Coordinating cereal farmers and buyers: evidence from Mali

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine how various transaction-cost characteristics influence the choice of vertical coordination (VC) structures (e.g. different contract types) and horizontal coordination (HC) structures (e.g. different farmer organization types) to link smallholder farmers efficiently with buyers. It analyzes the relationship between vertical and horizontal structures, and the economic sustainability of different structure combinations. Design/methodology/approach The paper develops a conceptual framework to predict coordination structures as a function of transaction-cost characteristics, compares predictions for the Malian cereals market to empirical evidence using 15 case studies, and then analyzes structure combinations. Findings Asymmetric scale between farmers and buyers; uncertainty in production, prices, policy, and contract enforcement; and quality and quantity debasement lead to selections of structures with high levels of control. Vertical and horizontal structures demonstrate a complementary relationship in certain core coordination roles, while exhibiting substitutability in the provision of other coordination activities. The marketing cooperative and marketing contract pairing is the most prevalent combination. Research limitations/implications The conceptual framework is useful for explaining the selection of coordination structures, and can be applied in other contexts to strengthen external validity. Originality/value The framework facilitates predictions and explanation of both VC and HC structures, with empirical application on a country and value chains receiving little attention in the literature.

Resilience of Agricultural Value Chains in Developing Country Contexts: A Framework and Assessment Approach

“…The second layer is the institutions that govern the use and flow of resources and coordinate these activities across the value chain. This second layer includes horizontal coordination structures that govern the interaction of businesses within a given value chain segment, such as farmer organizations [31]. It also includes vertical coordination structures that govern the interactions of businesses across segments, such as bilateral contracts between businesses, and even broader structures that coordinate multiple nodes in a chain, such as value chain participant councils or commodity associations [32].…”

Farmer Producer Company: India’s Magic Bullet to Realise Select SDGs?

“…These meetings serve as a platform for the member farmers to raise their concerns that are collated and conveyed to the management during the board meetings. In a study of smallholder farmers, it was found that organisations that are more coordinated vertically (different contract types) and horizontally (different farmer organisation types) are preferred by potential buyers because it reduces the transaction costs (Vroegindewey, Theriault, and Staatz 2018), FPCs in our sample are showing horizontal coordination (member reach and connect) and professional management by allocated staff provides structure for vertical coordination, though requires to grow in scale.…”

Competitive advantage and processor demand for local and imported food ingredients: analysis from an urban dairy market in West Africa

“…We used a qualitative case study methodology, which is appropriate for answering processtype questions about firm strategy (Vroegindewey et al, 2018;Yin, 2014). In the first step of case selection, we refined a preliminary list of case candidates through initial interviews with firms.…”