Aimable Nsabimana, F. Niyitanga, D. Weatherspoon, A. Naseem
Abstract Rwanda’s “Crop Intensification Program (CIP)” is primarily a land consolidation program aimed at improving agricultural productivity and food security. The program, which began in 2007, focuses on monocropping and commercialization of six priority crops: maize, wheat, rice, white potato, beans, and cassava. CIP has facilitated easy access to improved seed stocks, fertilizer, extension services, and postharvest handling and storage services. Although studies have documented the impact of CIP on changes in farm yield, incomes, and productivity, less is known about its impact on food prices. In this study, we examine the crop-food price differences in intensive monocropped CIP and non-intensive monocropped CIP zones in Rwanda. Specifically, the study evaluates price variations of beans and maize along with complementary food crops in intensive and non-intensive monocropped zones before and after the introduction of the CIP policy. We find that the CIP policy is not associated with differences in CIP crop prices between the intensive and non-intensive monocropped zones. Over time, prices increased for CIP crops but generally, the crop prices in the two zones were cointegrated. Prices for non-CIP crops in the two different zones did show price differentials prior to the implementation of CIP, with the prices in intensive monocropped zones being greater than in the non-intensive monocropped zones. Moreover, the prices in intensive areas are cointegrated with prices in non-intensive areas for maize and beans and these prices are converging. This indicates that farmers who intensively produced one CIP crop were able to go to the market and purchase other food crops and that price differences between zones have decreased over time, potentially making the CIP intensive farmers better off.
{"title":"Land Policy and Food Prices: Evidence from a Land Consolidation Program in Rwanda","authors":"Aimable Nsabimana, F. Niyitanga, D. Weatherspoon, A. Naseem","doi":"10.1515/jafio-2021-0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jafio-2021-0010","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Rwanda’s “Crop Intensification Program (CIP)” is primarily a land consolidation program aimed at improving agricultural productivity and food security. The program, which began in 2007, focuses on monocropping and commercialization of six priority crops: maize, wheat, rice, white potato, beans, and cassava. CIP has facilitated easy access to improved seed stocks, fertilizer, extension services, and postharvest handling and storage services. Although studies have documented the impact of CIP on changes in farm yield, incomes, and productivity, less is known about its impact on food prices. In this study, we examine the crop-food price differences in intensive monocropped CIP and non-intensive monocropped CIP zones in Rwanda. Specifically, the study evaluates price variations of beans and maize along with complementary food crops in intensive and non-intensive monocropped zones before and after the introduction of the CIP policy. We find that the CIP policy is not associated with differences in CIP crop prices between the intensive and non-intensive monocropped zones. Over time, prices increased for CIP crops but generally, the crop prices in the two zones were cointegrated. Prices for non-CIP crops in the two different zones did show price differentials prior to the implementation of CIP, with the prices in intensive monocropped zones being greater than in the non-intensive monocropped zones. Moreover, the prices in intensive areas are cointegrated with prices in non-intensive areas for maize and beans and these prices are converging. This indicates that farmers who intensively produced one CIP crop were able to go to the market and purchase other food crops and that price differences between zones have decreased over time, potentially making the CIP intensive farmers better off.","PeriodicalId":52541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/jafio-2021-0010","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45360624","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
D. Weatherspoon, Steven R. Miller, F. Niyitanga, L. Weatherspoon, J. Oehmke
Abstract Rwanda has experienced exceptional economic growth since 2000 despite more than 60% of the predominately-agrarian population living on less than $1.25 a day. Approximately 76% of the country’s working population are engaged in agricultural production, which makes up about one-third of the national economy. Agriculture is also an important source of foreign exchange, making up about 63% of the value of Rwanda’s exports. An important component of household diets – food produced on subsistence agriculture parcels averaging 0.6 ha – faces the challenge by government and private sector development to replace subsistence farming with a value-creating market-oriented food sector. A complex set of relationships across public incentives and programs encourages participation in markets. Designed to promote wealth, the Crop Intensification Program (CIP) has increased access to land, inputs, extension services, markets, supply chains, etc. Wealth and access to land are the dominant predictors of the ability to participate in markets and the extent of participation. For example, smallholders producing a diversity of crops are more likely to sell in markets. Within the confluence of competing policy objectives and market forces, further research is necessary to understand the household-level tradeoffs of both producers and consumers along the food value chain.
{"title":"Rwanda’s Commercialization of Smallholder Agriculture: Implications for Rural Food Production and Household Food Choices","authors":"D. Weatherspoon, Steven R. Miller, F. Niyitanga, L. Weatherspoon, J. Oehmke","doi":"10.1515/jafio-2021-0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jafio-2021-0011","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Rwanda has experienced exceptional economic growth since 2000 despite more than 60% of the predominately-agrarian population living on less than $1.25 a day. Approximately 76% of the country’s working population are engaged in agricultural production, which makes up about one-third of the national economy. Agriculture is also an important source of foreign exchange, making up about 63% of the value of Rwanda’s exports. An important component of household diets – food produced on subsistence agriculture parcels averaging 0.6 ha – faces the challenge by government and private sector development to replace subsistence farming with a value-creating market-oriented food sector. A complex set of relationships across public incentives and programs encourages participation in markets. Designed to promote wealth, the Crop Intensification Program (CIP) has increased access to land, inputs, extension services, markets, supply chains, etc. Wealth and access to land are the dominant predictors of the ability to participate in markets and the extent of participation. For example, smallholders producing a diversity of crops are more likely to sell in markets. Within the confluence of competing policy objectives and market forces, further research is necessary to understand the household-level tradeoffs of both producers and consumers along the food value chain.","PeriodicalId":52541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/jafio-2021-0011","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47033377","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Eric D. Raile, L. Young, J. Kirinya, J. Bonabana-Wabbi, Amber N. W. Raile
Abstract The global policy community has largely converged on climate-smart agriculture as a solution to various problems driven by climate change, but mass adoption of the crucial innovations presents challenges – particularly in the developing world. Widespread, meaningful, and rapid adoption of climate-smart agriculture will require an appropriate enabling environment. This study uses the political will and public will approach to identify the obstacles and opportunities for upscaling of climate-smart agriculture innovations. In 2015 and 2018, two rounds of semi-structured stakeholder and expert interviews conducted by researchers in Uganda identified four relevant obstacle categories: agricultural extension; communication infrastructure; basic and agricultural infrastructure; and other incentives and disincentives. These categories are related to the five definitional components of public will to reveal pathways for enabling social change. Importantly, both infrastructure and appropriate incentives are necessary for diffusion and then continued use of climate-smart agriculture innovations, often in interrelated ways. The study concludes with a detailed discussion of the implications for industry, government, and donors.
{"title":"Building Public Will for Climate-Smart Agriculture in Uganda: Prescriptions for Industry and Policy","authors":"Eric D. Raile, L. Young, J. Kirinya, J. Bonabana-Wabbi, Amber N. W. Raile","doi":"10.1515/jafio-2021-0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jafio-2021-0012","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The global policy community has largely converged on climate-smart agriculture as a solution to various problems driven by climate change, but mass adoption of the crucial innovations presents challenges – particularly in the developing world. Widespread, meaningful, and rapid adoption of climate-smart agriculture will require an appropriate enabling environment. This study uses the political will and public will approach to identify the obstacles and opportunities for upscaling of climate-smart agriculture innovations. In 2015 and 2018, two rounds of semi-structured stakeholder and expert interviews conducted by researchers in Uganda identified four relevant obstacle categories: agricultural extension; communication infrastructure; basic and agricultural infrastructure; and other incentives and disincentives. These categories are related to the five definitional components of public will to reveal pathways for enabling social change. Importantly, both infrastructure and appropriate incentives are necessary for diffusion and then continued use of climate-smart agriculture innovations, often in interrelated ways. The study concludes with a detailed discussion of the implications for industry, government, and donors.","PeriodicalId":52541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/jafio-2021-0012","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42364714","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The question of how to allocate scarce agricultural research and development dollars is significant for developing countries. Historically, benefit/cost analysis has been the standard for comparing the relative benefits of alternative investments. We examine the potential of shifting the implicit equal weights approach to benefit/cost analysis, as well as how a systematic variation in welfare weights may affect different groups important to policy makers. For example, in the case of Rwandan coffee, a shift in the welfare weights that would favor small coffee producers in Rwanda over foreign consumers of Rwandan coffee would increase the support for investments in small producer coffee projects. Generally, changes in welfare weights alter the ordering for selecting investments across alternative projects.
{"title":"Distributional Weights in Benefit-Cost Analysis: Examples from Rwanda and Uganda","authors":"C. Moss, A. Schmitz","doi":"10.1515/jafio-2021-0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jafio-2021-0003","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The question of how to allocate scarce agricultural research and development dollars is significant for developing countries. Historically, benefit/cost analysis has been the standard for comparing the relative benefits of alternative investments. We examine the potential of shifting the implicit equal weights approach to benefit/cost analysis, as well as how a systematic variation in welfare weights may affect different groups important to policy makers. For example, in the case of Rwandan coffee, a shift in the welfare weights that would favor small coffee producers in Rwanda over foreign consumers of Rwandan coffee would increase the support for investments in small producer coffee projects. Generally, changes in welfare weights alter the ordering for selecting investments across alternative projects.","PeriodicalId":52541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/jafio-2021-0003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43745953","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jock R. Anderson, R. Birner, L. Nagarajan, A. Naseem, C. Pray
Abstract Private agricultural research and development can foster the growth of agricultural productivity in the diverse farming systems of the developing world comparable to the public sector. We examine the extent to which technologies developed by private entities reach smallholder and resource-poor farmers, and the impact they have on poverty reduction. We critically review cases of successfully deployed improved agricultural technologies delivered by the private sector in both large and small developing countries for instructive lessons for policy makers around the world.
{"title":"Private Agricultural R&D: Do the Poor Benefit?","authors":"Jock R. Anderson, R. Birner, L. Nagarajan, A. Naseem, C. Pray","doi":"10.1515/jafio-2021-0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jafio-2021-0007","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Private agricultural research and development can foster the growth of agricultural productivity in the diverse farming systems of the developing world comparable to the public sector. We examine the extent to which technologies developed by private entities reach smallholder and resource-poor farmers, and the impact they have on poverty reduction. We critically review cases of successfully deployed improved agricultural technologies delivered by the private sector in both large and small developing countries for instructive lessons for policy makers around the world.","PeriodicalId":52541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/jafio-2021-0007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49300121","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
V. Bellassen, M. Drut, F. Antonioli, R. Brečić, M. Donati, Hugo Ferrer‐Pérez, L. Gauvrit, V. Hoang, Kamilla Knutsen Steinnes, Apichaya Lilavanichakul, E. Majewski, A. Malak-Rawlikowska, K. Mattas, A. Nguyễn, I. Papadopoulos, J. Peerlings, B. Ristić, M. Tomić Maksan, Á. Török, G. Vittersø, A. Diallo
Abstract The carbon and land footprint of 26 certified food products – geographical indications and organic products and their conventional references are assessed. This assessment goes beyond existing literature by (1) designing a calculation method fit for the comparison between certified food and conventional production, (2) using the same calculation method and parameters for 52 products – 26 Food Quality Schemes and their reference products – to allow for a meaningful comparison, (3) transparently documenting this calculation method and opening access to the detailed results and the underlying data, and (4) providing the first assessment of the carbon and land footprint of geographical indications. The method used is Life Cycle Assessment, largely relying on the Cool Farm Tool for the impact assessment. The most common indicator of climate impact, the carbon footprint expressed per ton of product, is not significantly different between certified foods and their reference products. The only exception to this pattern are vegetal organic products, whose carbon footprint is 16% lower. This is because the decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from the absence of mineral fertilizers is never fully offset by the associated lower yield. The climate impact of certified food per hectare is however 26% than their reference and their land footprint is logically 24% higher. Technical specifications directly or indirectly inducing a lower use of mineral fertilizers are a key driver of this pattern. So is yield, which depends both on terroir and farming practices. Overall, this assessment reinforces the quality policy of the European Union: promoting certified food is not inconsistent with mitigating climate change.
{"title":"The Carbon and Land Footprint of Certified Food Products","authors":"V. Bellassen, M. Drut, F. Antonioli, R. Brečić, M. Donati, Hugo Ferrer‐Pérez, L. Gauvrit, V. Hoang, Kamilla Knutsen Steinnes, Apichaya Lilavanichakul, E. Majewski, A. Malak-Rawlikowska, K. Mattas, A. Nguyễn, I. Papadopoulos, J. Peerlings, B. Ristić, M. Tomić Maksan, Á. Török, G. Vittersø, A. Diallo","doi":"10.1515/JAFIO-2019-0037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JAFIO-2019-0037","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The carbon and land footprint of 26 certified food products – geographical indications and organic products and their conventional references are assessed. This assessment goes beyond existing literature by (1) designing a calculation method fit for the comparison between certified food and conventional production, (2) using the same calculation method and parameters for 52 products – 26 Food Quality Schemes and their reference products – to allow for a meaningful comparison, (3) transparently documenting this calculation method and opening access to the detailed results and the underlying data, and (4) providing the first assessment of the carbon and land footprint of geographical indications. The method used is Life Cycle Assessment, largely relying on the Cool Farm Tool for the impact assessment. The most common indicator of climate impact, the carbon footprint expressed per ton of product, is not significantly different between certified foods and their reference products. The only exception to this pattern are vegetal organic products, whose carbon footprint is 16% lower. This is because the decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from the absence of mineral fertilizers is never fully offset by the associated lower yield. The climate impact of certified food per hectare is however 26% than their reference and their land footprint is logically 24% higher. Technical specifications directly or indirectly inducing a lower use of mineral fertilizers are a key driver of this pattern. So is yield, which depends both on terroir and farming practices. Overall, this assessment reinforces the quality policy of the European Union: promoting certified food is not inconsistent with mitigating climate change.","PeriodicalId":52541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/JAFIO-2019-0037","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42276843","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The purpose of this paper is to assess the effect of experienced quality attributes, credence quality attributes and demographic factors affecting green-skin avocado consumption. Data for the present study came from a consumer online survey to 355 avocado consumers. Consumer preferences were modeled by an ordered logit model. Results indicate that experienced quality attributes are the main drivers for green-skin avocado followed by origin and health credence attributes, respectively. Demographic factors other than ethnicity do not play a significant role for green-skin avocado consumption. Among other things, the findings indicate that consumers place a higher valuation on higher fat content compared to low calorie content, implying that the latter attribute should not be touted at the expense of the former. To the extent possible, the industry should focus on cultivars with higher fat content and develop promotional activities to target non-Hispanic consumers. The present study constitutes an effort to contribute to the existing literature as it explores the role of health credence attributes, a topic that has not received much attention.
{"title":"Consumer Preferences for Green Skin Avocados in the US Market: The Role of Experienced Quality Attributes, Credence Attributes, and Demographic Factors","authors":"F. Ballen, E. Evans, Yenny Katherine Parra-Acosta","doi":"10.1515/JAFIO-2020-0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JAFIO-2020-0006","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The purpose of this paper is to assess the effect of experienced quality attributes, credence quality attributes and demographic factors affecting green-skin avocado consumption. Data for the present study came from a consumer online survey to 355 avocado consumers. Consumer preferences were modeled by an ordered logit model. Results indicate that experienced quality attributes are the main drivers for green-skin avocado followed by origin and health credence attributes, respectively. Demographic factors other than ethnicity do not play a significant role for green-skin avocado consumption. Among other things, the findings indicate that consumers place a higher valuation on higher fat content compared to low calorie content, implying that the latter attribute should not be touted at the expense of the former. To the extent possible, the industry should focus on cultivars with higher fat content and develop promotional activities to target non-Hispanic consumers. The present study constitutes an effort to contribute to the existing literature as it explores the role of health credence attributes, a topic that has not received much attention.","PeriodicalId":52541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/JAFIO-2020-0006","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48101164","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The research aims of this study are bi-fold: to study factors influencing the uptake of contract farming (CF) and to compare the predicting power of the artificial neural network model (ANN) and the Multinomial Logit Model (MNL) on predicting CF participation in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. ANN and MNL were employed to analyze on the basis of the transaction cost theory. To validate the ANN, a 10-fold cross-validation procedure was applied to avoid model overfitting. The sensitivity analysis of ANN was used to elicit the magnitude of the correlation between predictors. Multicollinearity was examined with all VIFs lower than two. Among predictors, the most influential roles of the cooperatives and the extension agents/services in supporting CF participation are reported. Also, farmers who conduct frequent access to the market incline to participate in CF. Risk perceptions and preferences are dissimilar across domains, which are also mainly interpreted that risk-averse farmers tend to opt for CF as an effective solution to risks perceived. Thus, heterogeneous approaches should be tailored to promote CF. The findings suggest that MNL outperforms ANN in terms of accuracy percentage and mean absolute error (MAE). However, this result should not be generalized base on the constraint of the data threshold as articulated in the study. The sensitivity analysis of ANN and the estimation results of the MNL relatively agreed on the importance of model predictors. This study is the first to investigate the impacts of the domain-specific risk perceptions and attitudes on CF and also contribute to the debate over the performance between the conventional econometric models versus machine learning techniques.
{"title":"Predicting Contract Participation in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam: A Comparison Between the Artificial Neural Network and the Multinomial Logit Model","authors":"H. Dang, T. Pham","doi":"10.1515/JAFIO-2020-0023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JAFIO-2020-0023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The research aims of this study are bi-fold: to study factors influencing the uptake of contract farming (CF) and to compare the predicting power of the artificial neural network model (ANN) and the Multinomial Logit Model (MNL) on predicting CF participation in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. ANN and MNL were employed to analyze on the basis of the transaction cost theory. To validate the ANN, a 10-fold cross-validation procedure was applied to avoid model overfitting. The sensitivity analysis of ANN was used to elicit the magnitude of the correlation between predictors. Multicollinearity was examined with all VIFs lower than two. Among predictors, the most influential roles of the cooperatives and the extension agents/services in supporting CF participation are reported. Also, farmers who conduct frequent access to the market incline to participate in CF. Risk perceptions and preferences are dissimilar across domains, which are also mainly interpreted that risk-averse farmers tend to opt for CF as an effective solution to risks perceived. Thus, heterogeneous approaches should be tailored to promote CF. The findings suggest that MNL outperforms ANN in terms of accuracy percentage and mean absolute error (MAE). However, this result should not be generalized base on the constraint of the data threshold as articulated in the study. The sensitivity analysis of ANN and the estimation results of the MNL relatively agreed on the importance of model predictors. This study is the first to investigate the impacts of the domain-specific risk perceptions and attitudes on CF and also contribute to the debate over the performance between the conventional econometric models versus machine learning techniques.","PeriodicalId":52541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/JAFIO-2020-0023","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47452414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
P. Muller, Michael Böhm, P. Csillag, M. Donati, M. Drut, Hugo Ferrer‐Pérez, L. Gauvrit, J. Gil, V. Hoang, A. Malak-Rawlikowska, K. Mattas, O. Napasintuwong, A. Nguyễn, I. Papadopoulos, B. Ristić, Žaklina Stojanović, Á. Török, E. Tsakiridou, M. Veneziani, V. Bellassen
Abstract Food quality schemes (FQS: organic and geographical indication products) are often supposed to be more sustainable by their political advocates. We explore the social sustainability advantage of FQS through the lens of supply chains’ bargaining power (BP) distribution. We propose an indicator synthesizing different sources underlying BP (competition-based, transactional, institutional) and counting two dimensions (fair BP distribution and adaptation capacity), that we apply to 18 FQS supply chains and corresponding reference. FQS perform better than their reference products on both dimensions. This better performance is due to a combination of sources.
{"title":"Are Certified Supply Chains More Socially Sustainable? A Bargaining Power Analysis","authors":"P. Muller, Michael Böhm, P. Csillag, M. Donati, M. Drut, Hugo Ferrer‐Pérez, L. Gauvrit, J. Gil, V. Hoang, A. Malak-Rawlikowska, K. Mattas, O. Napasintuwong, A. Nguyễn, I. Papadopoulos, B. Ristić, Žaklina Stojanović, Á. Török, E. Tsakiridou, M. Veneziani, V. Bellassen","doi":"10.1515/jafio-2019-0039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jafio-2019-0039","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Food quality schemes (FQS: organic and geographical indication products) are often supposed to be more sustainable by their political advocates. We explore the social sustainability advantage of FQS through the lens of supply chains’ bargaining power (BP) distribution. We propose an indicator synthesizing different sources underlying BP (competition-based, transactional, institutional) and counting two dimensions (fair BP distribution and adaptation capacity), that we apply to 18 FQS supply chains and corresponding reference. FQS perform better than their reference products on both dimensions. This better performance is due to a combination of sources.","PeriodicalId":52541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/jafio-2019-0039","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42073224","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
S. Monier‐Dilhan, T. Poméon, Michael Böhm, R. Brečić, P. Csillag, M. Donati, Hugo Ferrer‐Pérez, L. Gauvrit, J. Gil, V. Hoang, Apichaya Lilavanichakul, E. Majewski, A. Malak-Rawlikowska, K. Mattas, O. Napasintuwong, A. Nguyễn, Kallirroi Nikolaou, I. Papadopoulos, S. Pascucci, J. Peerlings, B. Ristić, K. Steinnes, Žaklina Stojanović, M. Tomić Maksan, Á. Török, M. Veneziani, G. Vittersø, V. Bellassen
Abstract This article addresses the issue of the profitability of Food Quality Scheme (FQS) products as compared to reference products, which are defined as analogous products without quality label. We approach this question by taking into account the level of the value chain (upstream, processing, and downstream), the sector (vegetal, animal, seafood) and the type of FQS (PGI, PDO, Organic). We collected original data for several products produced in selected European countries, as well as in Thailand and Vietnam. Comparisons depending on value chain level, sector and FQS are possible by using two comparable indicators: price premium and net price premium (including cost differential). The following principal conclusions were reached: 1) Price is higher for FQS products than for the reference products, regardless of the production level, the type of FQS or the sector; 2) Price premiums generated by FQS do not differ along the value chain, nor between sectors (vegetal, animal or seafood/fish); 3) Price premium for organic products is significantly higher than for PGI products, and this conclusion holds at upstream and processing levels, taking into account the costs directly related to production; 4) All organic products and almost all PDO and PGI products analysed benefit from a positive quality rent; 5) At upstream level and processing level, the relative weight of intermediate consumption in the cost structure is lower for organic products than for reference products.
{"title":"Do Food Quality Schemes and Net Price Premiums Go Together?","authors":"S. Monier‐Dilhan, T. Poméon, Michael Böhm, R. Brečić, P. Csillag, M. Donati, Hugo Ferrer‐Pérez, L. Gauvrit, J. Gil, V. Hoang, Apichaya Lilavanichakul, E. Majewski, A. Malak-Rawlikowska, K. Mattas, O. Napasintuwong, A. Nguyễn, Kallirroi Nikolaou, I. Papadopoulos, S. Pascucci, J. Peerlings, B. Ristić, K. Steinnes, Žaklina Stojanović, M. Tomić Maksan, Á. Török, M. Veneziani, G. Vittersø, V. Bellassen","doi":"10.1515/jafio-2019-0044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jafio-2019-0044","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article addresses the issue of the profitability of Food Quality Scheme (FQS) products as compared to reference products, which are defined as analogous products without quality label. We approach this question by taking into account the level of the value chain (upstream, processing, and downstream), the sector (vegetal, animal, seafood) and the type of FQS (PGI, PDO, Organic). We collected original data for several products produced in selected European countries, as well as in Thailand and Vietnam. Comparisons depending on value chain level, sector and FQS are possible by using two comparable indicators: price premium and net price premium (including cost differential). The following principal conclusions were reached: 1) Price is higher for FQS products than for the reference products, regardless of the production level, the type of FQS or the sector; 2) Price premiums generated by FQS do not differ along the value chain, nor between sectors (vegetal, animal or seafood/fish); 3) Price premium for organic products is significantly higher than for PGI products, and this conclusion holds at upstream and processing levels, taking into account the costs directly related to production; 4) All organic products and almost all PDO and PGI products analysed benefit from a positive quality rent; 5) At upstream level and processing level, the relative weight of intermediate consumption in the cost structure is lower for organic products than for reference products.","PeriodicalId":52541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/jafio-2019-0044","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43821825","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：