Producer perceptions and attitudes toward hog marketing contracts

Chris Boessen, Joe Parcell (), Jason Franken, John Lawrence, Ron Plain and Glenn Grimes
Additional contact information
Chris Boessen: Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, Postal: Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211
Jason Franken: Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, Postal: Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211
John Lawrence: Department of Economics, Iowa State University, Ames, IO 50011, Postal: Department of Economics, Iowa State University, Ames, IO 50011
Ron Plain: Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, Postal: Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211
Glenn Grimes: Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, Postal: Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211

Agribusiness, 2010, vol. 26, issue 3, 405-424

Abstract: The objective of this research is to use survey respondent perceptions and demographic data to assess factors affecting producer's attitudes towards hog marketing contracts. Six statements related to marketing contracts were presented to subjects to measure their attitudes toward the dominant method used by packers to procure hogs. The results suggest that the profitability of the producer, marketing method employed by the producer and the number of packers to whom the producer sold hogs significantly influences attitudes towards marketing contracts. These results suggest that low-cost producers who market hogs via individual or group marketing contracts are more positive, or in some cases less negative, in their attitudes towards marketing contracts. Although prior nonparametric analyses provide some insight into factors influencing producers' views of marketing contracts, this analyses allows inference of statistical significance. [EconLit citations: D400, L100]. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Date: 2010
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/agr.20229 Link to full text; subscription required (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:agribz:v:26:y:2010:i:3:p:405-424

DOI: 10.1002/agr.20229

Access Statistics for this article

Agribusiness is currently edited by Ronald W. Cotterill

More articles in Agribusiness from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().