IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea06/21354.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What Drives Strategic Behavior? A Framework to Explain and Predict SMEs' Transition to Sustainable Production Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Kalogeras, Nikos
  • Pennings, Joost M.E.
  • Garcia, Philip

Abstract

The strategic choices of Small and Medium Enterprises in the agribusiness sector are fraught with large cost and revenue uncertainties. The transition to a new production system implies that SMEs must re-allocate resources and develop new strategies to achieve market goals. We highlight the agricultural, marketing and management literature on decision-making under risk for strategic decisions. Subsequently we discuss the various elicitation techniques to measure decision-makers' utility functions. That review indicates that one is able to measure the global utility function in a reliable and valid way. Particularly the measures based on experiments and rooted in expected utility framework seem to perform well. Furthermore, we develop various research propositions that deal with the factors that influence SMEs strategic decision whether or not to switch to sustainable production systems. We propose to investigate the global shape of the utility function of SMEs as it drives strategic decisions, and the factors that influence these decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Kalogeras, Nikos & Pennings, Joost M.E. & Garcia, Philip, 2006. "What Drives Strategic Behavior? A Framework to Explain and Predict SMEs' Transition to Sustainable Production Systems," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21354, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea06:21354
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/21354
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Barberis, 2001. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Individual Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(4), pages 1247-1292, August.
    2. Matthew Rabin, 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1281-1292, September.
    3. Joost M. E. Pennings, 2004. "Channel Contract Behavior: The Role of Risk Attitudes, Risk Perceptions, And Channel Members' Market Structures," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 77(4), pages 697-724, October.
    4. Sarin, Rakesh K. & Weber, Martin, 1993. "Risk-value models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 135-149, October.
    5. Jutta Roosen & David A. Hennessy, 2003. "Tests for the Role of Risk Aversion on Input Use," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 30-43.
    6. Jehoshua Eliashberg, 1980. "Consumer Preference Judgments: An Exposition with Empirical Applications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 60-77, January.
    7. L. J. Bourgeois, III & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 1988. "Strategic Decision Processes in High Velocity Environments: Four Cases in the Microcomputer Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(7), pages 816-835, July.
    8. Joost M.E. Pennings & Raymond M. Leuthold, 2000. "The Role of Farmers' Behavioral Attitudes and Heterogeneity in Futures Contracts Usage," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 908-919.
    9. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2001. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Individual Stock Returns," NBER Working Papers 8190, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Elke U. Weber & Richard A. Milliman, 1997. "Perceived Risk Attitudes: Relating Risk Perception to Risky Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(2), pages 123-144, February.
    11. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    12. Joost M.E. Pennings & Ale Smidts, 2000. "Assessing the Construct Validity of Risk Attitude," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(10), pages 1337-1348, October.
    13. Lindner, Robert K. & Gibbs, Melissa, 1990. "A Test Of Bayesian Learning From Farmer Trials Of New Wheat Varieties," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 34(01), April.
    14. Green, Paul E & Srinivasan, V, 1978. " Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 103-123, Se.
    15. Atwood, Joseph A. & Buschena, David E., 2003. "Evaluating the magnitudes of financial transactions costs on risk behavior," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 75(2-3), pages 235-249.
    16. Levy, H & Markowtiz, H M, 1979. "Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(3), pages 308-317, June.
    17. Matthew Rabin & Richard H. Thaler, 2001. "Anomalies: Risk Aversion," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 219-232, Winter.
    18. Schoemaker, Paul J H, 1982. "The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence and Limitations," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 529-563, June.
    19. Joost M.E. Pennings & Philip Garcia, 2001. "Measuring Producers' Risk Preferences: A Global Risk-Attitude Construct," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(4), pages 993-1009.
    20. John W. Payne & Dan J. Laughhunn & Roy Crum, 1980. "Translation of Gambles and Aspiration Level Effects in Risky Choice Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(10), pages 1039-1060, October.
    21. Mohammed Abdellaoui, 2000. "Parameter-Free Elicitation of Utility and Probability Weighting Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(11), pages 1497-1512, November.
    22. Just, Richard E. & Pope, Rulon D., 1978. "Stochastic specification of production functions and economic implications," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 67-86, February.
    23. Peter Wakker & Daniel Deneffe, 1996. "Eliciting von Neumann-Morgenstern Utilities When Probabilities Are Distorted or Unknown," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(8), pages 1131-1150, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:aaea06:21354. 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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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 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.

    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.