{"title":"谷物营销合作社和投入品供应合作社资本结构组成的比较研究","authors":"Jasper Grashuis, Keri Jacobs","doi":"10.1108/afr-09-2023-0112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The objective of the study is to explore explanations for the capital structure compositions of farmer cooperatives, which have a unique equity structure with allocated equity as well as unallocated equity.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>Data came from a panel of US grain marketing and input supply cooperatives for the 2010–2020 period. The study is concerned with the proportions of debt, allocated equity and unallocated equity, which requires the application of a fractional multinomial panel model to ensure predictions fall within the observed data range (i.e. 0–1).</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Larger cooperatives have relatively high debt proportions. Diversification of the product portfolio has a positive effect on the debt proportion. Profitability is associated with higher debt proportions in input supply cooperatives and higher allocated equity proportions in grain marketing cooperatives. Over time, the proportion of unallocated equity increased. Overall, some results differ across grain marketing and input supply cooperatives.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>Increasing proportions of unallocated equity warrant a debate about the future value of ownership and governance by members of farmer cooperatives.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>Previous empirical investigations of the capital structure compositions of cooperatives lacked a distinction between allocated and unallocated equity. Our results show that the proportions of the two equity accounts respond differently to given predictors. Furthermore, much of the prior empirical literature fails to separate cooperatives on the basis of economic activities (i.e. marketing, supply and mixed).</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":46748,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Finance Review","volume":"72 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of capital structure compositions in grain marketing and input supply cooperatives\",\"authors\":\"Jasper Grashuis, Keri Jacobs\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/afr-09-2023-0112\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>The objective of the study is to explore explanations for the capital structure compositions of farmer cooperatives, which have a unique equity structure with allocated equity as well as unallocated equity.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>Data came from a panel of US grain marketing and input supply cooperatives for the 2010–2020 period. The study is concerned with the proportions of debt, allocated equity and unallocated equity, which requires the application of a fractional multinomial panel model to ensure predictions fall within the observed data range (i.e. 0–1).</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>Larger cooperatives have relatively high debt proportions. Diversification of the product portfolio has a positive effect on the debt proportion. Profitability is associated with higher debt proportions in input supply cooperatives and higher allocated equity proportions in grain marketing cooperatives. Over time, the proportion of unallocated equity increased. Overall, some results differ across grain marketing and input supply cooperatives.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\\n<p>Increasing proportions of unallocated equity warrant a debate about the future value of ownership and governance by members of farmer cooperatives.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>Previous empirical investigations of the capital structure compositions of cooperatives lacked a distinction between allocated and unallocated equity. Our results show that the proportions of the two equity accounts respond differently to given predictors. Furthermore, much of the prior empirical literature fails to separate cooperatives on the basis of economic activities (i.e. marketing, supply and mixed).</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":46748,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agricultural Finance Review\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agricultural Finance Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/afr-09-2023-0112\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Finance Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/afr-09-2023-0112","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A comparative study of capital structure compositions in grain marketing and input supply cooperatives
Purpose
The objective of the study is to explore explanations for the capital structure compositions of farmer cooperatives, which have a unique equity structure with allocated equity as well as unallocated equity.
Design/methodology/approach
Data came from a panel of US grain marketing and input supply cooperatives for the 2010–2020 period. The study is concerned with the proportions of debt, allocated equity and unallocated equity, which requires the application of a fractional multinomial panel model to ensure predictions fall within the observed data range (i.e. 0–1).
Findings
Larger cooperatives have relatively high debt proportions. Diversification of the product portfolio has a positive effect on the debt proportion. Profitability is associated with higher debt proportions in input supply cooperatives and higher allocated equity proportions in grain marketing cooperatives. Over time, the proportion of unallocated equity increased. Overall, some results differ across grain marketing and input supply cooperatives.
Practical implications
Increasing proportions of unallocated equity warrant a debate about the future value of ownership and governance by members of farmer cooperatives.
Originality/value
Previous empirical investigations of the capital structure compositions of cooperatives lacked a distinction between allocated and unallocated equity. Our results show that the proportions of the two equity accounts respond differently to given predictors. Furthermore, much of the prior empirical literature fails to separate cooperatives on the basis of economic activities (i.e. marketing, supply and mixed).
期刊介绍:
Agricultural Finance Review provides a rigorous forum for the publication of theory and empirical work related solely to issues in agricultural and agribusiness finance. Contributions come from academic and industry experts across the world and address a wide range of topics including: Agricultural finance, Agricultural policy related to agricultural finance and risk issues, Agricultural lending and credit issues, Farm credit, Businesses and financial risks affecting agriculture and agribusiness, Agricultural policies affecting farm or agribusiness risks and profitability, Risk management strategies including the use of futures and options, Rural credit in developing economies, Microfinance and microcredit applied to agriculture and rural development, Financial efficiency, Agriculture insurance and reinsurance. Agricultural Finance Review is committed to research addressing (1) factors affecting or influencing the financing of agriculture and agribusiness in both developed and developing nations; (2) the broadest aspect of risk assessment and risk management strategies affecting agriculture; and (3) government policies affecting farm profitability, liquidity, and access to credit.