Are middlemen facilitators or barriers to improve smallholders' welfare in rural economies? Empirical evidence from Ethiopia

Abebe, Gumataw Kifle; Bijman, Jos; Royer, Annie

doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.12.004

Cited by 93 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Low trust coupled with an unstable market environment, as well as information asymmetry due to weak institutional arrangements, creates room for opportunistic behaviour by all parties [42][43][44] . Moreover, a lack of trust between cooperative members and their leadership could result in failure to deliver on agreements 28,[45][46][47][48] .…”

Section: Why Is This Methods So Important?mentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of market links between value chain actors and small-scale producers in developing regions

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable Development Goal 2 aims to end hunger, achieve food and nutrition security and promote sustainable agriculture by 2030. This requires that small-scale producers be included in, and benefit from, the rapid growth and transformation under way in food systems. Small-scale producers interact with various actors when they link with markets, including product traders, logistics firms, processors and retailers. The literature has explored primarily how large firms interact with farmers through formal contracts and resource provision arrangements. Although important, contracts constitute a very small share of smallholder market interactions. There has been little exploration of whether non-contract interactions between small farmers and both small- and large-scale value chain actors have affected small farmers’ livelihoods. This scoping review covers 202 studies on that topic. We find that non-contract interactions, de facto mostly with small and medium enterprises, benefit small-scale producers via similar mechanisms that the literature has previously credited to large firms. Small and medium enterprises, not just large enterprises, address idiosyncratic market failures and asset shortfalls of small-scale producers by providing them, through informal arrangements, with complementary services such as input provision, credit, information and logistics. Providing these services directly supports Sustainable Development Goal 2 by improving farmer welfare through technology adoption and greater productivity.

show abstract

Section: Why Is This Methods So Important?mentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of market links between value chain actors and small-scale producers in developing regions

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Holloway, Delgado, Staal, & Ehui, 2000;Gabre-Madhin, 2001). These transaction costs result from the small size of the farm, lack of market information, weak bargaining position and perishability of many agricultural products (Abebe, Bijman, & Royer, 2016). Collective action in the form of a co-operative allows smallholders to pool resources to overcome the risks related to asset specificity, to realize economies of scale and to gain countervailing power in sales transactions (Staatz, 1987).…”

Section: Transactions In Marketing Farm Productsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agricultural Co‐Operatives in Ethiopia: Evolution, Functions and Impact

Tefera

Bijman

Slingerland

2016

J of Intl Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To what extent can co-operatives strengthen rural development in sub-Saharan Africa? This paper explores the development of agricultural co-operatives in Ethiopia, particularly the changes in economic functions. Co-operative development in Ethiopia has been strongly influenced by various political regimes. Based on expert interviews and a literature review, we explore the factors that influence a shift in economic functions from provision of inputs to commercialization of farm products. Our review shows that the impact of commercialization on farmer welfare is still inconclusive. Both the institutional environment and the internal governance structure have a hard time adjusting to changing economic conditions.

show abstract

“…In these circumstances, direct trading between wholesalers and producers is mostly absent, so middlemen exercise a coordination role facilitating product transmission. Abebe et al (2016) describes this type of food supply chains as "where market failure is ubiquitous and food chains still consist of many stages" and where middlemen represent a socially-tied relationship.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the lack of trading skills is usually related to low educational levels and isolated geographic conditions. Under these circumstances, the bulking and perishability of products become the main problems (Abebe et al, 2016;Keys, 2005). These factors do not help the small-scale producers to organize and have fluid horizontal relationships among them, which might allow them achieving local, national or international markets.…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Food Supply Chainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating the influence of the network topology on the agility of food supply chains

Hernández

Pedroza-Gutiérrez

2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several studies have shown that the performance of a supply chain is heavily influenced by the pattern of relationships among firms. This paper analyzes the structure of relationships (network topology) that leads to the highest agility of a food supply chain when sudden demand changes occur. To do this, a simulation model that represents a supply chain and specific rules to allocate orders is built. The supply chain in the model follows the specific characteristics of trade in the primary sector. The model is fitted to the conditions of a real seafood supply chain in Mexico. Agility is measured through the effect on the order fulfillment of a sudden demand shock and the recovery time of this rate to previous values. The simulation results show that the most suitable structure depends on how product is distributed among suppliers. If product is evenly shared, supply chains with homogeneous topologies are more agile than supply chains with heterogeneous topologies, but the result is the opposite if product is unevenly shared among suppliers. Other previous recommendations, such as having multiple suppliers and horizontal links, are confirmed by the simulations. These findings contribute to the general debate on which is the optimal topology for an agile supply chain.

show abstract

Are middlemen facilitators or barriers to improve smallholders' welfare in rural economies? Empirical evidence from Ethiopia

Cited by 93 publications

References 57 publications

A scoping review of market links between value chain actors and small-scale producers in developing regions

A scoping review of market links between value chain actors and small-scale producers in developing regions

Agricultural Co‐Operatives in Ethiopia: Evolution, Functions and Impact

Estimating the influence of the network topology on the agility of food supply chains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About