IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v12y2023i1p106-d1309184.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Blockchain Adoption and Organic Subsidy in an Agricultural Supply Chain Considering Market Segmentation

Author

Listed:
  • Chunmei Li

    (School of Economics and Management, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing 100876, China)

  • Tianjian Yang

    (School of Economics and Management, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing 100876, China
    School of Modern Post (School of Automation), Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing 100876, China)

  • Ying Shi

    (China Telecom Corporation Limited Research Institute, Guangzhou 510630, China)

Abstract

The quality authenticity of organic agricultural products has always been a hot issue for consumers. Blockchain’s advantages in information traceability and preventing data from being tampered with can reduce fake and counterfeit products, increasing the consumers’ trust in the quality of organic agricultural products. Considering market segmentation of consumer types in organic agricultural products (OPs) and conventional agricultural products (CPs), this study builds a game-theoretical model to explore how participants decide between blockchain traceability platforms and organic subsidy strategies. Results show that the producer should introduce the blockchain when the fraction of blockchain technology’s total cost shared by the producer is smaller and the fixed cost of implementing blockchain is higher or when the fraction of blockchain technology’s total cost shared by the producer is higher and the fixed cost of implementing blockchain is lower. The retailer is inclined to an organic subsidy, and the smaller the market proportion of undifferentiated-conscious consumers (UCCs), the more inclined the retailer is to the organic subsidy strategy. In addition, the market share of UCCs positively promotes the sales quantities and supply chain profits of CPs but is not conducive to the sales quantities of OPs.

Suggested Citation

  • Chunmei Li & Tianjian Yang & Ying Shi, 2023. "Blockchain Adoption and Organic Subsidy in an Agricultural Supply Chain Considering Market Segmentation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2023:i:1:p:106-:d:1309184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/1/106/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/1/106/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ozinci, Yaacov & Perlman, Yael & Westrich, Sara, 2017. "Competition between organic and conventional products with different utilities and shelf lives," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 74-84.
    2. Dickinson, David L. & Bailey, DeeVon, 2002. "Meat Traceability: Are U.S. Consumers Willing To Pay For It?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Kanying Liu & Yong Lan & Wei Li & Erbao Cao, 2019. "Behavior-Based Pricing of Organic and Conventional Agricultural Products Based on Green Subsidies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, February.
    4. Peng, Hongjun & Pang, Tao, 2019. "Optimal strategies for a three-level contract-farming supply chain with subsidy," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 274-286.
    5. Dionne, Kim Yi & Horowitz, Jeremy, 2016. "The Political Effects of Agricultural Subsidies in Africa: Evidence from Malawi," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 215-226.
    6. Chunmei Li & Tianjian Yang & Zijing Bian, 2023. "Does Environmental Education Always Contribute to Remanufacturing Supply Chain Development?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-18, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nematollahi, Mohammadreza & Tajbakhsh, Alireza & Mosadegh Sedghy, Bahareh, 2021. "The reflection of competition and coordination on organic agribusiness supply chains," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    2. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny, 2011. "Demand for improved food safety and quality: a cross-regional comparison," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108791, Agricultural Economics Society.
    3. Kathleen J. Brown & Roos Haer & Gudrun Østby, 2023. "Local Food Price Volatility and School Dropout in Sub‐Saharan Africa," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 49(3), pages 443-468, September.
    4. Sylvester Amoako Agyemang & Tomáš Ratinger & Miroslava Bavorová, 2022. "The Impact of Agricultural Input Subsidy on Productivity: The Case of Ghana," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 34(3), pages 1460-1485, June.
    5. Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood & J. Ross Pruitt, 2006. "Consumer Demand for a Ban on Antibiotic Drug Use in Pork Production," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1015-1033.
    6. Sam Hamer & Jeremy Seekings, 2017. "Social protection, electoral competition, and political branding in Malawi," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-99, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    7. repec:ken:wpaper:0601 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. David A. Hennessy & Donald Lien, 2006. "Ledger provision in hog marketing contracts," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 66(1), pages 77-89, May.
    9. Leandro De Magalhaes & Isabel Spirgel-Sinclair, 2021. "Could Regression Discontinuity estimates of incumbency e ects help monitor parliamentary elections? Evidence from Malawi," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 21/741, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    10. Yamane, Fumihiro, 2010. "Estimation of Consumer Welfare Change from the Revision of Age Criterion for BSE Testing: Hypothetical Revealed Preference Method Using Monitoring Survey Data," Japanese Journal of Agricultural Economics (formerly Japanese Journal of Rural Economics), Agricultural Economics Society of Japan (AESJ), vol. 12, pages 1-19.
    11. Lee, Ji Yong & Fox, John A. (Sean), 2015. "Strategic bidding in a private value experimental auction with positive and negative bids," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 204984, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. David Dickinson & Jill Hobbs & DeeVon Bailey, 2003. "A Comparison of US and Canadian Consumers’ Willingness To Pay for Red-Meat Traceability," Working Papers 2003-06, Utah State University, Department of Economics.
    13. Lim, Kar Ho & Hu, Wuyang & Maynard, Leigh J. & Goddard, Ellen W., 2012. "Stated Preference and Perception Analysis for Traceable and BSE-tested Beef: An Application of Mixed Error-Component Logit Model," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124784, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Xuqi Chen & Zhifeng Gao & Lisa House & Jiaoju Ge & Chengfeng Zong & Fred Gmitter, 2016. "Opportunities for Western Food Products in China: The Case of Orange Juice Demand," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 343-362, July.
    15. Ole Magnus Theisen & Håvard Strand & Gudrun Østby, 2020. "Ethno-political favouritism in maternal health care service delivery: Micro-level evidence from sub-Saharan Africa, 1981–2014," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 23(1), pages 3-27, March.
    16. Zhou, Yanju & Che, Yuan, 2021. "Research on Government Logistics Subsidies for Poverty Alleviation with Non-uniform Distribution of Consumers," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    17. Donatella Baiardi & Riccardo Puglisi & Simona Scabrosetti, 2012. "Individual Attitudes on Food Quality and Safety: Empirical Evidence on EU Countries," DEM Working Papers Series 014, University of Pavia, Department of Economics and Management.
    18. Tavárez, Héctor & Álamo, Carmen & Cortés,Mildred, 2020. "Differentiated coffees and their potential markets in Puerto Rico: An economic valuation approach," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 20(02), December.
    19. Wendy J. Umberger & Dawn D. Thilmany McFadden & Amanda R. Smith, 2009. "Does altruism play a role in determining U.S. consumer preferences and willingness to pay for natural and regionally produced beef?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(2), pages 268-285.
    20. Bruner, David M. & Huth, William L. & McEvoy, David M. & Morgan, O. Ashton, 2014. "Consumer Valuation of Food Safety: The Case of Postharvest Processed Oysters," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 300-318, August.
    21. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2004. "A Choice Experiment Model For Beef Attributes: What Consumer Preferences Tell Us," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 19931, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2023:i:1:p:106-:d:1309184. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.