IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v320y2023i1d10.1007_s10479-022-04899-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enabling socially responsible operations: A decision-making model for a firm contracting with decision-biased smallholders

Author

Listed:
  • Nilanjan Dutta

    (Indian Institute of Technology Madras)

  • Arshinder Kaur

    (Indian Institute of Technology Madras)

Abstract

Small farmers in emerging economies face numerous constraints, including financial distress and limited access to profitable markets. Thus, procurement contracts having provisions for resource inputs are essential in linking them to the mainstream agri-supply chains. Consequently, we frame a decision-making model for a risk-neutral firm offering advance payment contracts to such credit-constrained smallholders. The firm allows them to commit their supply quantities and pays a fraction of the per-unit guaranteed price for the crop as advance. Behaviorally, the decision-biased farmers are loss-averse and hyperbolic discounters. They have a subjective perception of crop yield based on the (timing of) advance. Our model establishes a criterion for the firm to shortlist the farmers for contracting. Subsequently, it predicts their commitment quantities under limited information on their behavioral parameters using the Prospect Theory framework. Under the model assumptions, we calculate the upper and lower bounds on their commitment quantities, thereby establishing the limits on the firm’s production quantity and profitability. Lastly, our model determines the optimal timing for paying the advances to the eligible farmers using two different strategies. The first favors a firm’s profit maximization objective, while the second maximizes its marginal cost savings from contracting over spot buying. Through analytical and numerical calculations, we establish that the latter approach significantly raises the farmers’ utilities without severely affecting the firm’s profit. Thus, making it fit for a social entrepreneur on a mission to create a socially responsible and economically viable procurement strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Nilanjan Dutta & Arshinder Kaur, 2023. "Enabling socially responsible operations: A decision-making model for a firm contracting with decision-biased smallholders," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 320(1), pages 509-533, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:320:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-022-04899-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-022-04899-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-022-04899-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-022-04899-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herweg, Fabian, 2013. "The expectation-based loss-averse newsvendor," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(3), pages 429-432.
    2. ManMohan S. Sodhi, 2015. "Conceptualizing Social Responsibility in Operations Via Stakeholder Resource-Based View," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 24(9), pages 1375-1389, September.
    3. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    4. Ming Hu & Yan Liu & Wenbin Wang, 2019. "Socially Beneficial Rationality: The Value of Strategic Farmers, Social Entrepreneurs, and For-Profit Firms in Crop Planting Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(8), pages 3654-3672, August.
    5. Anderson, Edward & Monjardino, Marta, 2019. "Contract design in agriculture supply chains with random yield," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(3), pages 1072-1082.
    6. Jimena Gonzalez-Ramirez & Poonam Arora & Guillermo Podesta, 2018. "Using Insights from Prospect Theory to Enhance Sustainable Decision Making by Agribusinesses in Argentina," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, August.
    7. Gemma Berenguer & Pinar Keskinocak & J. George Shanthikumar & Jayashankar M. Swaminathan & Luk Van Wassenhove & Chen-Nan Liao & Ying-Ju Chen, 2017. "Farmers' Information Management in Developing Countries—A Highly Asymmetric Information Structure," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(6), pages 1207-1220, June.
    8. Lana A. Repar & Stephen Onakuse & Joe Bogue & Ana Afonso, 2018. "Key challenges in Malawi’s paprika supply chain: new insights into contract farming," Development in Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 227-241, February.
    9. Onur Boyabatlı & Paul R. Kleindorfer & Stephen R. Koontz, 2011. "Integrating Long-Term and Short-Term Contracting in Beef Supply Chains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(10), pages 1771-1787, October.
    10. Qing Zhang & Juan Li & Tiaojun Xiao, 2022. "Contract design for technology sharing between two farmers," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 314(2), pages 677-707, July.
    11. Jaehyung An & Soo-Haeng Cho & Christopher S. Tang, 2015. "Aggregating Smallholder Farmers in Emerging Economies," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 24(9), pages 1414-1429, September.
    12. Yuki Tanaka & Alistair Munro, 2014. "Regional Variation in Risk and Time Preferences: Evidence from a Large-scale Field Experiment in Rural Uganda," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 23(1), pages 151-187.
    13. Niu, Baozhuang & Jin, Delong & Pu, Xujin, 2016. "Coordination of channel members’ efforts and utilities in contract farming operations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 255(3), pages 869-883.
    14. Tang, Christopher S. & Sodhi, ManMohan S. & Formentini, Marco, 2016. "An analysis of partially-guaranteed-price contracts between farmers and agri-food companies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(3), pages 1063-1073.
    15. Jianjun Jin & Tong Xuhong & Xinyu Wan & Rui He & Foyuan Kuang & Jing Ning, 2020. "Farmers’ risk aversion, loss aversion and climate change adaptation strategies in Wushen Banner, China," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 63(14), pages 2593-2606, December.
    16. Maurice E. Schweitzer & Gérard P. Cachon, 2000. "Decision Bias in the Newsvendor Problem with a Known Demand Distribution: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(3), pages 404-420, March.
    17. Chen-Nan Liao & Ying-Ju Chen & Christopher S. Tang, 2019. "Information Provision Policies for Improving Farmer Welfare in Developing Countries: Heterogeneous Farmers and Market Selection," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 254-270, May.
    18. Reardon, Thomas & Barrett, Christopher B. & Berdegué, Julio A. & Swinnen, Johan F.M., 2009. "Agrifood Industry Transformation and Small Farmers in Developing Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 1717-1727, November.
    19. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    20. Géraldine Bocquého & Florence Jacquet & Arnaud Reynaud, 2014. "Expected utility or prospect theory maximisers? Assessing farmers' risk behaviour from field-experiment data," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 41(1), pages 135-172, February.
    21. Xiang Li & Yongjian Li, 2016. "On lot-sizing problem in a random yield production system under loss aversion," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 240(2), pages 415-434, May.
    22. Nicholas C. Petruzzi & Maqbool Dada, 1999. "Pricing and the Newsvendor Problem: A Review with Extensions," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 183-194, April.
    23. Balcombe, Kelvin & Bardsley, Nicholas & Dadzie, Sam & Fraser, Iain, 2019. "Estimating parametric loss aversion with prospect theory: Recognising and dealing with size dependence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 106-119.
    24. Quang Nguyen & Colin Camerer & Tomomi Tanaka, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences Linking Experimental and Household Data from Vietnam," Post-Print halshs-00547090, HAL.
    25. Xiaoyang Long & Javad Nasiry, 2015. "Prospect Theory Explains Newsvendor Behavior: The Role of Reference Points," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(12), pages 3009-3012, December.
    26. Alan P. Ker & Keith Coble, 2003. "Modeling Conditional Yield Densities," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(2), pages 291-304.
    27. D. G. Mogale & Sri Krishna Kumar & Manoj Kumar Tiwari, 2020. "Green food supply chain design considering risk and post-harvest losses: a case study," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 295(1), pages 257-284, December.
    28. ManMohan S. Sodhi & Christopher S. Tang, 2014. "Supply-Chain Research Opportunities with the Poor as Suppliers or Distributors in Developing Countries," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 23(9), pages 1483-1494, September.
    29. Amirmohsen Golmohammadi & Elkafi Hassini, 2018. "A two-period sourcing model with demand and supply risks," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 69(7), pages 1077-1095, July.
    30. Ba, Hélène A. & de Mey, Yann & Thoron, Sylvie & Demont, Matty, 2019. "Inclusiveness of contract farming along the vertical coordination continuum: Evidence from the Vietnamese rice sector," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    31. Awi Federgruen & Upmanu Lall & A. Serdar Şimşek, 2019. "Supply Chain Analysis of Contract Farming," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 361-378, April.
    32. Kuiti, Mithu Rani & Ghosh, Debabrata & Basu, Preetam & Bisi, Arnab, 2020. "Do cap-and-trade policies drive environmental and social goals in supply chains: Strategic decisions, collaboration, and contract choices," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    33. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer & Quang Nguyen, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences: Linking Experimental and Household Survey Data from Vietnam," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 557-571, March.
    34. Hung Khanh Nguyen & Raymond Chiong & Manuel Chica & Richard Middleton & Dung Thi Kim Pham, 2019. "Contract Farming in the Mekong Delta's Rice Supply Chain: Insights from an Agent-Based Modeling Study," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 22(3), pages 1-1.
    35. Marsh, Sally P & MacAulay, T. Gordon, 2002. "Land reform and the development of commercial agriculture in Vietnam: policy and issues," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 10, pages 1-19, April.
    36. Thomas Reardon & Julio A. Berdegué, 2002. "The Rapid Rise of Supermarkets in Latin America: Challenges and Opportunities for Development," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 20(4), pages 371-388, September.
    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. Xiaolong Guo & Lihong Cheng & Yugang Yu, 2022. "Government subsidy policy for green and efficient raw materials considering farmer heterogeneity," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(11), pages 4095-4112, November.
    2. Sushil Gupta & Hossein Rikhtehgar Berenji & Manish Shukla & Nagesh N. Murthy, 2023. "Opportunities in farming research from an operations management perspective," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(6), pages 1577-1596, June.
    3. Hong, Xianpei & He, Yimeng & Zhou, Pin & Chen, Jiguang, 2023. "Demand information sharing in a contract farming supply chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(2), pages 560-577.
    4. Pagare, Dewang & Biswas, Indranil & Agrahari, Amit & Ghosh, Sriparna, 2023. "A small farmer’s market choice in the presence of multiple markets: The Indian case," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 311(2), pages 739-753.
    5. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köster, Mats, 2017. "Salient compromises in the newsvendor game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 301-315.
    6. Mandal, Prasenjit & Kaul, Rupali & Jain, Tarun, 2018. "Stocking and pricing decisions under endogenous demand and reference point effects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 181-199.
    7. Doidge, Mary & Feng, Hongli & Hennessy, David A., 2018. "Farmers’ valuation of changes to crop insurance coverage level – a test of third generation prospect theory," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274478, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Jónas Oddur Jónasson & Kamalini Ramdas & Alp Sungu, 2022. "Social impact operations at the global base of the pyramid," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(12), pages 4364-4378, December.
    9. Julia Ihli, Hanna & Chiputwa, Brian & Winter, Etti & Gassner, Anja, 2022. "Risk and time preferences for participating in forest landscape restoration: The case of coffee farmers in Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    10. Wei, Ying & Xiong, Sijia & Li, Feng, 2019. "Ordering bias with two reference profits: Exogenous benchmark and minimum requirement," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 229-250.
    11. Bai, Tian & Wu, Meng & Zhu, Stuart X., 2019. "Pricing and ordering by a loss averse newsvendor with reference dependence," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 343-365.
    12. Bhavani Shanker Uppari & Sameer Hasija, 2019. "Modeling Newsvendor Behavior: A Prospect Theory Approach," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 481-500, July.
    13. Surti, Chirag & Celani, Anthony & Gajpal, Yuvraj, 2020. "The newsvendor problem: The role of prospect theory and feedback," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(1), pages 251-261.
    14. Geraldine Bocquého & Marc Deschamps & Jenny Helstroffer & Julien Jacob & Majlinda Joxhe, 2018. "Risk and Refugee Migration," Working Papers of BETA 2018-16, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    15. Xiaodong Du & Hongli Feng & David A. Hennessy, 2017. "Rationality of Choices in Subsidized Crop Insurance Markets," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(3), pages 732-756.
    16. Heutel, Garth, 2019. "Prospect theory and energy efficiency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 236-254.
    17. Tina L. Saitone & Richard J. Sexton & Benoît Malan, 2018. "Price premiums, payment delays, and default risk: understanding developing country farmers’ decisions to market through a cooperative or a private trader," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(3), pages 363-380, May.
    18. Arjan Verschoor & Ben D’Exelle, 2022. "Probability weighting for losses and for gains among smallholder farmers in Uganda," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(1), pages 223-258, February.
    19. Tamás Csermely & Alexander Rabas, 2016. "How to reveal people’s preferences: Comparing time consistency and predictive power of multiple price list risk elicitation methods," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 107-136, December.
    20. Holden , Stein, 2014. "Risky Choices of Poor People: Comparing Risk Preference Elicitation Approaches in Field Experiments," CLTS Working Papers 10/14, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 10 Oct 2019.

    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:spr:annopr:v:320:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-022-04899-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.