IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/flsman/v33y2021i4d10.1007_s10696-020-09397-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social equity in supplier–buyer relationships in smallholder agri-food supply chains

Author

Listed:
  • Nayeli Hernandez-Martinez

    (Eindhoven University of Technology)

  • Nevin Mutlu

    (Eindhoven University of Technology)

  • Jan C. Fransoo

    (Tilburg University)

Abstract

We study supplier–buyer relationships in smallholder agri-food supply chains with equity concerns and under stakeholder engagement. We develop a game theoretic model to study the impact of these socially responsible practices in investment and pricing decisions. We model this as a Stackelberg game and study the impacts of the power structure in the outcomes. Our work was motivated by the business model of socially responsible Mexican company Fractal Café. We provide closed form expressions for the optimal wholesale and retail prices, and numerically study the effect of the model parameters. We show that equity concerns drive a redistribution of the profit towards an equitable outcome, but they do not have the same effect on the investment decisions. Additionally, we show that equity concerns may reverse the advantage of the game leader and transfer utility to the follower. We identify the settings under which the introduction of socially responsible practices increases the total supply chain profit by reducing the double marginalization effect. We find that capacity constraints result in a higher retail price, achieved by increasing the leader’s margin. Finally, we show that a two-part tariff contract with equity concerns is only convenient for the game follower when the leader has a high concern for advantageous inequity.

Suggested Citation

  • Nayeli Hernandez-Martinez & Nevin Mutlu & Jan C. Fransoo, 2021. "Social equity in supplier–buyer relationships in smallholder agri-food supply chains," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 1027-1089, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:flsman:v:33:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s10696-020-09397-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10696-020-09397-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10696-020-09397-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10696-020-09397-1?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michelle Greenwood, 2007. "Stakeholder Engagement: Beyond the Myth of Corporate Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 315-327, September.
    2. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, "undated". "Theories of Fairness and Reciprocity - Evidence and Economic Applications," IEW - Working Papers 075, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    3. Federico Etro, 2007. "Endogenous Entry and Antitrust Policy," Working Papers 122, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 2007.
    4. Zhang, Rong & Liu, Bin & Wang, Wenliang, 2012. "Pricing decisions in a dual channels system with different power structures," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 523-533.
    5. S. Chan Choi, 1991. "Price Competition in a Channel Structure with a Common Retailer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 271-296.
    6. Marsh, Michael T. & Schilling, David A., 1994. "Equity measurement in facility location analysis: A review and framework," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 1-17, April.
    7. Ye, Qing Chuan & Zhang, Yingqian & Dekker, Rommert, 2017. "Fair task allocation in transportation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-16.
    8. Falk, Armin & Fehr, Ernst & Fischbacher, Urs, 2008. "Testing theories of fairness--Intentions matter," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 287-303, January.
    9. Pfeiffer, Thomas, 2016. "A comparison of simple two-part supply chain contracts," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 114-124.
    10. Stephen F. Hamilton, 2003. "Slotting Allowances as a Facilitating Practice by Food Processors in Wholesale Grocery Markets: Profitability and Welfare Effects," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 797-813.
    11. Hayat Khan, 2018. "Islamic economics and a third fundamental theorem of welfare economics," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 723-737, March.
    12. Cai, Gangshu (George) & Zhang, Zhe George & Zhang, Michael, 2009. "Game theoretical perspectives on dual-channel supply chain competition with price discounts and pricing schemes," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 80-96, January.
    13. Cooper, David J. & Stockman, Carol Kraker, 2002. "Fairness and learning: an experimental examination," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 26-45, October.
    14. Robert G. Eccles & Ioannis Ioannou & George Serafeim, 2014. "The Impact of Corporate Sustainability on Organizational Processes and Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(11), pages 2835-2857, November.
    15. Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
    16. Chunguang Bai & Joseph Sarkis, 2016. "Supplier development investment strategies: a game theoretic evaluation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 240(2), pages 583-615, May.
    17. Tony Haitao Cui & Jagmohan S. Raju & Z. John Zhang, 2007. "Fairness and Channel Coordination," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(8), pages 1303-1314, August.
    18. Jan A. Van Mieghem, 1999. "Coordinating Investment, Production, and Subcontracting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(7), pages 954-971, July.
    19. Tang, Christopher S. & Sodhi, ManMohan S. & Formentini, Marco, 2016. "An analysis of partially-guaranteed-price contracts between farmers and agri-food companies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(3), pages 1063-1073.
    20. Caliskan-Demirag, Ozgun & Chen, Youhua (Frank) & Li, Jianbin, 2010. "Channel coordination under fairness concerns and nonlinear demand," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1321-1326, December.
    21. Federico Etro, 2007. "Competition, Innovation, and Antitrust," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-49601-4, September.
    22. Jose‐Manuel Prado‐Lorenzo & Isabel Gallego‐Alvarez & Isabel M. Garcia‐Sanchez, 2009. "Stakeholder engagement and corporate social responsibility reporting: the ownership structure effect," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 94-107, March.
    23. E. S. Savas, 1978. "On Equity in Providing Public Services," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(8), pages 800-808, April.
    24. Du, Shaofu & Nie, Tengfei & Chu, Chengbin & Yu, Yugang, 2014. "Reciprocal supply chain with intention," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 389-402.
    25. Nie, Tengfei & Du, Shaofu, 2017. "Dual-fairness supply chain with quantity discount contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 491-500.
    26. Jessica H. McCoy & Hau L. Lee, 2014. "Using Fairness Models to Improve Equity in Health Delivery Fleet Management," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 23(6), pages 965-977, June.
    27. Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2001. "Theories of Fairness and Reciprocity," Discussion Papers in Economics 14, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    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. Đula, Ivan & Größler, Andreas, 2021. "Inequity aversion in dynamically complex supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 309-322.
    2. Messinger, Paul R., 2016. "The role of fairness in competitive supply chain relationships: An experimental studyAuthor-Name: Choi, Sungchul," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(3), pages 798-813.
    3. Sarkar, Sumit, 2019. "Gratitude, conscience, and reciprocity: Models of supplier motivation when quality is non-contractible," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(2), pages 633-642.
    4. Ashraf, Nava & Bohnet, Iris & Piankov, Nikita, 2003. "Is Trust a Bad Investment?," Working Paper Series rwp03-047, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Du, Shaofu & Chen, Yuan & Peng, Jing & Nie, Tengfei, 2022. "Incorporating risk fairness concerns into wine futures under quality uncertainty," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    6. Du, Shaofu & Nie, Tengfei & Chu, Chengbin & Yu, Yugang, 2014. "Reciprocal supply chain with intention," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 389-402.
    7. Lin, Chung-Cheng & Yang, C.C., 2010. "Reciprocity and downward wage rigidity," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 1155-1168, December.
    8. Yadong Shu & Ying Dai & Zujun Ma, 2019. "Pricing Decisions in Closed-Loop Supply Chains with Peer-Induced Fairness Concerns," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-19, September.
    9. Sarkar, Sumit & Bhala, Shrey, 2021. "Coordinating a closed loop supply chain with fairness concern by a constant wholesale price contract," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 295(1), pages 140-156.
    10. Linghong Zhang & Bowen Xue & Xiyu Liu, 2018. "Carbon Emission Reduction with Regard to Retailer’s Fairness Concern and Subsidies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-28, April.
    11. Ni Du & Qinglan Han, 2018. "Pricing and Service Quality Guarantee Decisions in Logistics Service Supply Chain with Fairness Concern," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 35(05), pages 1-41, October.
    12. Leonardo Becchetti & Emanuele Bobbio & Federico Prizia & Lorenzo Semplici, 2022. "Going Deeper into the S of ESG: A Relational Approach to the Definition of Social Responsibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, August.
    13. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, "undated". "Why Social Preferences Matter - The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition," IEW - Working Papers 084, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    14. Shuchen Ni & Chun Feng & Handan Gou, 2023. "Nash-Bargaining Fairness Concerns under Push and Pull Supply Chains," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-20, November.
    15. Neugebauer, Tibor & Poulsen, Anders & Schram, Arthur, 2008. "Fairness and reciprocity in the Hawk-Dove Game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 243-250, May.
    16. Fehr, Ernst & Falk, Armin, 2002. "Psychological foundations of incentives," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 687-724, May.
    17. Chen, Jingxian & Liang, Liang & Yang, Feng, 2015. "Cooperative quality investment in outsourcing," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 174-191.
    18. Chen, Xu & Wang, Xiaojun, 2015. "Free or bundled: Channel selection decisions under different power structures," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 11-20.
    19. Zongsheng Huang, 2020. "Stochastic Differential Game in the Closed-Loop Supply Chain with Fairness Concern Retailer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-21, April.
    20. Chong Hyun Park & Gemma Berenguer, 2020. "Supply Constrained Location‐Distribution in Not‐for‐Profit Settings," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(11), pages 2461-2483, November.

    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:spr:flsman:v:33:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s10696-020-09397-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.