IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i9p3009-d165554.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Social Capital Affects the Quality Performance of Agricultural Products: Evidence from a Binary Perspective of China

Author

Listed:
  • Shaoling Fu

    (College of Economics & Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China)

  • Hua Liu

    (College of Economics & Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China)

  • Kim Hua Tan

    (Business School, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK)

  • Yuanzhu Zhan

    (Management School, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZH, UK)

  • Yalan Ding

    (College of Economics & Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China)

  • Wene Qi

    (College of Economics & Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China)

Abstract

Improving the quality of agricultural products is the key factor in promoting agricultural development in the Belt and Road program. Although many studies have investigated the relationship between social capital and performance, the findings are inconsistent. Moreover, the mechanism of how social capital affects the quality performance of agricultural products remains unclear. Accordingly, this study developed a theoretical model with propositions from a social capital-quality performance of agricultural products paradigm for examining and comparing the three dimensions of social capital: The relationships among cognitive (measured by shared values), relational (measured by reciprocity) and structural (measured by communication), and their role in ensuring quality performance of agricultural products from the company and farmer perspectives. This study selected the companies and farmers in “A company + farmers” model. The data analysis is based on a sample of 184 companies and 414 farmers. The results show that shared values and communication have a significant positive effect on reciprocity. In terms of the influence on reciprocity, communication is higher than shared values from both the corporate and farmer perspectives. The three dimensions of social capital have different effects on quality performance of agricultural products. On the company side, communication and reciprocity in social capital have a significant positive effect on the quality performance of agricultural products, with the order of effect being communication first followed by reciprocity. On the farmer side, reciprocity and shared values have a significant positive effect on the quality performance of agricultural products, with the order of effect being reciprocity first followed by shared values. These findings have positive theoretical and practical significance for companies and farmers aiming to improve the quality of agricultural products.

Suggested Citation

  • Shaoling Fu & Hua Liu & Kim Hua Tan & Yuanzhu Zhan & Yalan Ding & Wene Qi, 2018. "How Social Capital Affects the Quality Performance of Agricultural Products: Evidence from a Binary Perspective of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-15, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3009-:d:165554
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/3009/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/3009/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Horn, Philipp & Scheffler, Paul & Schiele, Holger, 2014. "Internal integration as a pre-condition for external integration in global sourcing: A social capital perspective," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 54-65.
    2. Lei, David & Slocum, John W. & Pitts, Robert A., 1997. "Building cooperative advantage: Managing strategic alliances to promote organizational learning," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 203-223, October.
    3. Soh Hyun Chu & Hongsuk Yang & Mansokku Lee & Sangwook Park, 2017. "The Impact of Institutional Pressures on Green Supply Chain Management and Firm Performance: Top Management Roles and Social Capital," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-21, May.
    4. Nuno Ferreira da Cruz & António F. Tavares & Rui Cunha Marques & Susana Jorge & Luís de Sousa, 2016. "Measuring Local Government Transparency," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 866-893, July.
    5. Umar Farooq & Wu Tao & Ganjar Alfian & Yong-Shin Kang & Jongtae Rhee, 2016. "ePedigree Traceability System for the Agricultural Food Supply Chain to Ensure Consumer Health," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-16, August.
    6. Johnson, Nancy L. & Suarez, Ruth & Lundy, Mark, 2003. "The Importance Of Social Capital In Colombian Rural Agro-Enterprises," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25917, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Jakki Mohr & Robert Spekman, 1994. "Characteristics of partnership success: Partnership attributes, communication behavior, and conflict resolution techniques," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 135-152, February.
    8. Huo, Baofeng & Wang, Zhiqiang & Tian, Yu, 2016. "The impact of justice on collaborative and opportunistic behaviors in supply chain relationships," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 12-23.
    9. Pinto, Francisco Silva & Simões, Pedro & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2017. "Raising the bar: The role of governance in performance assessments," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 38-47.
    10. Chin-Shien Lin & Ruei-Yuan Chang & Van Thac Dang, 2015. "An Integrated Model to Explain How Corporate Social Responsibility Affects Corporate Financial Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-20, June.
    11. Jeffrey H. Dyer & Wujin Chu, 2003. "The Role of Trustworthiness in Reducing Transaction Costs and Improving Performance: Empirical Evidence from the United States, Japan, and Korea," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 57-68, February.
    12. Prashant Kale & Harbir Singh & Howard Perlmutter, 2000. "Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: building relational capital," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 217-237, March.
    13. Vincenzo Perrone & Akbar Zaheer & Bill McEvily, 2003. "Free to Be Trusted? Organizational Constraints on Trust in Boundary Spanners," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 422-439, August.
    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. Godfred Addai & Jungho Suh & Douglas Bardsley & Guy Robinson & Lawrence Guodaar, 2024. "Exploring sustainable development within rural regions in Ghana: A rural web approach," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(4), pages 3890-3907, August.
    2. Godfred Addai & Lawrence Guodaar & Owusu Amponsah & Dalia M. Ibrahiem & Kpenekuu Felix & Philip Antwi‐Agyei, 2024. "Role of social capital in agricultural diversification: Implications for sustainable development in rural regions," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(5), pages 4844-4865, October.

    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. Ranjay Gulati & Maxim Sytch, 2008. "Does familiarity breed trust? Revisiting the antecedents of trust," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2-3), pages 165-190.
    2. Oliver Schilke & Karen S. Cook, 2015. "Sources of alliance partner trustworthiness: Integrating calculative and relational perspectives," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 276-297, February.
    3. Gillis, William E. & Combs, James G. & Yin, Xiaoli, 2020. "Franchise management capabilities and franchisor performance under alternative franchise ownership strategies," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(1).
    4. Martyna Janowicz‐Panjaitan & Rekha Krishnan, 2009. "Measures for Dealing with Competence and Integrity Violations of Interorganizational Trust at the Corporate and Operating Levels of Organizational Hierarchy," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 245-268, March.
    5. Alfred Wong & Dean Tjosvold & Pengzhu Zhang, 2005. "Supply Chain Relationships for Customer Satisfaction in China: Interdependence and Cooperative Goals," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 179-199, June.
    6. Heimeriks, K., 2002. "Alliance Capability, Collaboration Quality, and Alliance Performance: An Integrated Framework," Working Papers 02.05, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    7. Duysters, G.M. & Heimeriks, K.H., 2002. "The influence of alliance capabilities on alliance performance: an empirical investigation," Working Papers 02.08, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    8. Martinez-Noya, Andrea & Narula, Rajneesh, 2018. "What more can we learn from R&D alliances? : A review and research agenda," MERIT Working Papers 2018-022, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    9. Jääskeläinen, Aki, 2021. "The relational outcomes of performance management in buyer-supplier relationships," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    10. Soh Hyun Chu & Hongsuk Yang & Mansokku Lee & Sangwook Park, 2017. "The Impact of Institutional Pressures on Green Supply Chain Management and Firm Performance: Top Management Roles and Social Capital," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-21, May.
    11. Manuela N. Hoehn-Weiss & Samina Karim & Chi-Hyon Lee, 2017. "Examining Alliance Portfolios Beyond the Dyads: The Relevance of Redundancy and Nonuniformity Across and Between Partners," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 56-73, February.
    12. George Chondrakis & Mari Sako, 2020. "When suppliers shift my boundaries: Supplier employee mobility and its impact on buyer firms' sourcing strategy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(9), pages 1682-1711, September.
    13. Felzensztein, Christian & Brodt, Susan E. & Gimmon, Eli, 2014. "Do strategic marketing and social capital really matter in regional clusters? Lessons from an emerging economy of Latin America," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 498-507.
    14. Madhavaram, Sreedhar & Hunt, Shelby D., 2017. "Customizing business-to-business (B2B) professional services: The role of intellectual capital and internal social capital," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 38-46.
    15. Phuong Thi Minh Nguyen & Khuong Ngoc Mai & Phuong Ngoc Duy Nguyen, 2021. "Alliance Management Practices for Higher Trust, Commitment and Inter-Organizational Relationship Performance: Evidence from Travel Companies in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-22, August.
    16. Min, Jae-Woong & Vonortas, Nicholas S. & Kim, YoungJun, 2019. "Commercialization of transferred public technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 10-20.
    17. Misener, Katie & Doherty, Alison, 2014. "In support of sport: Examining the relationship between community sport organizations and sponsors," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 493-506.
    18. Golonka, Monika, 2015. "Proactive cooperation with strangers: Enhancing complexity of the ICT firms' alliance portfolio and their innovativeness," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 168-178.
    19. Wang, Miaomiao & Mühlbacher, Hans & Wittmann, Xinhua & Perrett, Pieter, 2021. "Dynamic collaboration between small- and medium-sized enterprises from highly dissimilar markets," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 185-200.
    20. Alexander T Mohr & Jonas Puck, 2013. "Revisiting the Trust-performance Link in Strategic Alliances," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 269-289, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3009-:d:165554. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.