IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea16/235762.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Role of farmer’s attitude to risk in the relationship between trust and contract decisions: The fresh apple market in South Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Ahn, Kyeong Ah
  • Choi, Young Chan

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahn, Kyeong Ah & Choi, Young Chan, 2016. "Role of farmer’s attitude to risk in the relationship between trust and contract decisions: The fresh apple market in South Korea," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235762, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea16:235762
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.235762
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/235762/files/AAEA_May_revision%20-%20clean%20copy.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.235762?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. Brent Hueth & Ethan Ligon, 2002. "Estimation of an efficient tomato contract," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 29(2), pages 237-253, June.
    2. Ani L. Katchova & Mario J. Miranda, 2004. "Two-Step Econometric Estimation of Farm Characteristics Affecting Marketing Contract Decisions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 88-102.
    3. Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Eidman, Vernon R., 1998. "The Effect of Risk and Autonomy on Independent Hog Producers' Contracting Decisions," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(1), pages 175-188, July.
    4. Androkovich, Robert A, 1989. "An Attempt at Making the Principal-Agent Paradigm Operational," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 16(2), pages 285-300.
    5. Eckel, Catherine C. & Wilson, Rick K., 2004. "Is trust a risky decision?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 447-465, December.
    6. Andersson, Hans, 1995. "Primary and Secondary Producers: Economic Implications of Contracts in the Food Marketing Chain," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 22(3), pages 310-320.
    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. Granoszewski, Karol & Spiller, Achim, 2013. "Langfristige Rohstoffsicherung in der Supply Chain Biogas: Status Quo und Potenziale vertraglicher Zusammenarbeit," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 260820, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    2. Olmos, Marta Fernandez & Rosell-Martinez, Jorge & Espitia-Escuer, Manuel Antonio, 2008. "The yield/quality trade-off and contractual choice," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6065, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Vassalos, Michael & Hu, Wuyang & Woods, Timothy A. & Schieffer, Jack & Dillon, Carl R., 2013. "Fresh Vegetable Growers' Risk Perception, Risk Preference and Choice of Marketing Contracts: A Choice Experiment," 2013 Annual Meeting, February 2-5, 2013, Orlando, Florida 142506, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    4. Michael Vassalos & Wuyang Hu & Timothy Woods & Jack Schieffer & Carl Dillon, 2016. "Risk Preferences, Transaction Costs, and Choice of Marketing Contracts: Evidence from a Choice Experiment with Fresh Vegetable Producers," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 379-396, July.
    5. Du, Xiaoxue & Lu, Liang & Zilberman, David, 2013. "The Economics of Contract Farming: A Credit and Investment Perspective," 2014 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 3-5, 2014, Philadelphia, PA 161657, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Granoszewski, K. & Spiller, A., 2014. "Vertragliche Zusammenarbeit bei der energetischen Biomasselieferung: Einstellungen und Bindungsbereitschaften von deutschen Landwirten," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 49, March.
    7. Anne Corcos & François Pannequin & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, 2012. "Aversions to Trust," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 78(3), pages 115-134.
    8. Katchova, Ani L., 2010. "Agricultural Contracts and Alternative Marketing Options: A Matching Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 42(2), pages 1-16, May.
    9. Evan J. Miller-Tait & Sandeep Mohapatra & M. K. (Marty) Luckert & Brent M. Swallow, 2019. "Processing technologies for undervalued grains in rural India: on target to help the poor?," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 11(1), pages 151-166, February.
    10. Friedel Bolle & Jessica Kaehler, 2006. "Coleman's Hypothesis on trusting behaviour and a remark on meta-studies," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 469-483.
    11. Fraser, Iain, 2005. "Microeconometric analysis of wine grape supply contracts in Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(1), pages 1-24.
    12. Jordaan, Henry & Grove, Bennie, 2007. "Factors Affecting Maize Producers Adoption of Forward Pricing in Price Risk Management: The Case of Vaalharts," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 46(4), pages 1-18, December.
    13. Lukas, Daniel, 2009. "Efficiency effects of cross-border medical demand," Dresden Discussion Paper Series in Economics 15/09, Technische Universität Dresden, Faculty of Business and Economics, Department of Economics.
    14. Bill McEvily, 2011. "Reorganizing the Boundaries of Trust: From Discrete Alternatives to Hybrid Forms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1266-1276, October.
    15. John List & Daan Van Soest & Jan Stoop & Haiwen Zhou, 2014. "On the Role of Group Size in Tournaments: Theory and Evidence from Lab and Field Experiments," NBER Working Papers 20008, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Dickinson, David L. & Masclet, David & Peterle, Emmanuel, 2018. "Discrimination as favoritism: The private benefits and social costs of in-group favoritism in an experimental labor market," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 220-236.
    17. Yiting Guo & Jason Shachat & Matthew J. Walker & Lijia Wei, 2021. "Viral social media videos can raise pro-social behaviours when an epidemic arises," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(2), pages 120-138, December.
    18. Key, Nigel D., 2002. "How Much Do Farmers Value Their Independence? Estimating The Risk And Autonomy Premia Associated With Production Contracts," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19688, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Hernán Bejarano & Joris Gillet & Ismael Rodriguez‐Lara, 2018. "Do Negative Random Shocks Affect Trust and Trustworthiness?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(2), pages 563-579, October.
    20. Goeschl, Timo & Jarke, Johannes, 2014. "Trust, but verify? When trustworthiness is observable only through (costly) monitoring," WiSo-HH Working Paper Series 20, University of Hamburg, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, WISO Research Laboratory.

    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:ags:aaea16:235762. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.