IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/zbw/hiclch/209244.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Managing Common Goods in Supply Chain: Case of Agricultural Cooperatives

In: Innovative Methods in Logistics and Supply Chain Management: Current Issues and Emerging Practices. Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conference of Logistics (HICL), Vol. 18

Author

Listed:
  • Saikouk, Tarik
  • Badraoui, Ismail

Abstract

This paper synthesizes research findings on managing common goods with an application on the agricultural supply chain. Effective management of common goods highly depends on the effort and contributions of each member of the group and the equitable sharing of the added value. However, this contribution is not automatically guaranteed as some members tend to behave opportunistically, which leads to operations inefficiency and higher costs along the supply chain, resulting in lower benefits for the whole group, and ultimately, in the failure of the business. The objective of the paper is to analyze members' behaviors in an attempt to understand their dynamics within the supply chain. In this regard, we rely on the social dilemmas perspective to suggest a resolution mechanism to reduce opportunism and improve the management of common goods within the supply chain, highlighting the importance of communication, group identity, group size, and informal sanctions. The data collected for the case study accounts for nearly 1500 farmers belonging to 147 cooperatives, each one having to manage a common good. The results of this analysis allow us to confirm the relevance of recognizing and resolving social dilemmas in supply chain. We also discuss implications for the sustainable development of agricultural supply chain.

Suggested Citation

  • Saikouk, Tarik & Badraoui, Ismail, 2014. "Managing Common Goods in Supply Chain: Case of Agricultural Cooperatives," Chapters from the Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conference of Logistics (HICL), in: Blecker, Thorsten & Kersten, Wolfgang & Ringle, Christian M. (ed.), Innovative Methods in Logistics and Supply Chain Management: Current Issues and Emerging Practices. Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conferenc, volume 19, pages 477-498, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute of Business Logistics and General Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:hiclch:209244
    DOI: 10.15480/882.1189
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/209244/1/hicl-2014-19-477.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.15480/882.1189?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malhotra, Deepak & Lumineau, Fabrice, 2011. "Trust and collaboration in the aftermath of conflict: the effects of contract structure," MPRA Paper 38358, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Stanley E. Fawcett & Gregory M. Magnan & Matthew W. McCarter, 2008. "Supply chain alliances and social dilemmas: bridging the barriers that impede collaboration," International Journal of Procurement Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(3), pages 318-341.
    3. I. Zouaghi & A. Spalanzani, 2010. "Interdependencies and supply chain bipolar strategies: between com-peration and co-opetition," Post-Print halshs-00642342, HAL.
    4. Vanpoucke, E. & Boyer, K. & Vereecke, A., 2009. "Supply chain information flow strategies: an empirical taxonomy," Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School Working Paper Series 2009-03, Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School.
    5. Seung Ho Park & Gerardo R. Ungson, 2001. "Interfirm Rivalry and Managerial Complexity: A Conceptual Framework of Alliance Failure," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 37-53, February.
    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. Alex Eapen & Rekha Krishnan, 2019. "Transferring Tacit Know-How: Do Opportunism Safeguards Matter for Firm Boundary Decisions?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 715-734, July.
    2. Fabrice Lumineau & Joanne E. Oxley, 2012. "Let's Work It Out (or We'll See You in Court): Litigation and Private Dispute Resolution in Vertical Exchange Relationships," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 820-834, June.
    3. Changbyung Yoon & Keeeun Lee & Byungun Yoon & Omar Toulan, 2017. "Typology and Success Factors of Collaboration for Sustainable Growth in the IT Service Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-20, November.
    4. Saebi, Tina & Dong, Qinqin, 2008. "Strategic motivations for Sino-Western alliances: a comparativeanalysis of Chinese and Western alliance formation drivers," MERIT Working Papers 2008-030, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. Sanjith Gopalakrishnan & Moksh Matta & Hasan Cavusoglu, 2022. "The Dark Side of Technological Modularity: Opportunistic Information Hiding During Interorganizational System Adoption," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 1072-1092, September.
    6. Dirk Dohse & Rajeev K. Goel & Michael A. Nelson, 2019. "What induces firms to license foreign technologies? International survey evidence," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(7), pages 799-814, October.
    7. Lhuillery, Stéphane & Pfister, Etienne, 2009. "R&D cooperation and failures in innovation projects: Empirical evidence from French CIS data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 45-57, February.
    8. Heimeriks, K. & Duysters, G.M. & Vanhaverbeke, W.P.M., 2004. "The evolution of alliance capabilities," Working Papers 04.20, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    9. Arvin Sahaym & Joseph Vithayathil & Suprateek Sarker & Saonee Sarker & Niels Bjørn-Andersen, 2023. "Value Destruction in Information Technology Ecosystems: A Mixed-Method Investigation with Interpretive Case Study and Analytical Modeling," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 508-531, June.
    10. Glinos, Irene A. & Baeten, Rita, 2014. "Dream vs. reality: Seven case-studies on the desirability and feasibility of cross-border hospital collaboration in Europe," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 18-24.
    11. Dayashankar Maurya & Amit Srivastava, 2022. "Controlling Partner Opportunism in Cross-Sectoral Alliance: Dynamics of Governance Flexibility," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 23(1), pages 15-28, December.
    12. Lumineau, Fabrice & Frechet, Marc & Puthod, Dominique, 2011. "An organizational learning perspective on contract design," MPRA Paper 38360, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Bart S. Vanneste & Douglas H. Frank, 2014. "Forgiveness in Vertical Relationships: Incentive and Termination Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1807-1822, December.
    14. Santamaría, Luis & Nieto, María Jesús & Rodríguez, Alicia, 2021. "Failed and successful innovations: The role of geographic proximity and international diversity of partners in technological collaboration," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    15. Huo, Baofeng & Ye, Yuxiao & Zhao, Xiande, 2015. "The impacts of trust and contracts on opportunism in the 3PL industry: The moderating role of demand uncertainty," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(PA), pages 160-170.
    16. Liwen Wang, 2023. "The interplay of contracts and trust: untangling between- and within-dyad effects," Post-Print hal-03944358, HAL.
    17. Eric Van den Steen, 2010. "Culture Clash: The Costs and Benefits of Homogeneity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(10), pages 1718-1738, October.
    18. Wilfred Amaldoss & Amnon Rapoport, 2005. "Collaborative Product and Market Development: Theoretical Implications and Experimental Evidence," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 396-414, February.
    19. Carole Couper & A. Rebecca Reuber & Shameen Prashantham, 2020. "Lost that lovin’ feeling: The erosion of trust between small, high-distance partners," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 51(3), pages 326-352, April.
    20. Xiaodan Zheng & Jingfeng Yuan & Jiyue Guo & Mirosław J. Skibniewski & Sujun Zhao, 2018. "Influence of Relational Norms on User Interests in PPP Projects: Mediating Effect of Project Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.

    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:zbw:hiclch:209244. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hicl.org/ .

    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.