCVI VO COCO VOVO í*- O-^ QN CUOOoO

LP^CXD iPiOO lA t^ t-7 t-- H H 0\^ CSrHHHHHHHHCVJCVJHCVIHH

CO^ 0\v CVJ r-vo <

cnoomjjh--ít-d-co Lr\H-3t g>

)00 CVI t^CVJ IP^OQO-^ CO-* CO CO co^ co3- 3- -=^ ^ -a- ^ ir\vo vo 81 ^S^EÍ§^|^S^^g§gG§ - -"•^vövOVOVOvo^Oh-t^t—^

H iHHHH H i-lrHH H

COQJ

VO VO

CO CO

COCU I s! o\co fô<

OJ ri i-î cu CVI CVJ H H OJ

CO^ ON ON ( > -^ Q LTN t*- Q Ä5 CO fo fr

Lf>-íí- vooo^ t*-CUCUqOir^ON

' t-3^ COH vo H^ ONCU r

uSíñ^-O H <^l-í^ LfNLfNVÖVd CTN ÜS-:* J:f' 6¡ -:f ITN CTS US-it

CUHCUCUCUCUCUCUCUCUOÎCUCUOÎCUCUCUCUCUOJ

VOVO

tTNvo H trço

3- Ö'CO Q . .

cocu cu o o

ONONH coo

~ " Q ir\<

cr\H <

>qOQp00^irvONCU-d-CUl:r

o CO^ H COlTNONr-l ON^-^-ON\Û t--:t ONCO

ON

H rA 1-i rA H r^ r^Hr-^r-\(Slr-\HHHHr-iHr^HHr^

&^^° í t^OO ITiVOCO

-4- cu cu^ - ONCO o CJNÇ^Q col VO H g

ùS CU ON ö uSif CVJ CO CO' H ON ro-5-' ÖNOvö'vÖcvloocu^ai GS vb'. .

C^CO C*-C0 00 00 t^OO 00 00 t^VO t^ ï>- t^CO CO OO p H O O ON ON CO ON ON ON ON CJNCO

H-if G\j:t CUÇQ lA

ON ÇU QNlTNtrÔO VO

äFS*irN<

JCUCUCUCUcOcOCUCUcOCU<n(v\cU00CO cn^ cncr^ CO

t-CV|vO t-00 rj

eu H.:t-:1- l-vO

CO-* COCU eu eu

COlAH-4 COt^t-( JÇ^VO ifNvÔ H VO CoJ

00 00 0\ Ov ON ON ON (

>00 COVÛ

•V «^ •% «^ •« «^

ON ON ON Ko

d.-?. ^ír^-*iOiDíycU00HCO t^ ir^.:t eu o iPi

O eu H o ONONt^f-VO VO t^vO.:t LfN C*-

H H H H H H H eu eu eu eu H H H H eu eu eu eu eu H H H rÍHH•V •* ^

1 H H

Î^FiSlSîpi^-^ VO UNCU t-ONUS írNÙ^Lr^Lf^Ùf^ ÍK^JÍáS'Rí^í

iOS-^ t--t-ON00 lA CUONlfNCJNCOHCUlfN VA invo vo 00 s t-1^

J-^co çoCVJ .Ä^IACVJ lA

> CO COCO t^

• CJN-:t lAt^OO

>C0 lA CO

H HOOl

3 ON CUV

i/: i/^ u^ in: lA lA iK irv'li^ ir^^'^^'^ u;:^" i/;: i^: i^; ^^^

VOVO ^-

lAVOOO lA-:f O

lA VO VO VO VO VO VO

I

CO

3^

4>

»tí a

V u

AH O

il

CO

O a

+> H

•p 0)

86

'îII

cu|g

S • «)

CO ^

o;

o ^

T^ O

u -p

PI »

i"

A-( CO

H

ON 0)

: e

CO

tí a

O cd

•d 'S

CO »d

C (U

•H (0

ci >4

IIH «

•H •

'S » «H

a> O £

» <o

g".•^:^

^1

ll!l!lli^ililill«MMSî 3l

ON o H eu CO-4-

-î LA LfN lA LTV lA

. -j -, -.- --,• -' -' w » w » v/ > vj> ,j\ ON ON ON ON ON ON

:^:

? r

O d)

^ CD
- Ill -

I

U

Q oi <n H H o\\o en CO UN oj vo cvj b--* o\ o\vo

CMCVICVJCVICUCVICVJCVIHCVJCVJCVJCVICVJCVÍCVI <nm^^^ ai^ «ncncn^ cn<n<ncn

j-vocq

H vo >ö cn cn^ if\ o o cn ÖNVO . ^ ^ •* ^

!g ^^«Ääi ) H^âS!

CM<

uNfnirscQ Q ro

Ocö CKincvi ^- vOx

d»dSi2ISi|;1?12i?ISSilild2IS^i£iii»iiiiii^i?^^^^ai?

CVI 00 CO ^î!?0">d^OC^ h--=í- t- l/N C- 0\V0 CG CO ON CM o ONJ- CO^ H O 0\ 0\ j* fn:3h mlAirv^-* cnir^iTNi/Nt--vooo t-co cvj q mrocnco^3- moo vo P- (ncvi

HHHHHHHHHHHHHH

CQ ^ 0\VO W CM t^VO Q O

CO COfO-iT -^ ^ <n m co^ 003- ^ ^ -sf ^ -* ir^vo vo vo vo

GO CVI

vo HV fOir^-

vovov

• Po oí CO&

o\ oi r*- iTNvo <n CO CVI ifN irwo o\^ UN co t*- H ^

Q H Q -dh CVI li\^ CQ VO iTv CO O 0\ H O\0D H CVI M5 voMÍ^o vo VO VO vo^î) VO VO t^vo t*-vo vo ' '

t^t*-qQ CJNt^O ^-ÇV! UMTiCVI-d'-dh

.__,-. ,-CO coCKt^vo b-vo Ovoco HOÔVÛ

vo vo r-vo t-vo vö h-1- t^co c-1^ c^ i^ c- t^co r-co ^-1^

COJ

..0QCVIVOVOHVOCJ\H-*CÜ ! W 8 ITN ON?3 H 5^S cd00 3$q5 ÖQ -d- ^- t^ Oj CVI CO^ CÇGO ii>ITS ÖO uSÖO - . - . - . ,, . -, -

-it^já-^^-d-COCOCO CO^ ^ COJ^ ^ IfS^F ^ ITN-d- -3F l/N lA-:t lA-* -* -J|- .

^*^í^^?n^^^^í

I CI. coirviHcvi H^vQ.OJ

^-,^. ->cocvi üScoJt t-cö-sföö R^ ^^^^.

HHHHHHHHHHHH H HHHHCVICVICVICVICVICVICVICVIHCVICVJCVICVI H

Sei'â 21Sá Sr t-' W CO F^ t^'t^ H VÖ IAM5 t^»ri<5 co< " ^ ^ vO-=fCVICVICOHaicOCOHOHON

if\H ir\co<

CVI 00 vo H CO t-VO ONCQ UMA t^ COJ^ 2^0^" S^-á rf íí ^S

00 cJNco c^o\<j\oo00 c^oo t-c^t^t-oo ONO\o\gojggg

CI 0\lf\CVI

ONCOO h- CU ooo ir\

ovcAOvQ Q g a\o\

H OVOQIVO»^cvicocOiHHHvg^Qogco

iAVovouNvogvqH|cv¡5|g

00 CO cot*- irvCOH

covo cu vo ^ _

CVI CVJ co-d- tfNJ*fMI^^ CO UNCO I

ir\t-oQq> I

CO CO CVI CVI <

^

^CU SS Ql CO

H cu 52-4-lAvo _

CO CO CO^ CO CO CO

ON C7\ CJN ON ON ON ONfmilillllllllii w. ^. ^ _-^ H H H H H H H

C^
- 112 -

Table U3.- Equivalent farm value of total escports and shipments of all farm

commodities, by commodity groups, I92U-54 1/

Calendar

year

I92U

1925

1926

1927

1928

1929

1930

1931

1932

1933

193l^

1935

1936

1937

1938

1939

19'K)

19ÍH

1942

19^*3

19ÍA

1945

19h6

19U7

1948

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954 y

Cotton

2/

Grains

2/

Meat

animals Tobacco

Dairy,

poultry^

and

eggs

All

others

Total

exports

and

shipments

Mil.dol. Mil.dol. Mil.dol, Mil.dol. Mil.dol. Mil.dol. Mil.dol.

1,038

1,302

1,383

1,432

1,337

1,173

1,012

1,059

1,361

1,266

881

894

826

883

678

723

588

246

216

313

.235

458

699

609

529

865

917

867

700

499

695

662

454

488

657

493

467

348

298

24l

106

106

65

67

171

546

307

206

183

139

155

220

751

893

1,327

1,218

1,245

805

1,410

1,290

962

765

482

371

324

284

289

313

260

209

180

194

188

101

95

94

120

142

118

253

535

910

843

525

481

226

116

214

192

230

264

301

280

301

260

267

278

324

307

304

272

208

225

226

208

223

230

260

185

128

157

137

171

275

377

300

256

288

268

296

235

296

261

41

34

30

30

27

22

24

20

11

10

11

11

10

11

14

14

29

176

368

499

553

493

480

338

215

199

257

264

92

144

178

197 2,721

206 2,627

191 2,683

207 2,888

207 2,677

202 2,484

164 2,112

178 2,036

163 2,164

150 1,951

137 1,549

165 1,444

146 1,367

166 1,555

190 1,808

212 1,583

150 1,219

171 1,186

165 1,560

322 2,421

400 2,422

398 2,900

4l6 3,346

434 3,232

524 2,858

418 3,229

344 2,783

381 3,448

339 2,920

373 2,575

635 2,8l4

1/ include« rnilTtai^T^sMnpie^ —

Í/ SeuSL*^''^"' ^-^^>-' --. srln sorgh . oat., .uek^eat, and ,ye.
- 113 -

á

u to

cd PI

CO o

CO •• to

813

b.

'1

«. . VÛ ONOJ t-H CVI -It -d- O CO H -=!

H coCo m-d- r-co -cf ^ cvi ITS H

HOO H p CM mt

H CO CVl

I ON oj ir\ oil

I CM I

! ! ! 1 I 1 I I I I I I

I I I I I I I

H H H C\J H H jtnCVI H^^CVJ I I

C*- Q t^ t^ ON ir\00 I CUI I I

H H CVJ II

COCVJ-d-HONC^CUmC^ONOHvO CO

CVJHHr-lcVJmt-CVl-:tVO C--H

H CVJ ifN i/NVO li^

H CVJ CVJ cjiciicMi! ! ! ! I

I CVJ o iH CVJ o I I

I PH COCVJ H r-l I I

I I I

I I I

I I I

I I I

I rH CVJ VO CO VO H Vr\-^ r-j rH I

íí'^^d

H-d- ON CVJ u-\-rj- H CVJvO H t-vo O-dCVlt^t^fH HCVJvoHHH

t- ro iO ON^O CVJ H CVJ ON^ CVJ CU H \

- 0~ r-\• r-\• f-A• rH I COCO evil

H CVJ ONVÛ CVJCOCO-d- Í-H CVJJ-jQNO CVJ h-1-1- CO CO t^vp -it cu O\co m

cvj-îfvo mcj I

ï?^S5:^'r'^'^^oîT*^^^

I I «n^ CO ON I I I I

I I I

I I

I I

•j ÇVm«^ l/NVO C^OO ON O H CVJ m-d- -^-^-^^-,-,3--d--=tirNLrKifNijfNirN

0\ ON ON G\ ON ON ON ON ON ON 0> ON ON ON

<^ to hH 3

«p.

-P to

>i CO

(0

'IPI

CVJ coiAON^-ocovo rov

rovo tir O cn^ \f\a5 HiA-ï o vo H on oN-d- ir^-: OCO ITN

VO H H H

H CVJ H H H

^3: t^ CVJ oo ON ONCO m ON CVJ moo

• H iTNVO en iC\KO o t^ H f- o

• CVJVO LfNH "* '

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 vo m 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 f

ÇQ ir\ m H ON l/N H l/Nvp ON ON ITv

CO 00 OD O ir\CO H OJ vo ON

r-{\0 ONvO-d- cu

iä

CTv C^-d- CVJ t^ t--d- ONCO ir\ CÜ t^ <H ON Ö H o t- H H 3- ro CVJ q C- VO ON

CVJ CVJ H CVJ r-i H

r-l CVJ fO-d- l/NVD Í—CO ON O H CVJ fO-d"

o. o^ o^ 3^ Q^^^S' 2 2 2? 2 2 s
- nil -

GUniK TO TABLES, FIGURES, AND EXHIBITS

Value data

in table Pag.

33

3U

35

8

10

12

Table Brief title

Index of supply-utilization of -

1 All coirr.odities

2 Food commodities only

3 Nonfood conraodities only .•

Subindfexes and related measures

for —

Domestic production

h All, food, nonfood commodities —

5 Gross, feed and seed, and

net —

6 Crop and livestock —

7 By commodity groups 36

Imports

8 Total, supplementary', and

conç>lementary —

9 By commodity groups ••. 37

Stocks

10 Contribution to utilization ••• —

11 Beginning and ending stocks ••• —•

12 By commodity groups 38

13 Total supply of all commodities

Ik Total supply of food and nonfood commodities • ••

15 By type

Major channels of utilization

16 Relative importance —

17 Domestic use —

Inqportance in total utilization

18 Base period values of commodities -—

Civilian food use

19 By commodity groups 39

20 Per capita by commodity groups. —

21 Other measures of per c^ita

use ••••

22 Domestic and imported commodities ,

23 Imported food by commodity

groups

Military takings

2li By commodity groups 1^0

25 Shipments for civilian use ....

Domestic nonfood use

26 By commodity groups Ij.

27 By uses ^2

Exports

28 Through commercial and

Government channels

29 For food and nonfood uses

30 By commodity groups 13

31 USDA deliveries and net

purchases

32 USOA net purchases by commodity groups .., \¿^

Table Brief title

32

35

la

U5

he

5li

55

56

58

59

60

62

63

61*

72

7U

7li

75

77

80

80

85

86

92

93

92*

97

98

Value aggregates for —

Stjpply-utilization of — ^

33 All conmodities 99

ih Food commodities only 100

35 Nonfood coranodities only .. 101

36 GrJDSS production by conmodity

gXDups 102

37 Imports by commodity groups .. lOU

38 Change in stocks by conmodity

g;?oups ..•. 105

39 Civilian food use by commodity groups .....••.....••. 107

UO Military takings by commodity

groups 109

Ul Domestic nonfood use by commotSity groups •••• UO

U2 Domestic nonfood use by use .. Ill

li3 Exports by commodity groups •• 112

kh USDA net purchases by commodity groups 113

Figure

1 What the index of supplyutilization measures 6

2 Utilization of soybeans 26

3 Sources of U. S. civilian

food supply • 76

h Domestic nonfood use of farm

commodities 82

5 Changes in exports of farm

commodities 91

Exhibit

A Structure of master index,

1953 h

B Supply-utilization of

soybeans, 1953 Ik

U. S. GOV: -NMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1956 O - 369349