IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/nccest/37599.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Transaction Costs and Risk Preferences Influence Marketing Arrangements in the Illinois Hog Industry?

Author

Listed:
  • Franken, Jason R.V.
  • Pennings, Joost M.E.
  • Garcia, Philip

Abstract

Studies of hog industry structure often invoke risk reduction and transaction costs explanations for empirical observations but fail to directly examine the core concepts of risk behavior and transaction costs theories. Using a more unified conceptual framework and unique survey and accounting data, this study demonstrates that that risk preferences and asset specificity impact Illinois producers’ use of contracts and spot markets as suggested by theory. Factor analytic methods limit measurement error for indirectly observable risk and transaction costs variables employed in logit regressions. In particular, related investments in specific hog genetics and specific human capital regarding the production process increase the probability of selecting long-tem contracts over spot markets. Producers who perceive greater levels of price risk and/or are more averse to it appear more (less) likely to use long-term contracts (spot markets), and hence, to make such investments.

Suggested Citation

  • Franken, Jason R.V. & Pennings, Joost M.E. & Garcia, Philip, 2008. "Do Transaction Costs and Risk Preferences Influence Marketing Arrangements in the Illinois Hog Industry?," 2008 Conference, April 21-22, 2008, St. Louis, Missouri 37599, NCCC-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting, and Market Risk Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:nccest:37599
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/37599
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Claude Ménard & Peter G. Klein, 2004. "Organizational Issues in the Agrifood Sector: Toward a Comparative Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(3), pages 750-755.
    2. Key, Nigel D., 2004. "Agricultural Contracting and the Scale of Production," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 33(2), October.
    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. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G, 1981. "Several Tests for Model Specification in the Presence of Alternative Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 781-793, May.
    5. Brian P. Cozzarin & Randall E. Westgren, 2000. "Rent Sharing in Multi-Site Hog Production," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(1), pages 25-37.
    6. Joost M.E. Pennings & Ale Smidts, 2000. "Assessing the Construct Validity of Risk Attitude," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(10), pages 1337-1348, October.
    7. Lajili, Kaouthar & Barry, Peter J. & Sonka, Steven T. & Mahoney, Joseph T., 1997. "Farmers' Preferences For Crop Contracts," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(02), December.
    8. Jeffrey J. Reimer, 2006. "Vertical Integration in the Pork Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(1), pages 234-248.
    9. Johnson, C. Scott & Foster, Kenneth A., 1994. "Risk Preferences And Contracting In The U.S. Hog Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(02), December.
    10. Klein, Benjamin & Crawford, Robert G & Alchian, Armen A, 1978. "Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(2), pages 297-326, October.
    11. Mahoney, Joseph T. & McNally, Regina C., 2004. "Explaining and Predicting the Choice of Organizational Form: Integrating Performance Ambiguity and Asset Specificity Effects," Working Papers 04-0109, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    12. Nigel Key & William McBride, 2003. "Production Contracts and Productivity in the U.S. Hog Sector," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 121-133.
    13. Martinez, Stephen W., 2002. "Vertical Coordination Of Marketing Systems: Lessons From The Poultry, Egg, And Pork Industries," Agricultural Economics Reports 34051, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    14. repec:oup:revage:v:29:y:2007:i:2:p:331-348. is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Joskow, Paul L, 1987. "Contract Duration and Relationship-Specific Investments: Empirical Evidence from Coal Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(1), pages 168-185, March.
    16. Zheng Xiaoyong & Vukina Tomislav & Shin Changmock, 2008. "The Role of Farmers' Risk aversion for Contract Choice in the US Hog Industry," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22, June.
    17. Jill E. Hobbs, 1997. "Measuring the Importance of Transaction Costs in Cattle Marketing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1083-1095.
    18. Scott E. Masten & Stéphane Saussier, 2000. "Econometrics of Contracts : an Assessment of Developments in the Empirical Literature on Contracting," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 92(1), pages 215-236.
    19. Christopher G. Davis & Jeffrey M. Gillespie, 2007. "Factors Affecting the Selection of Business Arrangements by U.S. Hog Farmers," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(2), pages 331-348.
    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. Chris Boessen & Joe Parcell & Jason Franken & John Lawrence & Ron Plain & Glenn Grimes, 2010. "Producer perceptions and attitudes toward hog marketing contracts," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 405-424.
    2. Du, Xiaoxue & Lu, Liang & Zilberman, David, 2013. "The Economics of Contract Farming: A Credit and Investment Perspective," 2014 Allied Social Science Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 3-5, 2014, Philadelphia, PA 161657, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Franken, Jason R.V. & Parcell, Joseph L., 2012. "Evaluation of Market Thinness for Hogs and Pork," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 44(04), November.
    4. Alemu, Abebe Ejigu & Mathijs, Erik & Maertens, Miet & Deckers, Jozef A. & Gebregziabher, Kidanemariam & Baur, Hans & Gebrehiwot, Kindeya, 2011. "Trader-supplier Coordination in the Agrifood Supply Chains in Northern Ethiopia," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114218, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Frasa, Stefanie & Carlberg, Jared & Hogan, Robert, 2015. "Use of Contracts by Prairie Agricultural Producers," Working Papers 232328, Structure and Performance of Agriculture and Agri-products Industry (SPAA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    risk behavior; transaction costs economics; risk attitude and risk perception; asset specificity; contracts; hogs; Agricultural Finance;

    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:nccest:37599. 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/dauiuus.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.