IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaa116/95203.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Heterogeneity of Members’ Characteristics and Cooperation within Producer Groups Regulating Geographical Indications: The Case of the “Prosciutto di Parma” Consortium

Author

Listed:
  • Dentoni, Domenico
  • Menozzi, Davide
  • Capelli, Maria Giacinta

Abstract

Several studies have analyzed the conditions under which geographical indications (GIs), such as the European Protected Designations of Origin (PDOs) and Protected Geographical Indications (PGIs), can represent a profitable market opportunity for agri-food producers. The development of a common set of rules by a group of producers and the governance of the collective brand are key issues to jointly exploit market opportunities through GIs. This paper explores whether heterogeneous characteristics, resources and strategies of individual producers within a PDO Consortium influence their level of agreement on the future of the collective regulation and governance of GIs. We conduct an in-depth study on a representative sample of firms member of the “Prosciutto di Parma” PDO Consortium by integrating a multi-variate statistical analysis with a qualitative description of the vision that companies have for the future of their PDO. From the results of this study, we found confirmation that “Prosciutto di Parma” PDO Consortium members have highly heterogeneous characteristics which lead to significant segmentation in two major groups. The first segment includes a large number of Consortium members, mostly constituted by smaller firms, producing mainly PDO-labeled “Prosciutto di Parma”. The second is composed by a group of larger companies focusing on production of generic hams without the PDO-label. This difference clearly affects the level of agreement on the future regulation of "Prosciutto di Parma" as GI. The first segment advocates for the establishment of a “high-quality” PDO or for a PDO with stricter controls and standards, while the second would prefer that a PGI label was introduced, either in substitution to or parallel with the current PDO. Results, although explorative in nature, show that group heterogeneity influences the level of cooperation among the members of a producer group regulating and governing a PDO. Therefore, this study provides evidence that increasing group heterogeneity may represent a new challenge for the sustainability and profitability of GIs.

Suggested Citation

  • Dentoni, Domenico & Menozzi, Davide & Capelli, Maria Giacinta, 2010. "Heterogeneity of Members’ Characteristics and Cooperation within Producer Groups Regulating Geographical Indications: The Case of the “Prosciutto di Parma” Consortium," 116th Seminar, October 27-30, 2010, Parma, Italy 95203, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa116:95203
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.95203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/95203/files/paper%20completo%20101.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.95203?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. Stephan Marette & Roxanne Clemens & Bruce Babcock, 2008. "Recent international and regulatory decisions about geographical indications," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 453-472.
    2. Hassan, Daniel & Monier-Dilhan, Sylvette, 2005. "Signes officiels de qualité: faut-il avoir peur des marques de distributeur?," INRAE Sciences Sociales, Institut national de recherche pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement (INRAE), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2), vol. 2004, pages 1-4, April.
    3. Christine Boizot-Szantai & Sébastien Lecocq & Stéphan Marette, 2005. "Common Labels and Market Mechanisms," Midwest Agribusiness Trade Research and Information Center (MATRIC) Publications (archive only) 05-wp405, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    4. Daniel Hassan & Sylvette Monier-Dilhan, 2006. "National brands and store brands: Competition through public quality labels," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(1), pages 21-30.
    5. Riccardo Scarpa & George Philippidis & Fiorenza Spalatro, 2005. "Product-country images and preference heterogeneity for Mediterranean food products: A discrete choice framework," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(3), pages 329-349.
    6. Céline Bonnet, 2001. "Assessing consumer response to Protected Designation of Origin labelling: a mixed multinomial logit approach," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 28(4), pages 433-450, December.
    7. Jutta Roosen & Jayson L. Lusk & John A. Fox, 2003. "Consumer demand for and attitudes toward alternative beef labeling strategies in France, Germany, and the UK," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(1), pages 77-90.
    8. Marette, Stephan & Crespi, John M & Schiavina, Allesandra, 1999. "The Role of Common Labelling in a Context of Asymmetric Information," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 26(2), pages 167-178, June.
    9. Arfini, Filippo & Mora, Cristina, 1997. "Typical products and local development: the case of Parma area," 52nd Seminar, June 19-21, 1997, Parma, Italy 231276, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Crespi, John M. & Marette, Stephan, 2003. "Some Economic Implications Of Public Labeling," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(3), pages 1-12, November.
    11. Colin Carter & Barry Krissoff & Alix Peterson Zwane, 2006. "Can Country‐of‐Origin Labeling Succeed as a Marketing Tool for Produce? Lessons from Three Case Studies," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 54(4), pages 513-530, December.
    12. repec:dau:papers:123456789/2722 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Tobias Chilla & Benedikt Fink & Richard Balling & Simon Reitmeier & Karola Schober, 2020. "The EU Food Label ‘Protected Geographical Indication’: Economic Implications and Their Spatial Dimension," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-21, July.
    2. Török, Áron & Maró, Zalán Márk, 2020. "A földrajzi árujelzők gazdaságtana - az empirikus bizonyítékok [The economics of geographical indicators - empirical evidence]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 263-288.

    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. Dentoni, Domenico & Menozzi, Davide & Capelli, Maria Giacinta, 2012. "Group heterogeneity and cooperation on the geographical indication regulation: The case of the “Prosciutto di Parma” Consortium," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 207-216.
    2. Fares, M’hand & Raza, Saqlain & Thomas, Alban, 2018. "Is there complementarity between labels and brands? Evidence from small French co-operatives," TSE Working Papers 18-895, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    3. M’hand Fares & Saqlain Raza & Alban Thomas, 2018. "Is There Complementarity Between Certified Labels and Brands? Evidence from Small French Cooperatives," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 53(2), pages 367-395, September.
    4. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    5. Stephan Marette & Roxanne Clemens & Bruce Babcock, 2008. "Recent international and regulatory decisions about geographical indications," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 453-472.
    6. Resano, Helena & Sanjuán, Ana I. & Albisu, Luis M., 2012. "Consumers’ response to the EU Quality policy allowing for heterogeneous preferences," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 355-365.
    7. Jianyu Yu & Zohra Bouamra-Mechemache, 2016. "Production standards, competition and vertical relationship," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 43(1), pages 79-111.
    8. Deselnicu, Oana C. & Costanigro, Marco & Souza-Monteiro, Diogo M. & McFadden, Dawn Thilmany, 2013. "A Meta-Analysis of Geographical Indication Food Valuation Studies: What Drives the Premium for Origin-Based Labels?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-16, August.
    9. Crespi, John M. & Marette, Stephan, 2003. "Some Economic Implications Of Public Labeling," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(3), pages 1-12, November.
    10. Vecchio, Riccardo & Annunziata, Azzurra, 2011. "The role of PDO/PGI labelling in Italian consumers’ food choices," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 12(2).
    11. Leonardo Cei & Edi Defrancesco & Gianluca Stefani, 2018. "From Geographical Indications to Rural Development: A Review of the Economic Effects of European Union Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-21, October.
    12. Verbeke, Wim & Roosen, Jutta, 2009. "Market Differentiation Potential of Country-of-origin, Quality and Traceability Labeling," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16.
    13. Luisa Menapace & Gregory Colson & Carola Grebitus & Maria Facendola, 2011. "Consumers' preferences for geographical origin labels: evidence from the Canadian olive oil market," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(2), pages 193-212, June.
    14. Yokessa, Maïmouna & Marette, Stéphan, 2019. "A Review of Eco-labels and their Economic Impact," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 13(1-2), pages 119-163, April.
    15. Alexander E. Saak, 2011. "A Model of Labeling with Horizontal Differentiation and Cost Variability," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1131-1150.
    16. Riccardo SCARPA & Fiorenza SPALATRO & Maurizio CANAVARI, 2005. "Investigating Preferences For Environment Friendly Production," Others 0505003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Bontemps, Christophe & Bouamra-Mechemache, Zohra & Simioni, Michel, 2012. "Quality Labels and Firm Survival in the French Cheese Industry," TSE Working Papers 12-335, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    18. repec:dau:papers:123456789/5974 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Stranieri, Stefanella & Orsi, Luigi & De Noni, Ivan & Olper, Alessandro, 2023. "Geographical Indications and Innovation: Evidence from EU regions," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    20. Bodo E. Steiner, 2004. "Australian wines in the British wine market: A hedonic price analysis," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(3), pages 287-307.
    21. Onyango, Benjamin M. & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. & Govindasamy, Ramu, 2006. "U.S. Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Food Labeled 'Genetically Modified'," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 35(2), pages 1-12, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Agricultural and Food Policy; Community/Rural/Urban Development; Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety; Labor and Human Capital;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:eaa116:95203. 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/eaaeeea.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.