IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/saea13/142506.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fresh Vegetable Growers' Risk Perception, Risk Preference and Choice of Marketing Contracts: A Choice Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Vassalos, Michael
  • Hu, Wuyang
  • Woods, Timothy A.
  • Schieffer, Jack
  • Dillon, Carl R.

Abstract

Growers’ preferences for a number of marketing contract attributes as well as the effect of growers’ risk perception and risk preferences on the choice of marketing contracts were examined with the use of a choice experiment. The main data source for the study is a mail survey administrated to 315 wholesale tomato growers. The findings validate the transaction cost hypothesis and indicate heterogeneity in preferences. Risk perception and risk preferences had limited impact on contract choice.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:saea13:142506
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.142506
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/142506/files/SAEA%202013.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.142506?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. Hu, Wuyang & Woods, Timothy A. & Bastin, Sandra, 2009. "Consumer Acceptance and Willingness to Pay for Blueberry Products with Nonconventional Attributes," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(1), pages 1-14, April.
    2. Brent Hueth & Tigran Melkonyan, 2004. "Identity Preservation, Multitasking, and Agricultural Contract Design," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(3), pages 842-847.
    3. Daniel A. Ackerberg & Maristella Botticini, 2002. "Endogenous Matching and the Empirical Determinants of Contract Form," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(3), pages 564-591, June.
    4. Hueth, Brent & Ligon, Ethan & Wolf, Stephen & Wu, Steven, 1999. "Incentive Instruments in Agricultural Contracts: Input Control, Monitoring, Quality Measurement, and Price Risk," Staff General Research Papers Archive 5237, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Jayson L. Lusk & Keith H. Coble, 2005. "Risk Perceptions, Risk Preference, and Acceptance of Risky Food," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 393-405.
    6. Hueth, Brent & Ligon, Ethan, 1998. "Quality Measurement And Risk-Sharing In Contracts For California Fruits And Vegetables," 1998 Annual meeting, August 2-5, Salt Lake City, UT 20957, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Hudson Darren & Lusk Jayson, 2004. "Risk and Transactions Cost in Contracting: Results from a Choice-Based Experiment," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Brent Hueth & Ethan Ligon & Steven Wolf & Steven Wu, 1999. "Incentive Instruments in Fruit and Vegetable Contracts: Input Control, Monitoring, Measuring, and Price Risk," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 21(2), pages 374-389.
    9. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    10. 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.
    11. Hueth, Brent & Wolf, Stephen & Ligon, Ethan, 2001. "Policing Mechanisms in Agricultural Contracts," Staff General Research Papers Archive 5257, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. 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.
    13. Brent Hueth & Ethan Ligon, 1999. "Producer Price Risk and Quality Measurement," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(3), pages 512-524.
    14. MacDonald, James M. & Perry, Janet E. & Ahearn, Mary Clare & Banker, David E. & Chambers, William & Dimitri, Carolyn & Key, Nigel D. & Nelson, Kenneth E. & Southard, Leland W., 2004. "Contracts, Markets, and Prices: Organizing the Production and Use of Agricultural Commodities," Agricultural Economic Reports 34013, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    15. Joost M.E. Pennings & Philip Garcia, 2001. "Measuring Producers' Risk Preferences: A Global Risk-Attitude Construct," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(4), pages 993-1009.
    16. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    17. Gary Charness & Uri Gneezy, 2010. "Portfolio Choice And Risk Attitudes: An Experiment," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(1), pages 133-146, January.
    18. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, September.
    19. Hatanaka, Maki & Bain, Carmen & Busch, Lawrence, 2005. "Third-party certification in the global agrifood system," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 354-369, June.
    20. K. K. Lancaster, 2010. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Levine's Working Paper Archive 1385, David K. Levine.
    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. Barrowclough, Michael & Boys, Kathryn A. & Carpio, Carlos, 2015. "An Evaluation of Firm and Contract Characteristics Valued by Supply Chain Partners in Specialty Crop Marketing Channels," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205768, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Shuoli Zhao & Chengyan Yue, 2020. "Risk preferences of commodity crop producers and specialty crop producers: An application of prospect theory," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(3), pages 359-372, May.

    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. 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.
    2. Vassalos, Michael & Li, Yingbo, 2016. "Assessing the Impact of Fresh Vegetable Growers’ Risk Aversion Levels and Risk Preferences on the Probability of Adopting Marketing Contracts: A Bayesian Approach," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 19(1), pages 1-18, February.
    3. Liang, Jing & Jensen, Helen H., 2008. "Marketing Agreement, Food Safety and Contract Design," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6434, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Anastassiadis, Friederike & Liebe, Ulf & Musshoff, Oliver, 2012. "Finanzielle Flexibilität In Landwirtschaftlichen Investitionsentscheidungen: Ein Discrete Choice Experiment," 52nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 26-28, 2012 137142, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    5. Rai, Rajesh Kumar & Scarborough, Helen, 2012. "Estimating the public benefits of mitigating damages caused by invasive plant species in a subsistence economy," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 124421, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    6. Stine Broch & Suzanne Vedel, 2012. "Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-Environmental Contract Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 561-581, April.
    7. Chad M. Baum & Robert Weigelt, 2019. "How Where I Shop Influences What I Buy: The Importance of the Retail Format in Sustainable Tomato Consumption," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Chai & Chad M. Baum (ed.), Demand, Complexity, and Long-Run Economic Evolution, pages 141-169, Springer.
    8. Bechtold, Kai-Brit & Abdulai, Awudu, 2012. "Willingness-To-Pay for Functional Dairy Products and the Influence of Starting Point Bias: Empirical Evidence for Germany," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124776, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Pei Xu & Zhigang Wang, 2014. "Country of origin and willingness to pay for pistachios: a chinese case," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 2(1), pages 1-16, December.
    10. Abebe, Gumataw K. & Bijman, Jos & Kemp, Ron & Omta, Onno & Tsegaye, Admasu, 2013. "Contract farming configuration: Smallholders’ preferences for contract design attributes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 14-24.
    11. Hjelmgren, Jonas & Anell, Anders, 2007. "Population preferences and choice of primary care models: A discrete choice experiment in Sweden," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(2-3), pages 314-322, October.
    12. Wang, Xuehong & Bennett, Jeff & Xie, Chen & Zhang, Zhitao & Liang, Dan, 2007. "Estimating non-market environmental benefits of the Conversion of Cropland to Forest and Grassland Program: A choice modeling approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 114-125, June.
    13. Mussell, Al, 2003. "PRICE DISCOVERY MECHANISMS AND ALTERNATIVES FOR CANADIAN AGRICULTURE; Part II: A Review of Pricing Mechanisms from the Economic Literature," Miscellaneous Publications 18100, George Morris Center.
    14. Ladenburg, Jacob & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2008. "Gender-specific starting point bias in choice experiments: Evidence from an empirical study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 275-285, November.
    15. Ondřej Vojáček & Iva Pecáková, 2010. "Comparison of Discrete Choice Models for Economic Environmental Research," Prague Economic Papers, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2010(1), pages 35-53.
    16. Wu, Steven Y., 2013. "Adapting Contract Theory to Fit Contract Farming," 2014 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 3-5, 2014, Philadelphia, PA 161894, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Grisolía, José M. & Longo, Alberto & Boeri, Marco & Hutchinson, George & Kee, Frank, 2013. "Trading off dietary choices, physical exercise and cardiovascular disease risks," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 130-138.
    18. Barrowclough, Michael & Boys, Kathryn A. & Carpio, Carlos, 2015. "An Evaluation of Firm and Contract Characteristics Valued by Supply Chain Partners in Specialty Crop Marketing Channels," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205768, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Vedel, Suzanne Elizabeth & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2015. "Contracts for afforestation and the role of monitoring for landowners’ willingness to accept," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 29-37.
    20. Jaenicke, Edward C. & Shields, Martin & Kelsey, Timothy W., 2007. "Food Processors’ Use of Contracts to Purchase Agricultural Inputs: Evidence from a Pennsylvania Survey," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-17, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Farm Management; Marketing;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:saea13:142506. 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/saeaaea.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.