IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Fresh Vegetable Growers' Risk Perception, Risk Preference and Choice of Marketing Contracts: A Choice Experiment

  • Vassalos, Michael
  • Hu, Wuyang
  • Woods, Timothy A.
  • Schieffer, Jack
  • Dillon, Carl R.

Growers’ preferences for a number of marketing contract attributes as well as the effect of growers’ risk perception and risk preferences on the choice of marketing contracts were examined with the use of a choice experiment. The main data source for the study is a mail survey administrated to 315 wholesale tomato growers. The findings validate the transaction cost hypothesis and indicate heterogeneity in preferences. Risk perception and risk preferences had limited impact on contract choice.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/142506
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Southern Agricultural Economics Association in its series 2013 Annual Meeting, February 2-5, 2013, Orlando, Florida with number 142506.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 10 Jan 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:saea13:142506
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.saea.org/

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Jayson L. Lusk & Keith H. Coble, 2005. "Risk Perceptions, Risk Preference, and Acceptance of Risky Food," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 393-405.
  2. Hueth, Brent & Wolf, Stephen & Ligon, Ethan, 2001. "Policing Mechanisms in Agricultural Contracts," Staff General Research Papers 5257, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  3. 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.
  4. Hudson Darren & Lusk Jayson, 2004. "Risk and Transactions Cost in Contracting: Results from a Choice-Based Experiment," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-19, February.
  5. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri, 2003. "Portfolio Choice and Risk Attitudes: An Experiment," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt7vz7w609, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
  6. Hatanaka, Maki & Bain, Carmen & Busch, Lawrence, 2005. "Third-party certification in the global agrifood system," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 354-369, June.
  7. Ackerberg, D.A. & Botticini, M., 1999. "Endogenous Matching and the Empirical Determinants of Contract Form," Papers 96, Boston University - Department of Economics.
  8. Brent Hueth & Ethan Ligon, 1999. "Producer Price Risk and Quality Measurement," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(3), pages 512-524.
  9. Hu, Wuyang & Woods, Timothy A. & Bastin, Sandra, 2009. "Consumer Acceptance and Willingness to Pay for Blueberry Products with Nonconventional Attributes," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(01), April.
  10. Kenneth Train, 2003. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number emetr2.
  11. Brent Hueth & Tigran Melkonyan, 2004. "Identity Preservation, Multitasking, and Agricultural Contract Design," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(3), pages 842-847.
  12. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132.
  13. K. K. Lancaster, 2010. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Levine's Working Paper Archive 1385, David K. Levine.
  14. MacDonald, James M. & Perry, Janet E. & Ahearn, Mary Clare & Banker, David E. & Chambers, William & Dimitri, Carolyn & Key, Nigel D. & Nelson, Kenneth E. & Southard, Leland W., 2004. "Contracts, Markets, and Prices: Organizing the Production and Use of Agricultural Commodities," Agricultural Economics Reports 34013, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
  15. Hueth, Brent & Ligon, Ethan & Wolf, Stephen & Wu, Steven, 1999. "Incentive Instruments in Agricultural Contracts: Input Control, Monitoring, Quality Measurement, and Price Risk," Staff General Research Papers 5237, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  16. Hueth, Brent & Ligon, Ethan, 1998. "Quality Measurement And Risk-Sharing In Contracts For California Fruits And Vegetables," 1998 Annual meeting, August 2-5, Salt Lake City, UT 20957, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  17. Ligon, Ethan, 2002. "Estimation of an Efficient Tomato Contract," Staff General Research Papers 10235, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  18. Ani L. Katchova & Mario J. Miranda, 2004. "Two-Step Econometric Estimation of Farm Characteristics Affecting Marketing Contract Decisions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 88-102.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:saea13:142506. 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)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.