IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v96y2014i4p1084-1101..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Benefits from a Marketing Cooperative in the Copper River Fishery

Author

Listed:
  • Sunny L. Jardine
  • C.-Y. Cynthia Lin
  • James N. Sanchirico

Abstract

The degradation of product quality is one form of rent dissipation resulting from incomplete property rights in fisheries. Industry structure and information asymmetries can also lead to underinvestment in product quality, even when property rights are well defined. In this article we empirically examine whether the voluntary formation of a marketing cooperative was able to mitigate market failures that led to the production of inferior-quality fish. Specifically, we use a difference-in-differences estimation strategy to measure the impact that the Copper River Fishermen's Cooperative, an Alaskan salmon marketing cooperative, had on ex-vessel salmon prices and salmon quality measures. We find that the cooperative was able to improve product quality, as well as attract and sustain a higher price for its salmon. Our findings provide empirical support for many of the key tenets of cooperative theory. Specifically, we find evidence that marketing cooperatives can address existing market failures, that marketing cooperatives can have advantages in high-quality product markets, and that over time, as a result of their success, marketing cooperatives may lead to lasting producer benefits even though they become obsolete due to nonmember free-riding.

Suggested Citation

  • Sunny L. Jardine & C.-Y. Cynthia Lin & James N. Sanchirico, 2014. "Measuring Benefits from a Marketing Cooperative in the Copper River Fishery," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1084-1101.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:96:y:2014:i:4:p:1084-1101.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aau050
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:oup:ajagec:v:96:y:2014:i:4:p:1084-1101.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.