IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ifaamr/34227.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Global Change In Agrifood Grades And Standards: Agribusiness Strategic Responses In Developing Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Reardon, Thomas
  • Codron, Jean-Marie
  • Busch, Lawrence
  • Bingen, R. James
  • Harris, Craig

Abstract

The role of G&S has shifted from a technical instrument to reduce transaction costs in homogeneous commodity markets to a strategic instrument of competition in differentiated product markets. The nature of G&S has shifted from performance (realized characteristics of the product) to process standards. In developing countries, these changes have tended to exclude small firms and farms from participating in market growth, because of the implied investments. The three strategic responses to G&S change by agribusiness firms and farms include: (1) by large firms and multinationals, to create private G&S and private certification, labeling, and branding systems; (2) by medium-large domestic firms, to lobby governments to adopt public G&S similar to those in export markets in developed regions; (3) by small firms and farms, to ally with public and nonprofit sectors to form G&S and certification systems to access export markets and to bring institutional change to nontradable product markets. Governments should build the capacity of the poor to invest to 'make the grade' implied by the new G&S.

Suggested Citation

  • Reardon, Thomas & Codron, Jean-Marie & Busch, Lawrence & Bingen, R. James & Harris, Craig, 1999. "Global Change In Agrifood Grades And Standards: Agribusiness Strategic Responses In Developing Countries," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 2(3-4), pages 1-15.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ifaamr:34227
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.34227
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/34227/files/02030421.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.34227?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
    2. Unnevehr, Laurian J. & Jensen, Helen H., 1999. "The economic implications of using HACCP as a food safety regulatory standard," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 625-635, December.
    3. Michael A. Mazzocco, 1996. "HACCP as a Business Management Tool," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(3), pages 770-774.
    4. Jones, Eluned & Hill, Lowell D., 1994. "Re-engineering Marketing Policies in Food and Agriculture: Issues and Alternatives for Grain Grading Policies," Re-Engineering Marketing Policies for Food and Agriculture - FAMC 1994 Conference 265981, Food and Agricultural Marketing Consortium (FAMC).
    5. Salay, Elisabete & Caswell, Julie A., 1998. "Developments In Brazilian Food Safety Policy," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 1(2), pages 1-11.
    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. Unnevehr, Laurian J., 2000. "Food safety issues and fresh food product exports from LDCs," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 231-240, September.
    2. Segerson, Kathleen, 1998. "Mandatory vs. Voluntary Approaches to Food Safety," Research Reports 25188, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
    3. Kathleen Segerson, 1999. "Mandatory versus voluntary approaches to food safety," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(1), pages 53-70.
    4. Giovannucci, Daniele & Reardon, Thomas, 2000. "Understanding Grades and Standards: and how to apply them," MPRA Paper 13549, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Caswell, Julie A., 1998. "How Labeling of Safety and Process Attributes Affects Markets for Food," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 151-158, October.
    6. Francisco Marcos, 2003. "Privatizing Higher Education in Spain," Working Papers Economia wp03-13, Instituto de Empresa, Area of Economic Environment.
    7. Dulleck, Uwe & Kerschbamer, Rudolf, 2003. "Price Discrimination in Markets for Experts' Services," CEPR Discussion Papers 4155, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Feser, Daniel & Runst, Petrik, 2015. "Energy efficiency consultants as change agents? Examining the reasons for EECs’ limited success," ifh Working Papers 1 (2015), Volkswirtschaftliches Institut für Mittelstand und Handwerk an der Universität Göttingen (ifh).
    9. Thijs Vandemoortele & Koen Deconinck, 2014. "When Are Private Standards More Stringent than Public Standards?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 96(1), pages 154-171.
    10. Hussain, Salman, 2006. "Co-regulation and voluntarism in the provision of food safety: lessons from institutional economics," Working Papers 45996, Scotland's Rural College (formerly Scottish Agricultural College), Land Economy & Environment Research Group.
    11. Beck, Adrian & Kerschbamer, Rudolf & Qiu, Jianying & Sutter, Matthias, 2014. "Car mechanics in the lab––Investigating the behavior of real experts on experimental markets for credence goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 166-173.
    12. Mimra, Wanda & Rasch, Alexander & Waibel, Christian, 2016. "Second opinions in markets for expert services: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 106-125.
    13. Gál, Róbert Iván & Csaba, Iván, 1997. "A bőség zavara: tökéletlen fogyasztói információ és verseny a háziorvosi szolgáltatások piacán [The confusion of plenty: imperfect consumer information and competition on the market of family docto," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 673-686.
    14. Dhaval M. Dave, 2013. "Effects of Pharmaceutical Promotion: A Review and Assessment," NBER Working Papers 18830, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Jeanne DALL'ORSO & Romain GAURIOT & Lionel PAGE, 2016. "Disappointment looms around the corner: Visibility and local businesses' market power," QuBE Working Papers 041, QUT Business School.
    16. Gu, Yiquan & Rasch, Alexander & Wenzel, Tobias, 2020. "Consumer salience and quality provision in (un)regulated public service markets," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-087, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. David M. Waguespack & Robert Salomon, 2016. "Quality, Subjectivity, and Sustained Superior Performance at the Olympic Games," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(1), pages 286-300, January.
    18. Eunae Jung & Hyungun Sung, 2017. "The Influence of the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Outbreak on Online and Offline Markets for Retail Sales," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 9(3), pages 1-23, March.
    19. von Meyer-Höfer, Marie & Spiller, Achim, 2014. "“Sustainability” a semi-globalisable concept for international food marketing - Consumer expectations regarding sustainable food – An explorative survey in industrialised and emerging countries," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 182513, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    20. Francis Annan, 2017. "Fraud on Mobile Financial Markets: Evidence from A Pilot Audit Study," Working Papers 17-16, NET Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness;

    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:ifaamr:34227. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifamaea.html .

    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/ifamaea.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.