IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae06/25274.html

Quality Premiums and the Post-Harvest Spot Market Thinness: The Case of U.S. Peanuts

Author

Listed:
  • Nadolnyak, Denis A.
  • Fletcher, Stanley M.

Abstract

In the paper, we analyze two issues that are important in the U.S. peanut markets: the absence of explicit quality premiums in the crop contracts, and the thinness of the postharvest cash/spot markets, which obstructs the operation of current production support policies. We argue that introduction of quality differentials in the form of either fixed premium or rank-order tournament contracts may kill two birds with one stone by increasing the spot market turnover and providing incentives for increasing crop quality. In addition, this arrangement is likely to reduce the costs of the federal support programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Nadolnyak, Denis A. & Fletcher, Stanley M., 2006. "Quality Premiums and the Post-Harvest Spot Market Thinness: The Case of U.S. Peanuts," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25274, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae06:25274
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.25274
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/25274/files/cp060468.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.25274?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. Lazear, Edward P & Rosen, Sherwin, 1981. "Rank-Order Tournaments as Optimum Labor Contracts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(5), pages 841-864, October.
    2. Westcott, Paul C. & Price, J. Michael, 2001. "Analysis Of The U.S. Commodity Loan Program With Marketing Loan Provisions," Agricultural Economic Reports 34035, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    3. Green, Jerry R & Stokey, Nancy L, 1983. "A Comparison of Tournaments and Contracts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(3), pages 349-364, June.
    4. Michael Sykuta & Joseph Parcell, 2003. "Contract Structure and Design in Identity-Preserved Soybean Production," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 332-350.
    5. Theofanis Tsoulouhas & Tomislav Vukina, 2001. "Regulating Broiler Contracts: Tournaments Versus Fixed Performance Standards," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(4), pages 1062-1073.
    6. Revoredo-Giha, Cesar & Fletcher, Stanley M., 2005. "Supplier reputation and price premium: the case of groundnuts in Rotterdam," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 6(2), pages 1-12.
    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. Nadolnyak, Denis A. & Fletcher, Stanley M. & Revoredo-Giha, Cesar, 2005. "Can Rank-Order Tournaments Improve Efficiency of Quality Differentiated Crop Markets Under Marketing Loan Program Operation? The Case of U.S. Peanuts," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24703, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Marinakis, Kosmas & Tsoulouhas, Theofanis, 2013. "Are tournaments optimal over piece rates under limited liability for the principal?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 223-237.
    3. Kosmas Marinakis & Theofanis Tsoulouhas, 2012. "A comparison of cardinal tournaments and piece rate contracts with liquidity constrained agents," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 161-190, March.
    4. Zhen Wang & Tomislav Vukina, 2017. "Welfare effects of payment truncation in piece rate tournaments," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 120(3), pages 219-249, April.
    5. Fares, M'hand & Orozco, Luis, 2014. "Tournament Mechanism in Wine-Grape Contracts: Evidence from a French Wine Cooperative," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 320-345, December.
    6. Anja Schöttner & Veikko Thiele, 2010. "Promotion Tournaments and Individual Performance Pay," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 699-731, September.
    7. Matthias Kräkel, 2002. "U-Type versus J-Type Tournaments," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 158(4), pages 614-637, December.
    8. Basak, Suleyman & Makarov, Dmitry, 2012. "Difference in interim performance and risk taking with short-sale constraints," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 377-392.
    9. Ola Kvaløy & Trond E. Olsen, 2006. "Team Incentives in Relational Employment Contracts," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(1), pages 139-170, January.
    10. Gershkov, Alex & Perry, Motty, 2009. "Tournaments with midterm reviews," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 162-190, May.
    11. Moldovanu, Benny & Sela, Aner, 2006. "Contest architecture," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 70-96, January.
    12. Eguchi, Kyota, 2004. "Trainers' dilemma of choosing between training and promotion," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(6), pages 765-783, December.
    13. Brian L. Goff & Robert D. Tollison, 1999. "The Market Provision of Addiction Control Services," Public Finance Review, , vol. 27(2), pages 115-137, March.
    14. Kamijo, Yoshio, 2016. "Rewards versus punishments in additive, weakest-link, and best-shot contests," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 17-30.
    15. Ewerhart, Christian, 2016. "An envelope approach to tournament design," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-9.
    16. Pradeep Dubey & Siddhartha Sahi, 2016. "Optimal Prizes," Department of Economics Working Papers 16-03, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
    17. Soiliou Namoro, 2008. "The Impact of Organizer Market Structure on Participant Entry Behavior in a Multi-Tournament Environment," Working Paper 373, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Nov 2008.
    18. Matthias Kräkel, 2006. "Splitting Leagues," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 88(1), pages 21-48, June.
    19. James W. Bono, 2008. "Sales contests, promotion decisions and heterogeneous risk," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 371-382.
    20. Dubey, Pradeep & Wu, Chien-wei, 2001. "Competitive prizes: when less scrutiny induces more effort," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 311-336, December.

    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:ags:iaae06:25274. 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/iaaeeea.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.