Affiliation:
1. Centre for Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Business Economics, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium
2. Policy and Markets in the Agri-Food Sector Unit, Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development, Eberswalde, Germany
3. Department of Engineering Management, Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
Abstract
<abstract>
<p>Vertical integration is a means of increasing market power. For some agricultural products, it is easier for farmers to exert control over their product beyond the farm gate, but for others it is more difficult. Cases in the latter category have two main characteristics. First, the farmer cannot sell the respective product to final consumers without processing. Second, processing is capital-intensive. Consequently, farmers have limited sales channels, and vertical integration of the supply chain is complex and challenging. It implies cooperation among farmers to process the raw material at a profitable scale and to finance the installation of processing facilities. Thus, for these product categories, farmers are prone to market power issues, since they depend on private businesses that have the financial means to install processing facilities and the logistical capacities to organize the collection of large amounts of raw material. This paper aims to identify and analyze the role of supply chain integration for farmers who are already cooperating horizontally. Two case studies serve as the basis for the analysis: sugar beet in Flanders, Belgium, and oilseed rape in Hessen, Germany. The analysis is based on a qualitative research approach combining interviews, focus groups, and workshops with farmers and processors. While for sugar beet, the effects of market power are emerging only now with the termination of the quota system, farmers growing oilseed rape have been experiencing these problems since the 1990s. Our analysis concludes that most strategies to maintain or improve farm income have been exhausted. Even various forms of vertical integration supported by European policies do not necessarily work as a successful strategy.</p>
</abstract>
Publisher
American Institute of Mathematical Sciences (AIMS)
Subject
Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous),Food Science
Reference67 articles.
1. European Commission (2020) The nine key objectives. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/key-policies/common-agricultural-policy/future-cap/key-policy-objectives-future-cap_en#nineobjectives.
2. Sortino A, Chang Ting Fa M, Piccinini LC (2008) The future of modernized agriculture and the return of traditional technique. MPRA Paper, 7478. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/7478/
3. Chauve P, Parera A, Renckens A (2014) Agriculture, food and competition law: Moving the Borders. J Eur Competition Law & Pract 5: 304-313. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeclap/lpu020
4. Poole R, Clarke GP, Clarke DB (2002) Growth, Concentration and regulation in European food retailing. Eur Urban Reg Stud 9: 167-186. https://doi.org/10.1177/096977640200900205
5. Bertazzoli A, Fiorini A, Ghelfi R, et al. (2011) Food chains and value system: The case of potato, fruit, and cheese. J Food Prod Mark 17: 303-326. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2011.548691