IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v47y2015i48p5159-5168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An analysis of bargaining power for milk cooperatives and milk processors in Florida

Author

Listed:
  • Jiaoju Ge
  • Alfonso Flores-Lagunes
  • Kilmer

Abstract

The Florida dairy market has a few fluid milk processors and many dairy farmers. The dairy farmers are represented in negotiation with the processors by a cooperative. This research builds a theoretical model of bargaining between the processors and a cooperative. The model is applied to the Florida dairy market to examine price negotiations between Florida milk processors and a dairy cooperative. An expectation maximization (EM) algorithm along with maximum likelihood estimation is used to estimate the econometric disequilibrium model with time series data for the period of October 1998 to May 2009. The results show that the class I price set by the Federal Milk Marketing Order is the major factor influencing the cooperative's supply reservation price. Negotiated quantity and production seasonality affect the processors' demand reservation price. The processors appear to be more patient and have higher average bargaining power (0.8804) than the cooperative (0.1196). The highest (lowest) bargaining power for the cooperative (processors) occurred in 2008 and the lowest (highest) bargaining power for the cooperative (processors) occurred in 2001.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiaoju Ge & Alfonso Flores-Lagunes & Kilmer, 2015. "An analysis of bargaining power for milk cooperatives and milk processors in Florida," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(48), pages 5159-5168, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:47:y:2015:i:48:p:5159-5168
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2015.1044645
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2015.1044645
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036846.2015.1044645?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. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1982. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 97-109, January.
    2. Ken Binmore & Ariel Rubinstein & Asher Wolinsky, 1986. "The Nash Bargaining Solution in Economic Modelling," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(2), pages 176-188, Summer.
    3. Bruce Gardner, 1983. "Efficient Redistribution through Commodity Markets," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 65(2), pages 225-234.
    4. Appelbaum, Elie, 1979. "Testing price taking behavior," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 283-294, February.
    5. Iskow, Julie & Sexton, Richard, 1992. "Bargaining Associations in Grower-Processor Markets for Fruits and Vegetables," Research Reports 279811, United States Department of Agriculture, Rural Development.
    6. Appelbaum, Elie, 1982. "The estimation of the degree of oligopoly power," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 287-299, August.
    7. E. V. Jesse & B. W. Marion & A. C. Manchester & Aaron. C. Johnson, 1982. "Interpreting and Enforcing Section 2 of the Capper-Volstead Act," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(3), pages 431-443.
    8. Levine, David, 1983. "A remark on serial correlation in maximum likelihood," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 337-342, December.
    9. Ben C. French, 1982. "Fruit and Vegetable Marketing Orders: A Critique of the Issues and State of Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(5), pages 916-923, December.
    10. Richard J. Sexton, 1993. "Noncooperative Game Theory: A Review with Potential Applications to Agricultural Markets," Food Marketing Policy Center Research Reports 022, University of Connecticut, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Charles J. Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy.
    11. Metin Cakir & Joseph V. Balagtas, 2012. "Estimating Market Power of U.S. Dairy Cooperatives in the Fluid Milk Market," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(3), pages 647-658.
    12. Catherine A. Durham & Richard J. Sexton, 1992. "Oligopsony Potential in Agriculture: Residual Supply Estimation in California's Processing Tomato Market," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(4), pages 962-972.
    13. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    14. Tina L. Saitone & Richard J. Sexton, 2010. "Impacts of Minimum Quality Standards Imposed Through Marketing Orders or Related Producer Organizations," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(1), pages 164-180.
    15. Ben C. French, 1982. "Fruit and Vegetable Marketing Orders: A Critique of the Issues and State of Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(5), pages 916-923.
    16. Sexton, Richard J., 1993. "Noncooperative Game Theory: A Review with Potential Applications to Agricultural Markets," Research Reports 25183, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
    17. Anthony A. Prato, 1973. "Milk Demand, Supply, and Price Relationships, 1950–1968," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 55(2), pages 217-222.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hayashida, K., 2018. "Bargaining Power between Food Processors and Retailers: Evidence from Japanese Milk Transactions," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277730, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Twine, Edgar E. & Adur-Okello, Stella E. & Mujawamariya, Gaudiose, 2023. "Estimating oligopsonistic market power in Uganda’s rice industry," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 62(3-4), December.

    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. Prasertsri, Peerapon & Kilmer, Richard L., 2008. "The Bargaining Strength of a Milk Marketing Cooperative," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 37(2), pages 1-7.
    2. John K. Horowitz & Richard E. Just & Sinaia Netanyahu, 1996. "Potential Benefits and Limitations of Game Theory in Agricultural Economics," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(3), pages 753-760.
    3. Guth, Werner & Ritzberger, Klaus & van Damme, Eric, 2004. "On the Nash bargaining solution with noise," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 697-713, June.
    4. Joalland, Olivier & Pereau, Jean-Christophe & Rambonilaza, Tina, 2019. "Bargaining local compensation payments for the installation of new power transmission lines," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 75-85.
    5. Takeuchi, Ai & Veszteg, Róbert F. & Kamijo, Yoshio & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2022. "Bargaining over a jointly produced pie: The effect of the production function on bargaining outcomes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 169-198.
    6. Yakov Babichenko & Leonard J. Schulman, 2015. "Pareto Efficient Nash Implementation Via Approval Voting," Papers 1502.05238, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2017.
    7. Chen, Violet Xinying & Hooker, J.N., 2022. "Combining leximax fairness and efficiency in a mathematical programming model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(1), pages 235-248.
    8. Sexton, Richard J., 1990. "The Role of Cooperatives in Increasingly Concentrated Agricultural Markets," Cooperatives: Their Importance in the Future Food and Agricultural System - FAMC 1990 Conference 265909, Food and Agricultural Marketing Consortium (FAMC).
    9. Hanato, Shunsuke, 2019. "Simultaneous-offers bargaining with a mediator," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 361-379.
    10. Chiu, Y. Stephen & Rachel Yang, B., 1999. "The outside option, threat point, and Nash bargaining solution," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 181-188, February.
    11. Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2001. "The role of economics in global management of whales: re-forming or re-founding IWC?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 205-221, February.
    12. Binmore, Ken & Osborne, Martin J. & Rubinstein, Ariel, 1992. "Noncooperative models of bargaining," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 7, pages 179-225, Elsevier.
    13. Driesen, Bram & Perea, Andrés & Peters, Hans, 2012. "Alternating offers bargaining with loss aversion," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 103-118.
    14. Oleksandr Perekhozhuk, 2013. "Modern Concepts for Pricing Analysis in Imperfect Competition Production Factor Market," Oblik i finansi, Institute of Accounting and Finance, issue 4, pages 99-106, December.
    15. Mattoo, Aaditya, 1999. "Can no antitrust policy be better than some antitrust policy?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2191, The World Bank.
    16. Viaene, Stijn & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Dedene, Guido, 2002. "Insurance bargaining under risk aversion," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 245-259, March.
    17. Dagan, Nir & Serrano, Roberto, 1998. "Invariance and randomness in the Nash program for coalitional games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 43-49, January.
    18. Adriana Breccia, 2006. "Sequential Bargaining in a Stochastic Environment," Discussion Papers 06/07, Department of Economics, University of York.
    19. Kjell Hausken, 1997. "Game-theoretic and Behavioral Negotiation Theory," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(6), pages 511-528, December.
    20. Spulber, Daniel F., 2016. "Patent licensing and bargaining with innovative complements and substitutes," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 693-713.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:applec:v:47:y:2015:i:48:p:5159-5168. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    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.