IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/midasp/11629.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Coordinating Strategy Decisions In Sao Paulo'S Fresh Markets: An Empirical Test Of The Peterson, Wysocki And Harsh Model

Author

Listed:
  • Mainville, Denise Y.
  • Peterson, H. Christopher

Abstract

Transaction cost economics revolutionized economists understanding of coordination strategy decisions, bringing into the economic equation questions of how the attributes of a transaction affect the governance decision, particularly given the reality of bounded rationality and possibility for opportunism among partners in an exchange. Despite the explanatory power of transaction cost models, they have been criticized on theoretical grounds and for operational shortcomings. Specifically, Dow points out that in order to compare transaction costs across different governance structures, the characteristics of the transaction must be constant regardless of the governance structure in question (Dow in Dietrich 1994 p 4). This is rarely the case in reality. In fact, the characteristics of both the transaction and production tend to shift between coordination strategies, which makes it more difficult to assign solely transaction cost explanations to governance structure decisions. Related to this is a further important criticism: implicit in the transaction cost framework is the assumption that costs are the primary driver of transaction cost decisions,. while benefits, particularly strategic benefits (which can not be written off merely as negative costs), playing an insignificant role. Several operational shortcomings of the transaction cost model have also been named. For one, transaction cost economics has been criticized as providing such a general explanation of coordination strategy decisions that one can always find what one is looking for, making it impossible to reject hypotheses related to their determinants. Another criticism concerns the lack of discussion in transaction cost literature of the cognitive process by which transaction costs are taken into account. Together, these criticisms point to the need for an approach to analyzing governance structures that is both theoretically consistent and operationally sound. The need for such an approach has been felt not only in economics but also in the strategic management fields, where there have been appeals for a business literature that not only offers insight into strategic decision-making but also offers general theoretical insights into coordination issues for use in research and hypothesis testing (e.g. Zylbersztajn 1996). In their 2001 article, Peterson Wysocki and Harsh (PWH) (2001) address these issues, offering a theoretical decision-making model of the firm's coordination strategy decisions. This paper applies the PWH model to the analysis of coordination strategy decisions among firms in Sao Paulo Brazil's fresh produce markets. The objective is to test the model's explicative power and to explore the unique contributions that it lends to research on firms' coordination strategy decisions. Data is drawn from case study analyses of the evolution of coordination strategy decisions of three retailers and one processor. The case study approach is a suitable method of analysis in situations where a small sample permits in-depth consideration of the complex and interdependent factors entering into a decision (Yin 2003). A survey of the firms' fresh produce marketing and procurement strategies was implemented and interviews with open and structured questions were conducted with each firm's management. A total of eight coordination strategy outcomes are analyzed.

Suggested Citation

  • Mainville, Denise Y. & Peterson, H. Christopher, 2004. "Coordinating Strategy Decisions In Sao Paulo'S Fresh Markets: An Empirical Test Of The Peterson, Wysocki And Harsh Model," Staff Paper Series 11629, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:midasp:11629
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.11629
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/11629/files/sp04-08.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.11629?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. Peterson, H. Christopher & Wysocki, Allen F. & Harsh, Stephen B., 2001. "Strategic Choice Along The Vertical Coordination Continuum," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 4(2), pages 1-18.
    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. Altair Dias de Moura & Sandra Martin & Diane Mollenkopf, 2009. "Product specification and agribusiness chain coordination: introducing the coordination differential concept," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(1), pages 112-127.
    2. Schipmann, Christin & Qaim, Matin, 2011. "Supply chain differentiation, contract agriculture, and farmers’ marketing preferences: The case of sweet pepper in Thailand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 667-677.
    3. Le, Thi Ha Lien & Kristiansen, Paul & Vo, Brenda & Moss, Jonathan & Welch, Mitchell, 2024. "Understanding factors influencing farmers’ crop choice and agricultural transformation in the Upper Vietnamese Mekong Delta," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    4. Schipmann, Christin & Qaim, Matin, 2011. "Supply chain differentiation, contract agriculture, and farmers’ marketing preferences: the case of sweet pepper in Thailand," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 108349, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    5. Xiaoyong Zhang & Lusine H. Aramyan, 2009. "A conceptual framework for supply chain governance," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 1(2), pages 136-154, January.
    6. Signorini, Guilherme & Ross, R. Brent & Peterson, H. Christopher, 2015. "Governance strategies and transaction costs in a renovated electricity market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(PA), pages 151-159.
    7. Giger, Markus & Mutea, Emily & Kiteme, Boniface & Eckert, Sandra & Anseeuw, Ward & Zaehringer, Julie G., 2020. "Large agricultural investments in Kenya’s Nanyuki Area: Inventory and analysis of business models," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. Arouna Dissa & Jos Bijman & Maja Slingerland & Ousmane Mama Sanogo & Ken E Giller & Katrien Descheemaeker, 2022. "Growing cotton to produce food: Unravelling interactions between value chains in southern Mali," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 40(5), September.
    9. Peterson, H. Christopher, 2013. "Fundamental Principles of Managing Multi-Stakeholder Engagement," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 16(A), pages 1-12.
    10. Sartorius, K & Kirsten, J, 2002. "Can Small-Scale Farmers Be Linked To Agribusiness? The Timber Experience," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 41(4).
    11. Calum G. Turvey & Rong Kong, 2009. "Business and financial risks of small farm households in China," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 1(2), pages 155-172, January.
    12. Fertő, Imre & Szabó G., Gábor, 2004. "Értékesítési csatornák választása a magyar zöldség-gyümölcs szektorban. Esettanulmány [The choice of supply channels in the Hungarian fruit and vegetable sector - a case study]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 77-89.
    13. Enthoven, Laura & Van den Broeck, Goedele, 2021. "Local food systems: Reviewing two decades of research," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    14. Zsófia Benedek & Imre Fertő & Adrienn Molnár, 2018. "Off to market: but which one? Understanding the participation of small-scale farmers in short food supply chains—a Hungarian case study," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 383-398, June.
    15. Trienekens, Jacques & Velzen, Mariska van & Lees, Nic & Saunders, Caroline & Pascucci, Stefano, 2018. "Governance of market-oriented fresh food value chains: export chains from New Zealand," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(2), March.
    16. Bergtold, Jason S. & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Fewell, Jason E. & Williams, Jeffery R., 2017. "Annual bioenergy crops for biofuels production: Farmers' contractual preferences for producing sweet sorghum," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 724-731.
    17. Yao, B. & Shanoyan, A., 2018. "The Use of Mobile Money Application and Smallholder Farmer Market Participation: Evidence form Cote d Ivoire and Tanzania," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277259, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Charis Linda Braun & Meike Rombach & Anna Maria Häring & Vera Bitsch, 2018. "A Local Gap in Sustainable Food Procurement: Organic Vegetables in Berlin’s School Meals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
    19. Jose Blandon & Spencer Henson & Towhidul Islam, 2009. "Marketing preferences of small-scale farmers in the context of new agrifood systems: a stated choice model," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(2), pages 251-267.
    20. Marianne Hubeau & Fleur Marchand & Guido Van Huylenbroeck, 2017. "Sustainability Experiments in the Agri-Food System: Uncovering the Factors of New Governance and Collaboration Success," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-23, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Marketing;

    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:ags:midasp:11629. 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/damsuus.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.