The paper "The Role of the Mining Sector in the Australian Agriculture System" is a wonderful example of an assignment on macro and microeconomics. The aim of this article is to analyze likely tendencies in crucial drivers of output with a view to proposing the rate of yield that is likely required to sustain the competitiveness of Australian agriculture both within the Australian economy and relative to the agricultural sector of other economies. The research question attempts to explain how the mining sector is gaining a competitive advantage over agriculture in Australia.
This is a very interesting concept since agriculture has higher productivity growth than mining. Q1) Labour is an essential input into lamb production. In recent years relatively higher wages in the mining sector have drawn labor resources away from the agriculture sector, making it harder for farmers to attract and retain workers. (i) Using a model of marketing margin behavior (similar to Figure 6.3 of the textbook) illustrates and explains how a labor shortage would impact on the margin for Australian lamb. Primary demand is a retail level while derived demand is farm level.
The Lamb industry in Australia is a labor-intensive market. Macroeconomic conditions have led to a tight labor market and general staff shortages. Mining is responsible for soaking up all the labor. The aging workforces also pose a threat to the maintenance of the pastoral livestock industries. The farms do not provide additional benefits such as housing to retain the employees (Lyon & Thompson, 1991) The difference in pay and other benefits are not significant in the attraction and retention of the employees. The difference between the work environments and lifestyle involved in the two sectors is significantly different.
Pastoralists mainly work out in the field. They have been used to this environment for their entire life (Alston, 2010). Mining has an entirely different setup. The people are enticed to work in the environment. This trend has been the culprit behind the absorbing of farm industries to the mining sector. Both farm and retail prices are affected by a change in marketing input.
Alston, J. M. (2010). Persistence pays U.S. agricultural productivity growth and the benefits from public R & D spending. New York: Springer.
Bernard, A. B., & Jones, C. I. (1996). Productivity across Industries and Countries: Time Series Theory and Evidence. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 78(1), 135.
Byerlee, D. (2001). Sense and sustainability revisited: the limits of total factor productivity measures of sustainable agricultural systems. Agricultural Economics, 26(3), 227-236.
Campbell, K. O. (1973). The State Marketing Board: Relic Or Prototype?*. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 17(3), 179-188.
(2013). Challenge for Australian Agriculture. The future Productivity and Competitiveness, 3, 1-26.
Chavas, J. (2002). Chambers, Robert G., and John Quiggin. Uncertainty, Production, Choice, and Agency: The State-Contingent Approach. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000, 373 pp. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 84(3), 872-874.
Gopinath, M. (1997). Agricultural competitiveness: The case of the United States and major EU countries. Agricultural Economics, 16(2), 99-109.
Groot, P. D., & Cline, W. R. (1993). The Economics of Global Warming...International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944- ), 69(2), 371.
Lyon, C. C., & Thompson, G. D. (1991). Model selection with temporal and spatial aggregation: alternative marketing margin models. St. Paul, Minn.: University of Minnesota, Institute of Agriculture, Forestry and Home Economics.
AGRIBUSINESS. (n.d.). ACCC alleges egg producers formed 'cartel'. Retrieved August 23, 2014, from http://www.theland.com.au/news/agriculture/agribusiness/general-news/eggs-in-one-basket-accc/2700018.aspx