IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v86y2004i1p115-123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hog Producer Preferences for Marketing Contract Attributes

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Roe
  • Thomas L. Sporleder
  • Betsy Belleville

Abstract

We use a stated preference instrument to elicit producer preferences for the attributes of risk-shifting hog marketing contracts and express acceptable producer trade-offs between contract attributes in a convenient dollar metric. Respondents value an increase in a window contract's price ceiling three to five times more than the same increase in the price floor, which suggests that hog producers dislike contracts that limit up-side price potential (limit positive skewness). The contractor's organizational form is also important. Cooperative forms are preferred by many respondents, particularly those who state that trust in the contractor is an important antecedent for any contractual relationship. Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Roe & Thomas L. Sporleder & Betsy Belleville, 2004. "Hog Producer Preferences for Marketing Contract Attributes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 115-123.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:86:y:2004:i:1:p:115-123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00566.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:ajagec:v:86:y:2004:i:1:p:115-123. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (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.