Estimating Market Power by Retailers in a Dynamic Framework: the Italian PDO Cheese Market

Sckokai, Paolo; Soregaroli, Claudio; Moro, Daniele

doi:10.1111/j.1477-9552.2012.00368.x

Cited by 31 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Generally speaking, larger stakeholders will have more influence in the management of GIs. To this respect, it is worth underlining that the presence of the GI may paradoxically worsen the bargaining position of the farmers as they have no alternative to selling their produce to the processors within the GI [51]. Furthermore, being gathered under the same GI requires cooperation, while at the same time enhancing competition, free-riding, and other opportunistic behaviors may arise that may damage the GI reputation [29,49].…”

Section: Supply Chains For Typical Products: the Case Of Geographicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Foods and Places: Comparing Different Supply Chains

Carbone¹

2018

Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the relationships between food and places and how these affect the organization and functioning of different supply chains. The theme is increasingly relevant due to demand trends and new production patterns, including globalization, that deeply affect the (re)localization of production. This is a conceptual paper extensively relying on previous studies done by the author and on evidence and concepts discussed in the literature; it does not present new in-depth case studies or any other original evidences. First, the different ways of conceptualizing and thinking the linkages between food and production places are discussed. Then, three chains that seek at delivering products for which the place of origin is important are compared: (i) short chains, where producers integrate the whole process in order to access the final consumer; (ii) geographical indications, where producers gather under a common name in order to build their reputation in connection with the place of production; (iii) retailers specialized in high quality foods, where advantages of large retailers are combined with the strong identity of products. The objective is to contribute understanding differences in the coordination modes and in the kind of governance at stake in each chain and to compare their strengths and drawbacks in terms of capacity to assure place-related quality and of delivering reliable information to consumers. Attention is also given to the role of farmers within the different chains, as these are usually strongly rooted in the place of origin but the weakest knots in the chain in terms of bargaining power. Vertical and horizontal coordination, together with collective actions, are essential for an effective alignment of the production process that can enhance quality and create/distribute value. The discussion also assesses difficulties and drawbacks related to sharing decisions and to managing common resources.

show abstract

Section: Supply Chains For Typical Products: the Case Of Geographicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Foods and Places: Comparing Different Supply Chains

Carbone¹

2018

Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the different channels, they can be truly high quality niche products that gain price premiums over their generic substitutes or may be considered almost as commodities where price competition is definitely intense (Sckokai et al 2013;Carbone et al 2014). This variety of situations within one unique quality scheme has been addressed as a cause of reputational puzzling that reduces the effectiveness of the GI (Carbone 1997).…”

Section: Supply Chains For Geographical Indicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Food supply chains: coordination governance and other shaping forces

Carbone

2017

Agric Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is twofold. First, it discusses how the functioning and performance of food chains are affected by the way stakeholders are embedded in the chains, by the coordination modes, and by the kind of governance. Second, by depicting six relevant agro-food chains, attention is raised on the kind of the stakeholders that participate in the chain and on the role of each with a special focus on possible drawbacks of an effective functioning of the supply chains. The chains outlined are (i) supply chains driven by a large retailer; (ii) supply chains driven by a global processing company; (iii) supply chains driven by a cooperative; (iv) supply chains for geographical indications; (v) short supply chains; and (vi) supply chains driven by a specialized high quality retailer. Special consideration is given to the positioning of farmers in each of the six chains and to the outcomes they get. It is shown how: (i) going spot on the marketplace may leave them with difficult market access and no bargaining power; (ii) being embedded in supply chains framed in the context of a captive governance may result in a squeeze of their profits as well as in unreliable market access; and (iii) supply chains are populated by reciprocal and pooled relationships and ruled by a more relational kind of governance, beside potentially bringing advantages in terms of decision power and economic benefits, also raises difficulties and drawbacks due to complexity of functioning, heterogeneity of stakeholders, and ambiguity of the nature of relations among them.

show abstract

“…His results strongly suggest evidence of retail oligopoly and even stronger oligopsony power. Sckokai et al (2009) estimate market power in the cheese market in Italy and conclude that evidence for oligopoly power is stronger than for oligopsony power. 1 Most NEIO studies focus on the estimation of oligopoly power only (e.g., Hyde and Perloff 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Examples of estimates on joint oligopoly/ oligopsony power are Schroeter (1988), Schroeter and Azzam (1990), Wann and Sexton (1992) and Gohin and Guyomard (2000). Studies estimating both oligopoly and oligopsony power separately are Azzam and Pagoulatos (1990), Anders (2008) and Sckokai et al (2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Market power in Austrian food retailing: the case of milk products

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An increasing market concentration in food retailing has generated concerns about the market power of retailers towards consumers and input suppliers. This is especially true for countries such as Austria, which has a CR-3 in food retailing greater than 75%. Based on a New Empirical Industrial Organization model we estimate the market power of food retailers towards consumers and input suppliers with respect to three groups of dairy products (drinking milk, cheese, butter including others). Our empirical results suggest that market power of retailing exists towards consumers (in particular in the case of drinking milk) and towards input suppliers (in particular in the case of butter and other milk products). Market power is more significant (in statistical terms) downstream than upstream. However, the impact of oligopsony power on input prices is stronger than the impact of oligopoly power on consumer prices.

show abstract

Estimating Market Power by Retailers in a Dynamic Framework: the Italian PDO Cheese Market

Cited by 31 publications

References 23 publications

Foods and Places: Comparing Different Supply Chains

Foods and Places: Comparing Different Supply Chains

Food supply chains: coordination governance and other shaping forces

Market power in Austrian food retailing: the case of milk products

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About