[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v13y2023i5p1056-d1147246.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

External Factors Facilitating Quality Certification of Agricultural Products in China: Insights from Cooperatives in the Sichuan Province

Author

Listed:
  • Min Liu

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China)

  • Jinxiu Yang

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China)

  • Guoquan Zheng

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China)

  • Ping Shang

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China)

  • Yipei Li

    (College of Economics, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China)

Abstract
Promoting quality certification of agricultural products is a matter of the sustainable development of agriculture and the transformation of the global agri-food system, and cooperatives are an important carrier to achieve the above policy goals. However, few scholars have included external resources and cooperative quality certification behavior in an analytical framework from the perspective of resource embedding. This study combines resource dependence theory and embeddedness theory, based on survey data from 230 agricultural cooperatives in six counties of Sichuan Province, China. This paper constructs a theoretical analysis framework of government resources, market resources and cooperative quality certification, and uses binary Logit regression model to empirically study the correlation between external resources and cooperative quality certification. The results show that: (1) Cooperatives do not receive a high proportion of external resource support, with 30% and 47% receiving support from the government and market respectively; the proportion of cooperatives carrying out product quality certification was relatively low, about 29.57%. (2) Government resources and market resources have a significant positive effect on improving the quality certification of cooperatives, and the promotion effect of the market is greater than that of the government. (3) Mechanism analysis shows that government resources promote quality certification in cooperatives mainly through regulations on agricultural inputs, while market resources can jointly play a role on regulations on agricultural inputs and market expectations for certified agricultural products.

Suggested Citation

  • Min Liu & Jinxiu Yang & Guoquan Zheng & Ping Shang & Yipei Li, 2023. "External Factors Facilitating Quality Certification of Agricultural Products in China: Insights from Cooperatives in the Sichuan Province," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:5:p:1056-:d:1147246
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/5/1056/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/5/1056/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nakamura, Masao & Takahashi, Takuya & Vertinsky, Ilan, 2001. "Why Japanese Firms Choose to Certify: A Study of Managerial Responses to Environmental Issues," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 23-52, July.
    2. Feixiao Wang & Yaoqun Xu, 2022. "Evolutionary Game Analysis of the Quality of Agricultural Products in Supply Chain," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-16, September.
    3. Xiaojing Li & Xianli Xia & Jiazhen Ren, 2022. "Can the Participation in Quality Certification of Agricultural Products Drive the Green Production Transition?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-16, September.
    4. Michael Ollinger & Danna L. Moore, 2008. "The Economic Forces Driving Food Safety Quality in Meat and Poultry," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 30(2), pages 289-310.
    5. Caswell, Julie A., 1998. "Valuing the benefits and costs of improved food safety and nutrition," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 42(4), pages 1-16.
    6. Snider, Anna & Gutiérrez, Isabel & Sibelet, Nicole & Faure, Guy, 2017. "Small farmer cooperatives and voluntary coffee certifications: Rewarding progressive farmers of engendering widespread change in Costa Rica?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 231-242.
    7. Sunghye Moon & Sang-ho Lee, 2020. "A Strategy for Sustainable Development of Cooperatives in Developing Countries: The Success and Failure Case of Agricultural Cooperatives in Musambira Sector, Rwanda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-24, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Utomo, Raden Priyo & Kuleh, Yohanes & Darma, Dio Caisar, 2023. "Conventional vs modern: which approach is better for the success of agricultural cooperatives?," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 9(4), December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhou, Jiehong & Yue, Chengyan, 2010. "Investigating Chinese Vegetable Processing Firms’ Economic Incentives to Enhance Quality and Safety Controls," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 41(3), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Al-Najjar, Basil & Salama, Aly, 2022. "Mind the gap: Are female directors and executives more sensitive to the environment in high-tech us firms?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    3. Kube, Roland & von Graevenitz, Kathrine & Löschel, Andreas & Massier, Philipp, 2019. "Do voluntary environmental programs reduce emissions? EMAS in the German manufacturing sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(S1).
    4. Banterle, Alessandro & Stranieri, Stefanella, 2008. "The consequences of voluntary traceability system for supply chain relationships. An application of transaction cost economics," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 560-569, December.
    5. Blackman, Allen & Guerrero, Santiago, 2012. "What drives voluntary eco-certification in Mexico?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 256-268.
    6. Arimura, Toshi H. & Darnall, Nicole & Katayama, Hajime, 2011. "Is ISO 14001 a gateway to more advanced voluntary action? The case of green supply chain management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 170-182, March.
    7. Mupangi Sithole & Assan Ng’ombe & Collins M. Musafiri & Milka Kiboi & Tomas Sales & Felix K. Ngetich, 2023. "The Role of Agricultural Projects in Building Sustainable and Resilient Maize Value Chain in Burkina Faso," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-15, December.
    8. Sinner, Jim, 1999. "Cost-benefit analysis and the SPS Agreement," 1999 Conference (43th), January 20-22, 1999, Christchurch, New Zealand 171901, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    9. Atonu Rabbani, "undated". "Can Leaders Promote Better Health Behavior? Learning from a Sanitation and Hygiene Communication Experiment in Rural Bangladesh," Working papers 118, The South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics.
    10. Yu, Yanan & He, Yong & Zhao, Xuan, 2021. "Impact of demand information sharing on organic farming adoption: An evolutionary game approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    11. Jayasinghe-Mudalige, Udith K. & Henson, Spencer J., 2004. "Quantifying The Impact Of Economic Incentives On Firms' Food Safety Responsiveness: The Case Of Red Meat And Poultry Processing Sector In Canada," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20419, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Wang, Derek D. & Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 2018. "Climate change mitigation targets set by global firms: Overview and implications for renewable energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 386-398.
    13. Hubert Paluš & Ján Parobek & Rastislav Šulek & Ján Lichý & Jaroslav Šálka, 2018. "Understanding Sustainable Forest Management Certification in Slovakia: Forest Owners’ Perception of Expectations, Benefits and Problems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    14. Mei-Yin Kuan & Szu-Yung Wang & Jiun-Hao Wang, 2021. "Investigating the Association between Farmers’ Organizational Participation and Types of Agricultural Product Certifications: Empirical Evidence from a National Farm Households Survey in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-18, August.
    15. Yuping Deng & Yanrui Wu & Helian Xu, 2022. "Emission Reduction and Value-added Export Nexus at Firm Level," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 22-19, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    16. Roeland Bracke & Tom Verbeke, 2007. "What Distinguishes EMAS Participants? An Exploration of Company Characteristics," Working Papers 2007.37, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    17. Cañón de Francia, Joaquín & Garcés Ayerbe, Concepción, 2006. "Repercusión económica de la certificación medioambiental ISO 14001," Cuadernos de Gestión, Universidad del País Vasco - Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la Empresa (IEAE).
    18. Aneta Wysokinska-Senkus & Barbara Hadryjanska & Piotr Senkus, 2021. "The State and Prospects for the Development of a Systemic Approach to Manage Environmental Resources in the Context of Ecological Safety," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 180-198.
    19. Stefan Ambec & Paul Lanoie, 2009. "Performance environnementale et économique de l'entreprise," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(4), pages 71-94.
    20. Jorge Sellare & Eva‐Marie Meemken & Christophe Kouamé & Matin Qaim, 2020. "Do Sustainability Standards Benefit Smallholder Farmers Also When Accounting For Cooperative Effects? Evidence from Côte d'Ivoire," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(2), pages 681-695, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:5:p:1056-:d:1147246. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.