E. Fleming, G. Griffith, S. Mounter, M. Hartmann, J. Simons
{"title":"食品价值链协调的实践:欧洲和澳大利亚的连锁产品创新案例研究*","authors":"E. Fleming, G. Griffith, S. Mounter, M. Hartmann, J. Simons","doi":"10.18461/IJFSD.V12I3.85","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Food value chain businesses form alliances with horizontal and/or vertical partners to take collective action to either overcome or ameliorate chain failure, or to take advantage of new opportunities available due to innovations in products or processes. The desired outcomes from the collective action would no t be possible to achieve if these businesses acted independently. While such alliances and collaborations may take many forms, depending on the degree of commitment, the kind of governance and infrastructure linkages, they can often be thought of as “clubs ” for the purpose of economic analysis. Several different types of clubs can be identified, thus the path to collective action chosen by clubs may vary according to existing capabilities and the scope for collaboration, particularly in relation to the potential for value-creating innovation. The result of the collective action is the provision of a chain good or service, which usually leads to greater and more valuable chain coordination. By collectively identifying, funding and acting to capture positive externalities associated with innovation, businesses in many parts of a food value chain can widen opportunities to increase whole-of-chain surplus as well as private profits. In this paper five mini-case studies are presented to demonstrate the breadth of past collective actions undertaken by businesses in food value chains, two in Europe and three in Australia. These are the Euro Pool System, and Global Standards certification in Europe and globally, as well as Meat Standards Australia, an Australian beef organic producer alliance (OBE Organic®), and the supply of food to households during Covid-19 lockdown in Australia. Each case study yields insights into the rationale of how businesses in different food value chains in different countries have acted as a club to use their joint resources to internalise positive innovation and coordination externalities.","PeriodicalId":37887,"journal":{"name":"International Journal on Food System Dynamics","volume":"12 1","pages":"196-205"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Food Value Chain Coordination in Practice: European and Australian Case Studies of the Creation of Chain Good Innovations*\",\"authors\":\"E. Fleming, G. Griffith, S. Mounter, M. Hartmann, J. Simons\",\"doi\":\"10.18461/IJFSD.V12I3.85\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Food value chain businesses form alliances with horizontal and/or vertical partners to take collective action to either overcome or ameliorate chain failure, or to take advantage of new opportunities available due to innovations in products or processes. The desired outcomes from the collective action would no t be possible to achieve if these businesses acted independently. While such alliances and collaborations may take many forms, depending on the degree of commitment, the kind of governance and infrastructure linkages, they can often be thought of as “clubs ” for the purpose of economic analysis. Several different types of clubs can be identified, thus the path to collective action chosen by clubs may vary according to existing capabilities and the scope for collaboration, particularly in relation to the potential for value-creating innovation. The result of the collective action is the provision of a chain good or service, which usually leads to greater and more valuable chain coordination. By collectively identifying, funding and acting to capture positive externalities associated with innovation, businesses in many parts of a food value chain can widen opportunities to increase whole-of-chain surplus as well as private profits. In this paper five mini-case studies are presented to demonstrate the breadth of past collective actions undertaken by businesses in food value chains, two in Europe and three in Australia. These are the Euro Pool System, and Global Standards certification in Europe and globally, as well as Meat Standards Australia, an Australian beef organic producer alliance (OBE Organic®), and the supply of food to households during Covid-19 lockdown in Australia. Each case study yields insights into the rationale of how businesses in different food value chains in different countries have acted as a club to use their joint resources to internalise positive innovation and coordination externalities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37887,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal on Food System Dynamics\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"196-205\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal on Food System Dynamics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18461/IJFSD.V12I3.85\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal on Food System Dynamics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18461/IJFSD.V12I3.85","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Food Value Chain Coordination in Practice: European and Australian Case Studies of the Creation of Chain Good Innovations*
Food value chain businesses form alliances with horizontal and/or vertical partners to take collective action to either overcome or ameliorate chain failure, or to take advantage of new opportunities available due to innovations in products or processes. The desired outcomes from the collective action would no t be possible to achieve if these businesses acted independently. While such alliances and collaborations may take many forms, depending on the degree of commitment, the kind of governance and infrastructure linkages, they can often be thought of as “clubs ” for the purpose of economic analysis. Several different types of clubs can be identified, thus the path to collective action chosen by clubs may vary according to existing capabilities and the scope for collaboration, particularly in relation to the potential for value-creating innovation. The result of the collective action is the provision of a chain good or service, which usually leads to greater and more valuable chain coordination. By collectively identifying, funding and acting to capture positive externalities associated with innovation, businesses in many parts of a food value chain can widen opportunities to increase whole-of-chain surplus as well as private profits. In this paper five mini-case studies are presented to demonstrate the breadth of past collective actions undertaken by businesses in food value chains, two in Europe and three in Australia. These are the Euro Pool System, and Global Standards certification in Europe and globally, as well as Meat Standards Australia, an Australian beef organic producer alliance (OBE Organic®), and the supply of food to households during Covid-19 lockdown in Australia. Each case study yields insights into the rationale of how businesses in different food value chains in different countries have acted as a club to use their joint resources to internalise positive innovation and coordination externalities.
期刊介绍:
Understanding the development of the food system requires a system view that captures the complexity of the system and its many interrelationships with its economic, social and natural environments. The Journal accepts and offers papers within this broad range of issues focussing on the management, policy, marketing, consumer aspects, transparency, e-commerce, institutional or regional development, information and communication systems, ressource economics, production economics, chain management, network economics, and similar aspects. Papers may focus on modeling, empirical research or theoretical analyis. This broad range of publication opportunities asks authors to follow clear lines of arguments and to present arguments in a convincing way that avoids unnecessary complexities of model formulations if not relevant for the support of arguments. The publication of scientific articles is complemented by a number of sections that provide room for publications with a more specific focus: ''Case studies'': A section on case studies of the ''Harvard Type'' allows the publication of studies that might build on established scientific methodology but demonstrate its use in ceratin decision environments. Case studies might be complemented by ''teaching cases'' that are kept on a database outside the journal but accessible to readers on approval by authors. ''Research Forum'': It allows to discuss newly emerging research challenges or to contribute to ongoing scientific discussions on research problems. In addition, authors might initiate a discussion on issues brought up by articles published in the journal. ''Research Notes'': It provides room for specific shorter scientific contributions with a narrow scope.