IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/erevae/v26y1999i2p199-218.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quality and Self-Regulation in Agricultural Markets: How Do Producer Organisations Make the Rules?

Author

Listed:
  • Zago, Angelo M

Abstract

The paper focuses on Producer Organisations (POs) and studies the interaction of asymmetric information and the democratic process in the quality choices of a group of heterogeneous producers facing an opportunity to gain from their collective capacity to establish a reputation for their products. It makes the PO's choice of remuneration scheme endogenous and distinguishes between a constitutional and a working phase. It compares different equilibria, according to which type of producer is in the majority, and it finds that, irrespective of the constitutional rules adopted, the quality level provided by the group is higher or lower than the first-best according to the producers in the majority. Copyright 1999 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Zago, Angelo M, 1999. "Quality and Self-Regulation in Agricultural Markets: How Do Producer Organisations Make the Rules?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 26(2), pages 199-218, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:26:y:1999:i:2:p:199-218
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sabine Duvaleix & Marie Lassalas & Laure Latruffe & Vasilia Konstantidelli & Irene Tzouramani, 2020. "Adopting Environmentally Friendly Farming Practices and the Role of Quality Labels and Producer Organisations: A Qualitative Analysis Based on Two European Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Philippe Mahenc, 2017. "Honest versus Misleading Certification," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 454-483, June.
    3. Fulvio Fontini & Katrin Millock & Michele Moretto, 2018. "Collective reputation with stochastic production and unknown willingness to pay for quality," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 20(2), pages 387-410, April.
    4. Ahmet Candemir & Sabine Duvaleix & Laure Latruffe, 2021. "Agricultural Cooperatives And Farm Sustainability – A Literature Review," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 1118-1144, September.
    5. Tauber, Ramona & Anders, Sven M. & Langinier, Corinne, 2011. "The Economics of Geographical Indications: Welfare Implications," Working Papers 103262, Structure and Performance of Agriculture and Agri-products Industry (SPAA).
    6. Liang, Qiao & Hendrikse, George, 2016. "Pooling and the yardstick effect of cooperatives," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 97-105.
    7. Loïc Henry, 2023. "Adapting the designated area of geographical indications to climate change," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(4), pages 1088-1115, August.
    8. Teuber, Ramona, 2011. "Protecting Geographical Indications: Lessons learned from the Economic Literature," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 116081, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Merel, Pierre R. & Saitone, Tina L. & Sexton, Richard J., 2009. "Cooperatives and Quality-Differentiated Markets: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Modeling Approaches," Journal of Rural Cooperation, Hebrew University, Center for Agricultural Economic Research, vol. 37(2), pages 1-24.
    10. Armelle Mazé, 2005. "Contract Law and the self-enforcing range of contracts in agriculture," Working Papers halshs-00354960, HAL.

    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:erevae:v:26:y:1999:i:2:p:199-218. 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/eaaeeea.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.