Marketing Orders

  • R. Brian How


Government enforced marketing orders have enabled growers to secure compulsory support for group action in marketing (Armbruster, Jesse, Nelson, Schafer, 1981). Under certain circumstances growers have needed to use the government authority provided by marketing orders to obtain greater participation in marketing programs. This chapter will discuss only federal marketing order legislation and programs even though legislation in California and several other states also authorizes marketing orders. The marketing order approach provides government authority to muster compulsory support for certain types of marketing activities provided a substantial proportion of the growers involved indicate their willingness to participate. Fruit and vegetable marketing order legislation does not permit the setting of prices directly, but the expectation is that returns will be stabilized or increased through such provisions as setting minimum standards for grades and sizes, regulating the flow to market, or raising money for advertising and promotion. The use of marketing orders for advertising and promotion will be discussed in a subsequent chapter.


Commodity Price Market Order Fresh Market Primary Market Reserve Pool 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Armbruster, Walter J., Dennis R. Henderson, Ronald D. Knutson, Editors, 1983. Federal Marketing Programs in Agriculture: Issues and Options. The Interstate Printers and Publishers, Danville, Illinois.Google Scholar
  2. Heifner, Richard, Walter Armbruster, Edward Jesse, Glenn Nelson, Carl Shafer, 1981. A Review of Federal Marketing Orders for Fruits, Vegetables, and Specialty Crops: Economic Efficiency and Welfare Implications. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Agricultural Economic Report No. 477.Google Scholar
  3. Jesse, Edward V., Aaron C. Johnson, Jr., 1981. Effectiveness of Federal Marketing Orders for Fruits and Vegetables. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economics and Statistics Service, Agriculture Economic Report No. 471.Google Scholar
  4. Kinney, William, Hoy Carman, Richard Green, John O’Connell, 1987. An Analysis of Economic Adjustments in the California-Arizona Lemon Industry. Giannini Foundation, University of California, Giannini Foundation Research Report No. 337.Google Scholar
  5. Polopolus, Leo C, Hoy F. Carman, Edward V. Jesse, James D. Shaffer, 1986. Criteria for Evaluating Federal Marketing Orders: Fruits, Vegetables, Nuts, and Speciality Commodities. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.Google Scholar
  6. Powers, Nicholas J., Glenn A. Zepp, Frederic L. Hoff, 1986. Assessment of a Marketing Order Prorate Suspension: A Study of California-Arizona Navel Oranges. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Economic Report No. 557.Google Scholar
  7. Thor, Peter K., Edward V. Jesse, 1981. Economic Effects of Terminating Federal Marketing Orders for California-Arizona Oranges. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Technical Bulletin No. 1664.Google Scholar
  8. Zepp, Glenn, Nicholas Powers, 1988. Fruit and Vegetable Marketing Orders. In National Food Review. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Volume 11, Issue 3, July–September.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Brian How
    • 1
  1. 1.Cornell UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations