IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Measuring perceived black economic empowerment in the South African wine industry

  • Janssens, W.
  • Sefoko, N.
  • van Rooyen, Johan
  • Bostyn, F.
Registered author(s):

    The aim of this study is to develop a scale to measure perceived black economic empowerment (BEE) as reported by beneficiaries themselves. Two scale development procedures were carried out on randomly selected samples of 213 and 322 previously disadvantaged individual respondents within 14 and 11wine business that cover the larger part of the wine industry chain. The results led to a 'feeling' self-report scale (5-dimensions) and an ‘evolution’ self-report scale (6-dimensions). The emerged dimensions are: Business ownership and control (BOC), Access to finance (ATF), Employment and Human Resources Management (EMP) [internal and external], Social capital/enabling environment (SOC) and Lobbying power and collective action (LOB). First measurement results indicate that respondents feel less empowered with respect to BOC and ATF as compared to EMP, SOC and LOB. There appears to be no gender or age differences, but there are geographical differences. The latter is mostly per farm, that is, a lot of variation in BEE is observed at the firm level. The scale can be used at the firm and industry level as a diagnostic tool to monitor BEE progress as a complementary and not a substitutive framework to the wine industry scorecard as an objective measure of BEE. Future research should focus on the gap between the two definitions and assessment tools in order to comprehensively capture BEE in its entirety. The scale can also be adapted to fit the context, for example, its use in the agricultural sector at large.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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://purl.umn.edu/10137
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA) in its journal Agrekon.

    Volume (Year): 45 (2006)
    Issue (Month): 4 (December)
    Pages:

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:10137
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.aeasa.org.za/Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    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.:

    as in new window
    1. repec:ner:tilbur:urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-364386 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Ravallion, Martin & Lokshin, Michael, 2000. "Identifying welfare effects from subjective questions," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2301, The World Bank.
    3. Wils, F.C.M., 2001. "Empowerment and its evaluation," ISS Working Papers - General Series 23178, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    4. West, Quentin M., 1973. "Economic Research Trade-Offs Between Efficiency And Equity," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 5(01), July.
    5. van Praag, Bernard M. S., 1991. "Ordinal and cardinal utility : An integration of the two dimensions of the welfare concept," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 69-89, October.
    6. Hildebrandt, Lutz, 1987. "Consumer retail satisfaction in rural areas: A reanalysis of survey data," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 19-42, March.
    7. Kapteyn, Arie, 1994. "The Measurement of Household Cost Functions: Revealed Preference versus Subjective Measures," Journal of Population Economics, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 333-50, November.
    8. Menno Pradhan & Martin Ravallion, 2000. "Measuring Poverty Using Qualitative Perceptions Of Consumption Adequacy," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(3), pages 462-471, August.
    9. repec:dgr:kubcen:19943 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:10137. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.