This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Reputations, Market Structure, and the Choice of Quality Assurance Systems in the Food Industry

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Miguel Carriquiry () (Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD), Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI))
Bruce A. Babcock () (Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD), Midwest Agribusiness Trade Research and Information Center (MATRIC))

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Participants in a supply chain of agricultural value-added products face significant challenges. Many of the costly distinctive traits are difficult (if not impossible) to observe even after consumption. A complicating factor, addressed here, is that in some circumstances delivered quality can only be imperfectly learned and/or affected stochastically by producers. In order for markets for these goods to arise, firms touting the quality of the product need to be trusted. In response to these challenges, new (and diverse) quality assurance systems (QASs) that facilitate the acquisition and flow of information about agricultural and food products are being put in place. A repeated-purchases model is developed to explore the fundamental economic factors that lie behind the choice of different QASs and their associated degrees of stringency by firms. Differences in the quality discoverability of a sought-after attribute, market structure, attractiveness of a market, nature of reputations, and the value placed in the future are among the factors contributing to the implementation of widely diverse systems across participants in different markets. Close attention is paid to the role of reputations in providing the incentives for firms to deliver high-quality goods. We model three different scenarios—monopoly, duopoly with firm-specific reputations, and duopoly with industry-wide reputations—and compare the resulting welfare of processors and their customers. We also provide a rationale for the branding efforts of many firms to distinguish their products along the supply chain.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.card.iastate.edu/publications/DBS/PDFFiles/04wp377.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function: Full Text
Download Restriction: no
File URL: http://www.card.iastate.edu/publications/synopsis.aspx?id=558
File Format: text/html
File Function: Online Synopsis
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University in its series Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications with number 04-wp377.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Nov 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ias:cpaper:04-wp377

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 578 Heady Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011-1070
Phone: (515) 294-1183
Fax: (515) 294-6336
Email:
Web page: http://www.card.iastate.edu/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: ().

Related research
Keywords: imperfect information; product quality; quality assurance; repeated purchases; reputations; supply chain; value-added agriculture.;

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Bulow, Jeremy I & Geanakoplos, John D & Klemperer, Paul D, 1985. "Multimarket Oligopoly: Strategic Substitutes and Complements," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(3), pages 488-511, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Caswell, Julie A. & Mojduszka, Eliza M., 1996. "Using Informational Labeling To Influence The Market For Quality In Food Products," Working Papers 25989, Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance. [Downloadable!]
  3. Hennessy, David A., 2002. "Information Asymmetry as a Reason for Food Industry Vertical Integration," Staff General Research Papers 5032, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  4. David A. Hennessy & Jutta Roosen & Helen H. Jensen, 2002. "Systemic Failure in the Provision of Safe Food," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 02-wp299, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. De, Sankar & Nabar, Prafulla, 1991. "Economic implications of imperfect quality certification," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 333-337, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Dixit, Avinash K, 1986. "Comparative Statics for Oligopoly," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(1), pages 107-22, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Chalfant, James A. & James, Jennifer S. & Lavoie, Nathalie & Sexton, Richard J., 1999. "Asymmetric Grading Error And Adverse Selection: Lemons In The California Prune Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(01), July. [Downloadable!]
  8. Klein, Benjamin & Leffler, Keith B, 1981. "The Role of Market Forces in Assuring Contractual Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(4), pages 615-41, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Shapiro, Carl, 1983. "Premiums for High Quality Products as Returns to Reputations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 98(4), pages 659-79, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Fearne, Andrew & Hornibrook, Susan & Dedman, Sandra, 2001. "The Management Of Perceived Risk In The Food Supply Chain: A Comparative Study Of Retailer-Led Beef Quality Assurance Schemes In Germany And Italy," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IAMA), vol. 4(01). [Downloadable!]
  11. Laurian J. Unnevehr & Helen H. Jensen, 1996. "HACCP as a Regulatory Innovation to Improve Food Safety in the Meat Industry," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 96-wp152, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  12. Hennessy, David A & Roosen, Jutta & Miranowski, John A, 2001. " Leadership and the Provision of Safe Food," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, American Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 83(4), pages 862-74, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  13. Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law & Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
  14. Mason, Charles F & Sterbenz, Frederic P, 1994. "Imperfect Product Testing and Market Size," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 35(1), pages 61-86, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  15. Noelke, Corinna M. & Caswell, Julie A., 2000. "A Model Of The Implementation Of Quality Management Systems For Credence Attributes," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21874, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association). [Downloadable!]
  16. Rafael Rob & Tadashi Sekiguchi, 2001. "Product Quality, Reputation and Turnover," Penn CARESS Working Papers 95ec48d1c0f2065e1d4aaeb99, Penn Economics Department. [Downloadable!]
  17. Reardon, Thomas & Farina, Elizabeth, 2001. "The Rise Of Private Food Quality And Safety Standards: Illustrations From Brazil," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IAMA), vol. 4(04). [Downloadable!]
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Rouviere, Elodie & Soubeyran, Raphael, 2008. "Collective Reputation, Entry and Minimum Safety Standard," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44465, European Association of Agricultural Economists. [Downloadable!]
  2. Marette, Stéphan, 2007. "Minimum Safety Standard, Consumers’ Information, and Competition (The)," Staff General Research Papers 12718, Iowa State University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? About 1000 journals are listed on RePEc.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-6.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.