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

Quality policy, market structure and investment behavior in the food marketing chain

  • Hoffmann, Ruben
Registered author(s):

    This thesis, consisting of four articles, analyzes quality in relation to consumer demand and market structure, and the potential problem of asset fixity at primary level. All four articles, directly or indirectly, relate to different parts of the food marketing chain. Article I examines country of origin as a quality cue from a consumer perception perspective. This is an empirical article applied to the market for fresh meat in Sweden where the characteristics of consumers are related to how important they perceive the labelling â€Swedish†to be in evaluating (i) the eating quality and (ii) the food safety of pork, beef and chicken. Article II examines how ownership structure affects the equilibrium within a two-stage duopoly framework where firms first choose what qualities to produce and then compete in prices. Specifically, cooperatives and investor-owned firms are analyzed. It is shown that firms can have a structural cost advantage due to ownership structure in addition to the high-quality advantage identified in previous literature. The equilibrium outcomes are examined and the policy implications of the different structures are discussed. In a multi-product oligopoly framework article III examines what qualities firms choose to produce and the conditions for when firms choose specialization versus head-to-head competition. The conditions for symmetric and asymmetric equilibria are identified and discussed. It is shown that head-to-head competition rather than specialization is a common outcome and that holes may be left in the product line. Finally, article IV examines the impact of uncertainty on investment behavior in the U.S. hog production using an endogenous threshold model. The results indicate that the investment behavior is characterized by three regimes (investment, disinvestment and inaction) and thus yield support for asset fixity in sow investments. The importance of accounting for investment rigidity when estimating hog supply and variable input demands is highlighted. While quality is not explicitly modelled in article IV, the potential problem of asset fixity examined has implications for quality policy.

    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://pub.epsilon.slu.se/1117/
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Economics in its series Department of Economics publications with number 1117.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: May 2006
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:sua:ekonwp:1117
    Contact details of provider: Postal: Box 7013, 750 07 UPPSALA
    Phone: 018-67 1724
    Fax: 018-67 3502
    Web page: http://www.slu.se/ekonomi

    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. Konstantinos Giannakas & Murray Fulton, 2005. "Process Innovation Activity in a Mixed Oligopoly: The Role of Cooperatives," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 406-422.
    2. Manez, J.A. & Waterson, M., 2001. "Multiproduct Firms and Product Differentiation: a Survey," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 594, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    3. Berit Tennbakk, 1995. "Marketing Cooperatives In Mixed Duopolies," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 33-45.
    4. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521335263 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Bonanno, Giacomo & Haworth, Barry, 1998. "Intensity of competition and the choice between product and process innovation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 495-510, July.
    6. Boetel, Brenda L. & Hoffmann, Ruben & Liu, Donald J., 2004. "Estimating Investment Rigidity Within A Threshold Regression Framework: The Case Of U.S. Hog Production Sector," Staff Papers 13790, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    7. Nelson, Phillip, 1970. "Information and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(2), pages 311-29, March-Apr.
    8. Murray Fulton & Konstantinos Giannakas, 2004. "Inserting GM Products into the Food Chain: The Market and Welfare Effects of Different Labeling and Regulatory Regimes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 42-60.
    9. Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
    10. Peitz, Martin, 2002. "The pro-competitive effect of higher entry costs," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 353-364, March.
    11. Lloyd, Tim & McCorriston, S. & Morgan, C. W. & Rayner, A. J., 2001. "The impact of food scares on price adjustment in the UK beef market," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(2-3), pages 347-357, September.
    12. Juan F. Juli· & Ricardo J. Server, 2003. "Social Economy Companies in the Spanish Agricultural Sector: Delimitation and Situation in the Context of the European Union," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 465-488, 09.
    13. Andrew B. Abel & Janice C. Eberly, . "A Unified Model of Investment Under Uncertainty," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 14-93, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
    14. Hansen, Bruce E., 1999. "Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation, testing, and inference," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 345-368, December.
    15. Ulrich Lehmann-Grube, 1997. "Strategic Choice of Quality When Quality is Costly: The Persistence of the High-Quality Advantage," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(2), pages 372-384, Summer.
    16. Besanko, David & Donnenfeld, Shabtai & White, Lawrence J, 1987. "Monopoly and Quality Distortion: Effects and Remedies," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 102(4), pages 743-67, November.
    17. Frode Alfnes & Kyrre Rickertsen, 2003. "European Consumers' Willingness to Pay for U.S. Beef in Experimental Auction Markets," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(2), pages 396-405.
    18. Shyh-Fang Ueng, 1997. "On economic incentive for quality upgrading," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 49(5), pages 459-473.
    19. Jaskold Gabszewicz, Jean & Shaked, Avner & Sutton, John & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1986. "Segmenting the market: The monopolist's optimal product mix," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 273-289, August.
    20. Donnenfeld, S. & Weber, S., 1991. "Limit Qualities and Entry Deterrence," Papers 92-4, York (Canada) - Department of Economics.
    21. Wauthy, Xavier, 1996. "Quality Choice in Models of Vertical Differentiation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 345-53, September.
    22. Ky�sti S. Pietola & Robert J. Myers, 2000. "Investment under Uncertainty and Dynamic Adjustment in the Finnish Pork Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 956-967.
    23. Bruce E. Hansen, 2000. "Sample Splitting and Threshold Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(3), pages 575-604, May.
    24. Murray Fulton & Konstantinos Giannakas, 2001. "Organizational Commitment in a Mixed Oligopoly: Agricultural Cooperatives and Investor-Owned Firms," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1258-1265.
    25. Frode Alfnes, 2004. "Stated preferences for imported and hormone-treated beef: application of a mixed logit model," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 31(1), pages 19-37, March.
    26. Jayson L. Lusk & Jutta Roosen & John A. Fox, 2003. "Demand for Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison of Consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 16-29.
    27. Paolo Buccirossi & StÈphan Marette & Alessandra Schiavina, 2002. "Competition policy and the agribusiness sector in the European Union," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 29(3), pages 373-397, July.
    28. Gregory S. Amacher & Erkki Koskela & Markku Ollikainen, 2005. "Quality Competition and Social Welfare in Markets with Partial Coverage: New Results ," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 391-405, October.
    29. Gilbert, Richard J. & Matutes, Carmen, 1989. "Product Line Rivalry with Brand Differentiation," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1nr3k6nk, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    30. Fulton, Murray E., 1989. "Cooperatives in Oligopolistic Industries: The Western Canadian Fertilizer Industry," Journal of Agricultural Cooperation, National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, vol. 4.
    31. Steven C. Salop, 1979. "Monopolistic Competition with Outside Goods," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 141-156, Spring.
    32. Richard J. Sexton, 2000. "Industrialization and Consolidation in the U.S. Food Sector: Implications for Competition and Welfare," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1087-1104.
    33. Hansen, Bruce E, 1996. "Inference When a Nuisance Parameter Is Not Identified under the Null Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(2), pages 413-30, March.
    34. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    35. CHAMPSAUR, Paul & ROCHET, Jean-Charles, . "Multiproduct duopolists," CORE Discussion Papers RP -854, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    36. Klemperer, Paul, 1992. "Equilibrium Product Lines: Competing Head-to-Head May Be Less Competitive," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(4), pages 740-55, September.
    37. Uri Ronnen, 1991. "Minimum Quality Standards, Fixed Costs, and Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(4), pages 490-504, Winter.
    38. Lloyd, Tim & McCorriston, S. & Morgan, C.W. & Rayner, A.J., 2001. "The impact of food scares on price adjustment in the UK beef market," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 25(2-3), September.
    39. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521335522 is not listed on IDEAS
    40. Pietola, Kyosti & Myers, Robert J., 1998. "Investment Under Uncertainty And Dynamic Adjustment In Finnish Pork Industry," 1998 Annual meeting, August 2-5, Salt Lake City, UT 20953, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    41. Claude Ménard & Peter G. Klein, 2004. "Organizational Issues in the Agrifood Sector: Toward a Comparative Approach," Industrial Organization 0401005, EconWPA.
    42. Economides, Nicholas, 1999. "Quality choice and vertical integration," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 903-914, August.
    43. Ian M. Sheldon, 2002. "Regulation of biotechnology: will we ever 'freely' trade GMOs?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 29(1), pages 155-176, March.
    44. Besanko, David & Donnenfeld, Shabtai & White, Lawrence J, 1988. "The Multiproduct Firm, Quality Choice, and Regulation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 411-29, June.
    45. Motta, Massimo, 1993. "Endogenous Quality Choice: Price vs. Quantity Competition," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 113-31, June.
    46. Shaked, Avner & Sutton, John, 1983. "Natural Oligopolies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(5), pages 1469-83, September.
    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:sua:ekonwp:1117. 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: (Alejandro Engelmann)

    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.