300 0

[英文文献] Contracting for Consistency: Hog Quality and the Use of Marketing Contracts [推广有奖]

  • 0关注
  • 0粉丝

等待验证会员

学前班

0%

还不是VIP/贵宾

-

威望
0
论坛币
0 个
通用积分
0
学术水平
0 点
热心指数
0 点
信用等级
0 点
经验
10 点
帖子
0
精华
0
在线时间
0 小时
注册时间
2020-9-21
最后登录
2020-9-21

楼主
不良贷款率628 发表于 2005-12-25 10:59:52 |AI写论文

+2 论坛币
k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群
赵安豆老师微信:zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币!

+2 论坛币
英文文献:Contracting for Consistency: Hog Quality and the Use of Marketing Contracts
英文文献作者:Jang, Jongick,Sykuta, Michael E.
英文文献摘要:
Achieving consistency in hog quality has been one of the greatest challenges in the US pork industry. Packers, processors and retailers all ranked lack of uniformity in live hogs, carcasses, and retail cuts with regard to size and backfat as the most important quality issue facing the industry in the mid 1990s (NPPC, Pork Quality Audit, 1994), and quality consistency continues to be a leading industry concern (Martinez and Zering, 2004). The past 15 years have also witnessed dramatic changes in the organization of the US hog industry. In 1993, over 82% of hogs were sold through spot markets while 11% were sold under marketing contracts. By 2005, only 11% of hogs were sold through spot markets, with 67% sold under marketing contracts and over 20% owned by packers through formal integration or production contracts. This change in industry structure has not gone unnoticed by agricultural economists. A large body of literature examines the relations between hog quality and newly developed organization modes, particularly production contracting and vertical integration. A variety of theoretical frameworks and empirical approaches have been employed, whether using surveys (Kliebenstein and Lawrence, 1995), simulation techniques (Poray, 2002), contract document analysis (Martinez and Zering, 2004), and quality outcome analysis (Muth, et al., 2007). However, research focusing on production contracts and formal vertical integration fails to address the dominant institutional form, namely marketing contracts. Likewise, research focusing on market-based incentive mechanisms fails to provide a consistent explanation for the use and design of long-term hog marketing contracts. We propose a theoretical explanation for the use of long-term marketing contracts in the presence of buyer-specific quality attributes in an otherwise commoditized industry. This theoretical framework draws from and builds upon existing theories of contracting and organizational economics. In particular, the paper develops an analytical model that accounts for the use and structure of long-term marketing contracts to increase intertemporal quality consistency in hog procurement. The paper links the packer’s decision to move from spot-market transactions to long-term marketing contracts to the packer’s downstream product differentiation strategy. We provide empirical evidence to support the model and its explanatory power relative to existing theories.
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝


您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 我要注册

本版微信群
扫码
拉您进交流群
GMT+8, 2026-1-28 23:02