Integrative role of value chain governance: evidence from the malt barley value chain in Ethiopia

Abstract

Past studies did not fully address how value chain governance mechanisms and transaction attributes influence value chain integration. The paper, hence, investigates how value chain governance mechanisms (i.e. relational and contractual) and transaction attributes (i.e. dependency, asset specificity and uncertainty) correlate with chain integration. Survey data obtained from 320 farmers and 100 traders participating in the malt barley value chain in Ethiopia were used for the study. In addition, interview responses from 64 selected members of the chain were used for data triangulation. Descriptive statistics and ordered logistic regression were used for data analysis. The study highlights the following key findings: (a) the use of contract relates positively to value chain integration at all interfaces except at the traders‐malt factory interface; (b) trust correlates positively with value chain integration at all interfaces; and (c) asset specificity relates negatively to value chain integration at the farmer–trader interface based on traders' survey data, while dependency and uncertainty relate positively to value chain integration at some of the studied interfaces. Copyright © 2016 The Institute of Brewing & Distilling

The trade-off between chain performance and fragility considering coordination strategies of agri-food chains: a South African egg chain’s case study

“…The findings also support an argument of Jordaan (2017) that 'increasing fragility is due to the increasing vertical coordination intensity and not that the coordination intensity is due to this fragility'. Furthermore, the results also concur with the literature that suggests that leaner and highly integrated transaction mechanisms -such as contracting and vertical integration -are due to increased coordination as major ways to reduce costs and risks within supply chains (Cadot, 2015;Jordaan, 2017;Martinez, 2002a,b;Maslaric et al, 2013;Watabaji et al, 2016;Weseen et al, 2014). These coordinating strategies produce the interdependencies between chain players (Jordaan, 2017;Lazzarini et al, 2001;Wever et al, 2012a) and these interdependencies, in turn, expose the vulnerability of chains that pursue such lean and highly integrated strategies due to disruptive and detrimental events with very low likelihoods but huge impacts (Bailey, 2016;Christopher et al, 2002;Jüttner, 2005;Kleindorfer and Saad, 2005;Simba et al, 2017;Vlajic et al, 2013;Wagner and Bode, 2009;Wagner and Neshat, 2012).…”

“…Weseen et al (2014), the empirical study indicates that increased vertical coordination is a preferred governance mechanism to reduce transaction costs against investment in specific assets. Then, Watabaji et al (2016) highlight that uncertainty in exchange situations between a farmer and a trader, and also between a malt factory and a trader, has a positive correlation with value chain integration. Thus, farmers and traders go for integration to avoid or minimize any possible risks in their transactions.…”

Governance in agrifood global value chain: the scientific field in the recent 15 years

“…Authors such as Ponte, S., Pietrobelli, C., Rossi, A., and Trienekens, J. have developed studies related to governance in global chains, although they have not directly investigated the agrifood sector in every article. Other prominent authors in number of publications have investigated the governance of these chains in the agricultural context, mostly based on empirical studies (Neilson & Shonk, 2014;van Herck & Swinne, 2015;Watabaji et al, 2016;Neilson et al, 2018;Mancini et al, 2019).…”

Trust in agri-food value chains: a systematic review

“…This includes information sharing in general but the conclusions of these studies also show that the type, quality, content and usage of information is key. Hilary et al (2017) add to this that this relation also works the other way around as a lack of trust limits information sharing (for instance between farms and factory (Watabaji et al, 2016)), which is especially relevant in cases where participation in information sharing is voluntary (Irvine, 2015). Last, Troy et al (2016) focusses on consumer response to new technologies used in food processing, they conclude that the extent to which these are accepted largely depends on trust in meat processors.…”