Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Unfair trading practices and countervailing power

Bibliographic Data

ID11928679
AuthorsCarlo Russo (0000-0002-4560-4188, Università degli studi di Cassino e del Lazio Meridionale), Federica Di Marcantonio (0000-0002-1288-5657, Joint Research Center), Luca Cacchiarelli (0000-0002-0302-9621, Università degli Studi della Tuscia, corresponding author), Luisa Menapace (0000-0002-8684-302X, Technical University of Munich), Alessandro Sorrentino (Università degli Studi della Tuscia)
Year2023
Volume119
Pages102521-102521
Publication date2023-08-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueFood Policy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0306-9192 • E-ISSN: 1873-5657
PublisherElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.foodpol.2023.102521
OpenAlexW4386077267
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited18

This paper investigates whether countervailing power of collective initiatives (cooperatives, producer organizations, associations) can mitigate unfair trading practices in agricultural markets. The study hypothesis is that collective initiatives exerting countervailing power can attenuate the imbalance in the distribution of bargaining power that is considered one of the main causes of unfair trading practices. Our findings suggest that in a multidimensional bargaining setting where all contract terms are negotiated at once, there is no theoretical expectation that exerting countervailing power necessarily results in a mitigation of unfair trading practices. To investigate the topic empirically, we used a data set measuring fairness perception of a sample of Italian kiwifruit producers. The data support the hypothesis that membership in collective initiatives increases the probability that a farmer perceives a transaction as fair. However, countervailing power does not counter all unfair practices in the same way. While patrons of collective initiatives perceive benefits in price and quality determination practices, no such effect was found for contract renegotiation. The analysis compares two policy approaches: supporting countervailing power and banning specific practices (such as EU Directive 633/2019). We conclude that countervailing power is less effective in targeting specific unfair practices, but it is less likely to determine efficiency loss because it does not impose constraints on contractual negotiations

Bargaining power · Business · Collective bargaining · Database transaction · Directive · Economics · Industrial organization · Market economy · Microeconomics · Negotiation · Perception · Political science · Power (physics · Quality (philosophy · Transaction cost · Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Merger and Competition Analysis

  • Cooperating Freely

    Open Access•Gabriel Monette, Rafael Ziegler et al.•Journal of Business Ethics•2026

  • Competition, Power and Inequality in Agro-food Value Chains in Africa

    Open Access•Reena Das Nair, Simon Robert et al.•European Journal of Development…•2026

  • Bargaining Theory with Applications

    Open Access•Abhinay Muthoo, Marcia Morgan et al.•Bargaining Theory with Applications•1999

  • Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model

    Ariel Rubinstein•Econometrica•1982

  • The Economics of the Food System Revolution

    Thomas Reardon, C Peter Timmer•Annual Review of Resource Economics•2012

  • The Bargaining Problem

    John F Nash•Econometrica•1950

Unique citing works2
Citations per year2
Citation span2026 - 2026 (1)
Citation velocitycurrent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 2

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae