IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cns/cnscwp/201228.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparative efficiency of producer cooperatives and conventional firms in a sample of quasi-twin companies

Author

Abstract

We investigate the comparative technical efficiency of producer cooperatives (PCs) and conventional firms (CFs) by looking at the performance of a mixed sample of Sardinian wine producing companies over the period 2004-2009. Thanks to the similarity of the habitats in which the firms operate, the peculiarities of the production environment, and the careful measurement of some key inputs through suitable aggregation of accounting data, the observed units are "twins" in all non- organizational respects, providing one natural setting for comparative work. The analysis is carried out in two steps - in the first, technical efficiency indicators for each firm in each year are calculated using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) with reference to a common production frontier. Subsequently, the measured efficiency scores become the dependent variables of a pooled truncated maximum likelihood regression in which we control for external covariates and firm type. To assess the procedure's appropriateness, we test whether the separability condition that the support of the output variables does not depend on the set of external variables is satisfied. Moreover, a double bootstrap algorithm is run to compute valid standard errors and confidence intervals of the coefficients estimates. According to our findings cooperatives are less technically efficient than their capitalist counterparts and displays decreasing returns to scale. Both results are particularly worrying in light of the main challenges (liberalization of EU planting rights and climate changes) facing the wine industry in the near future.

Suggested Citation

  • MG. Brandano & C. Detotto & M. Vannini, 2012. "Comparative efficiency of producer cooperatives and conventional firms in a sample of quasi-twin companies," Working Paper CRENoS 201228, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
  • Handle: RePEc:cns:cnscwp:201228
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://crenos.unica.it/crenos/node/4326
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://crenos.unica.it/crenos/sites/default/files/WP12-28.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Piesse, Jenifer & Doyer, Tobias & Thirtle, Colin & Vink, Nick, 2005. "The changing role of grain cooperatives in the transition to competitive markets in South Africa," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 197-218, March.
    2. Michael C. Jensen, 2010. "The Modern Industrial Revolution, Exit, and the Failure of Internal Control Systems," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 43-58.
    3. Pencavel, John & Craig, Ben, 1994. "The Empirical Performance of Orthodox Models of the Firm: Conventional Firms and Worker Cooperatives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(4), pages 718-744, August.
    4. Mosheim, Roberto, 2002. "Organizational Type and Efficiency in the Costa Rican Coffee Processing Sector," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 296-316, June.
    5. Ferrantino Michael J. & Ferrier Gary D. & Linvill Carl B., 1995. "Organizational Form and Efficiency: Evidence from Indian Sugar Manufacturing," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 29-53, August.
    6. Jones, Derek C & Svejnar, Jan, 1985. "Participation, Profit Sharing, Worker Ownership and Efficiency in Italian Producer Cooperative," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 52(208), pages 449-465, November.
    7. Ornella Wanda Maietta & Vania Sena, 2010. "Financial Constraints And Technical Efficiency: Some Empirical Evidence For Italian Producers' Cooperatives," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 81(1), pages 21-38, March.
    8. Simar, Leopold & Wilson, Paul W., 2007. "Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 31-64, January.
    9. Eisenberg, Theodore & Sundgren, Stefan & Wells, Martin T., 1998. "Larger board size and decreasing firm value in small firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 35-54, April.
    10. Kelvin Balcombe & Iain Fraser & Laure Latruffe & Mizanur Rahman & Laurence Smith, 2008. "An application of the DEA double bootstrap to examine sources of efficiency in Bangladesh rice farming," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(15), pages 1919-1925.
    11. Zhang, Anming & Zhang, Yimin & Zhao, Ronald, 2001. "Impact of Ownership and Competition on the Productivity of Chinese Enterprises," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 327-346, June.
    12. Bonin, John P & Jones, Derek C & Putterman, Louis, 1993. "Theoretical and Empirical Studies of Producer Cooperatives: Will Ever the Twain Meet?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(3), pages 1290-1320, September.
    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. repec:hrs:journl:v:ix:y:2017:i:2:p:97-107 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    double bootstrap; data envelopment analysis; comparative firm efficiency;

    JEL classification:

    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance
    • P13 - Economic Systems - - Capitalist Systems - - - Cooperative Enterprises
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • C24 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Truncated and Censored Models; Switching Regression Models; Threshold Regression Models
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes

    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:cns:cnscwp:201228. 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: (Antonello Pau). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/crenoit.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.