IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/arerjl/45659.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Production Contracts Raise Farm Productivity? An Instrumental Variables Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Key, Nigel D.
  • McBride, William D.

Abstract

Estimating how the use of production contracts affects farm productivity is difficult when unobservable factors are correlated with both the decision to contract and productivity. To account for potential selection bias, this study uses the local availability of production contracts as an instrument for whether a farm uses a contract in order to estimate the impact of contract use on total factor productivity. Results indicate that use of a production contract is associated with a large increase in productivity for feeder-to-finish hog farms in the United States. The instrumental variable method makes it credible to assert that the observed association is a causal relationship rather than simply a correlation.

Suggested Citation

  • Key, Nigel D. & McBride, William D., 2008. "Do Production Contracts Raise Farm Productivity? An Instrumental Variables Approach," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 37(2), pages 1-12.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:arerjl:45659
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.45659
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/45659/files/key%20-%20current.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.45659?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Key, Nigel D. & McBride, William D. & Mosheim, Roberto, 2008. "Decomposition of Total Factor Productivity Change in the U.S. Hog Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(01), pages 1-13, April.
    2. McBride, William D. & Key, Nigel D., 2003. "Economic And Structural Relationships In U.S. Hog Production," Agricultural Economic Reports 33971, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    3. Patrick Puhani, 2000. "The Heckman Correction for Sample Selection and Its Critique," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 53-68, February.
    4. Leung, Siu Fai & Yu, Shihti, 1996. "On the choice between sample selection and two-part models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1-2), pages 197-229.
    5. Hennessy, David A., 1996. "Information Asymmetry As a Reason for Vertical Integration," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10422, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    6. Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Davis, Christopher G. & Rahelizatovo, Noro C., 2004. "An Evaluation of U.S. Hog Producer Preferences Toward Autonomy," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 575-590, December.
    7. MacDonald, James M. & Perry, Janet E. & Ahearn, Mary Clare & Banker, David E. & Chambers, William & Dimitri, Carolyn & Key, Nigel D. & Nelson, Kenneth E. & Southard, Leland W., 2004. "Contracts, Markets, and Prices: Organizing the Production and Use of Agricultural Commodities," Agricultural Economic Reports 34013, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    8. Charles R. Knoeber & Walter N. Thurman, 1995. ""Don't Count Your Chickens...": Risk and Risk Shifting in the Broiler Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(3), pages 486-496.
    9. David A. Hennessy, 1996. "Information Asymmetry as a Reason for Food Industry Vertical Integration," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(4), pages 1034-1043.
    10. V. James Rhodes, 1995. "The Industrialization of Hog Production," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 17(2), pages 107-118.
    11. Joshua D. Angrist & Alan B. Krueger, 2001. "Instrumental Variables and the Search for Identification: From Supply and Demand to Natural Experiments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 69-85, Fall.
    12. Nigel Key & William McBride, 2003. "Production Contracts and Productivity in the U.S. Hog Sector," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 121-133.
    13. Key, Nigel, 2004. "Agricultural Contracting and the Scale of Production," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(2), pages 255-271, October.
    14. Joshua Angrist & Alan Krueger, 2001. "Instrumental Variables and the Search for Identification: From Supply and Demand to Natural Experiments," Working Papers 834, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    15. Martinez, Steve W. & Smith, Kevin E. & Zering, Kelly D., 1998. "Analysis of Changing Methods of Vertical Coordination in the Pork Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(2), pages 301-311, December.
    16. Martin, Laura L., 1997. "Production Contracts, Risk Shifting, and Relative Performance Payments in the Pork Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 267-278, December.
    17. Martin, Laura L., 1997. "Production Contracts, Risk Shifting, And Relative Performance Payments In The Pork Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 29(2), pages 1-12, December.
    18. Catherine J. Morrison Paul & Richard Nehring & David Banker, 2004. "Productivity, Economies, and Efficiency in U.S. Agriculture: A Look at Contracts," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1308-1314.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Xiaoheng Zhang & Ping Qing & Xiaohua Yu, 2019. "Short supply chain participation and market performance for vegetable farmers in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(2), pages 282-306, April.
    2. Frasa, Stefanie & Carlberg, Jared & Hogan, Robert, 2015. "Use of Contracts by Prairie Agricultural Producers," Working Papers 232328, Structure and Performance of Agriculture and Agri-products Industry (SPAA).
    3. Ba, Hélène A. & de Mey, Yann & Thoron, Sylvie & Demont, Matty, 2019. "Inclusiveness of contract farming along the vertical coordination continuum: Evidence from the Vietnamese rice sector," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    4. Briones, Roehlano M., 2015. "Small Farmers in High-Value Chains: Binding or Relaxing Constraints to Inclusive Growth?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 43-52.
    5. Nigel Key & William D. McBride, 2014. "Sub-therapeutic Antibiotics and the Efficiency of U.S. Hog Farms," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 96(3), pages 831-850.
    6. Pardeshi, Shefali & Loughrey, Dr. Jason & O’Connor, Dr. Declan, 2023. "Adoption of Fixed Milk Price Contracts and Farm Investments in Irish Dairy Sector," GEWISOLA 63rd Annual Conference, Goettingen, Germany, September 20-22, 2023 344245, GEWISOLA.
    7. Rachael Goodhue & Leo Simon, 2016. "Agricultural contracts, adverse selection, and multiple inputs," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 4(1), pages 1-33, December.
    8. Pardeshi, Shefali & Loughrey, Jason & O'Connor, Declan, 2024. "Farm Investment and Adoption of Fixed Milk Price Contracts on Irish Dairy Farms," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 73(1), April.
    9. Xiaoheng Zhang & Feng Chu & Xiaohua Yu & Yingheng Zhou & Xu Tian & Xianhui Geng & Jinyang Yang, 2017. "Changing Structure and Sustainable Development for China’s Hog Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, January.
    10. McBride, William D. & Key, Nigel, 2013. "U.S. Hog Production From 1992 to 2009: Technology, Restructuring, and Productivity Growth," Economic Research Report 262217, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    11. Martins, Franco Müller & Trienekens, Jacques & Omta, Onno, 2021. "Impact of buyers' support on farmer performance and investments in the Brazilian pork supply chain," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 25(01), July.
    12. Md. Aktar Hussain & Pradyut Guha, 2023. "Role of farm infrastructure in agribusiness during a crisis: insights from rural Assam, India," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 1035-1054, December.
    13. Key, Nigel D. & McBride, William D., 2007. "The Changing Economics of U.S. Hog Production," Economic Research Report 6389, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    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. McBride, William D. & Key, Nigel D., 2003. "Economic And Structural Relationships In U.S. Hog Production," Agricultural Economic Reports 33971, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Key, Nigel D. & McBride, William D., 2001. "Does Contracting Raise Farm Productivity? The Impact Of Production Contracts On Hog Farm Performance," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20721, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Li, X. & Guo, H. & Li, L., 2018. "Do Product Attributes affect Farmer's Contract Farming Participation? Evidence from Vegetable Production in China," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277154, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Key, Nigel D., 2013. "Production Contracts and Farm Business Growth and Survival," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 45(2), pages 1-17, May.
    5. Rachael Goodhue & Leo Simon, 2016. "Agricultural contracts, adverse selection, and multiple inputs," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 4(1), pages 1-33, December.
    6. MacDonald, James M. & Perry, Janet E. & Ahearn, Mary Clare & Banker, David E. & Chambers, William & Dimitri, Carolyn & Key, Nigel D. & Nelson, Kenneth E. & Southard, Leland W., 2004. "Contracts, Markets, and Prices: Organizing the Production and Use of Agricultural Commodities," Agricultural Economic Reports 34013, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    7. Martinez, Stephen W., 2002. "Vertical Coordination Of Marketing Systems: Lessons From The Poultry, Egg, And Pork Industries," Agricultural Economic Reports 34051, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    8. repec:oup:apecpp:v:40:y:2018:i:3:p:379-401. is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Hueth, Brent & Ligon, Ethan & Dimitri, Carolyn, 2007. "AJAE Appendix: Agricultural Contracts: Data and Research Needs," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1-7, December.
    10. Li, Xiaokang & Guo, Hongdong & Li, Lin, 2016. "Contract Farming in China: Perspectives of Smallholders in Vegetable Production," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235573, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Patterson, Paul M. & Richards, Timothy J., 2001. "Retail Contracting And Grower Prices," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20534, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Martinez, Steve & Zering, Kelly, 1997. "Vertical Coordination and Consumer Welfare: The Case of the Pork Industry," Agricultural Economic Reports 262048, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    13. Hu, Wu-Yueh & Vukina, Tomislav & Zheng, Viaoyong, 2014. "The Role of Risk and Risk-Aversion in Adoption of Alternative Marketing Arrangements by the U.S. Farmers," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 168930, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Jaenicke, Edward C. & Shields, Martin & Kelsey, Timothy W., 2007. "Food Processors’ Use of Contracts to Purchase Agricultural Inputs: Evidence from a Pennsylvania Survey," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-17, October.
    15. McBride, William D. & Key, Nigel D., 2001. "Factors Affecting Contractor And Grower Success In Hog Contracting," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20552, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. McBride, William D. & Key, Nigel, 2013. "U.S. Hog Production From 1992 to 2009: Technology, Restructuring, and Productivity Growth," Economic Research Report 262217, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    17. Unterschultz, James R., 2000. "New Instruments For Co-Ordination And Risk Sharing Within The Canadian Beef Industry," Project Report Series 24046, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    18. Martinez, Stephen W., 1999. "Vertical Coordination in the Pork and Broiler Industries: Implications for Pork and Chicken Products," Agricultural Economic Reports 34031, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    19. Rehber, Erkan, 2000. "Vertical Coordination In The Agro-Food Industry And Contract Farming: A Comparative Study Of Turkey And The Usa," Research Reports 25225, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
    20. Poray, Michael C. & Gray, Allan W. & Boehlje, Michael, 2002. "Evaluation of Alternative Coordination Systems Between Producers and Packers in the Pork Value Chain," Staff Papers 200386, Purdue University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    21. Elanor Starmer & Aimee Witteman & Timothy A. Wise, "undated". "Feeding the Factory Farm: Implicit Subsidies to the Broiler Chicken Industry," GDAE Working Papers 06-03, GDAE, Tufts University.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Productivity Analysis;

    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:ags:arerjl:45659. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nareaea.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.