U.S. meat demand elasticity estimates: using publicly available data versus scanner data

Jaime R. Luke et al.

Agricultural and Resource Economics Review2026https://doi.org/10.1017/age.2025.10020article
AJG 1ABDC B
Weight
0.37

Abstract

Traditionally, many meat demand analyses have used publicly available data amassed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Circana retail point-of-sale scanner data offer an alternative to these publicly available data sources. Scanner data allow for quantity-weighting retail prices to account for increased purchases at lower prices due to sales and promotions. We find that quantity-weighted scanner-based beef and pork prices are lower than those reported by USDA, whereas quantity-weighted chicken prices are higher. Rotterdam demand models are estimated using both publicly available and scanner data sources. Own- and cross-price elasticities estimated using scanner data are greater in magnitude than those estimated using publicly available data, suggesting meat consumers may be more price sensitive than indicated by elasticity estimates from publicly available data sources. Scanner data insights are further explored by estimating demand for meat products with organic or natural claims. Demand elasticities for these differentiated meat products are more elastic than those for meat products without such claims, highlighting a greater amount of consumer price sensitivity when purchasing such products.

1 citation

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/age.2025.10020

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{jaime2026,
  title        = {{U.S. meat demand elasticity estimates: using publicly available data versus scanner data}},
  author       = {Jaime R. Luke et al.},
  journal      = {Agricultural and Resource Economics Review},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/age.2025.10020},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

U.S. meat demand elasticity estimates: using publicly available data versus scanner data

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.