Abstract
Sharing information in supply chains may prompt conflicts of interest among stakeholders, presenting a challenge for achieving the long-term goals associated with platforms such as I-Choose. In this chapter, we analyze such potential conflicts and possible ways to overcome them, on the basis of convention theory and as a result of case studies. Through semistructured interviews with stakeholders of the coffee supply chain in the NAFTA region, we found the presence of four worlds, or “orders of worth”: the domestic, civic, market, and industrial worlds, according to the terminology of convention theory. Our empirical work shows that in practice, supply chain participants can be characterized by a combination of at least two of such views. We also specify the conditions that make different supply chain configurations and set of values more or less amenable to the changes implied in the disclosure of private information that the I-Choose platform requires. In the conclusion of this chapter, we draw policy implications to design the right incentives to the private sector to enhance public value.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Biggart, N. W., & Beamish, T. D. (2003). The economic sociology of conventions: Habit, custom, practice, and routine in market order. Annual Review of Sociology, 29(1), 443–464. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.29.010202.100051.
Boltanski, L., & Thévenot, L. (2006). On justification: Economies of worth. (Catherine Porter, Trans.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Darby, M. R., & Karni, E. (1973). Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud. Journal of Law and Economics, 16(1), 67–88.
Eymard-Duvernay, F. (1989). Conventions de qualité et formes de coordination. Revue Économique, 40(2), 329–359.
Fridell, G. (2007). Fair trade coffee: The prospects and pitfalls of market-driven social justice (Repr.). Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Friedland, R., & Alford, R. R. (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices and institutional contradictions. In W. W. Powell & P. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 232–263). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J., & Sturgeon, T. (2005). The governance of global value chains. Review of International Political Economy, 12(1), 78–104.
Gond, J. P., & Leca, B. (2012). Theorizing change in a pluralistic institutional context: What can economies of worth and new-institutionalism learn from each other? Lille Economie & Management-LEM, Working Paper no. 15, 53 p.
Greenwood, R., Díaz, A. M., Li, S. X., & Lorente, J. C. (2010). The multiplicity of institutional logics and the heterogeneity of organizational responses. Organization Science, 21(2), 521–539. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0453.
Hatanaka, M., Bain, C., & Busch, L. (2005). Third-party certification in the global agrifood system. Food Policy, 30(3), 354–369. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2005.05.006.
Kim, G.-S., Lee, G. Y., & Park, K. (2010). A cross-national investigation on how ethical consumers build loyalty toward fair trade brands. Journal of Business Ethics, 96(4), 589–611. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0486-1.
Macdonald, K. (2007). Globalising justice within coffee supply chains? Fair trade, Starbucks and the transformation of supply chain governance. Third World Quarterly, 28(4), 793–812. http://doi.org/10.1080/01436590701336663.
Marquis, C., & Lounsbury, M. (2007). Vive La Résistance: Competing logics and the consolidation of U.S. community banking. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 799–820. http://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2007.26279172.
Muradian, R., & Pelupessy, W. (2005). Governing the coffee chain: The role of voluntary regulatory systems. World Development, 33(12), 2029–2044. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.06.007.
Nelson, P. (1970). Information and consumer behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 78(2), 311–329.
Patriotta, G., Gond, J.-P., & Schultz, F. (2011). Maintaining legitimacy: Controversies, orders of worth, and public justifications: Maintaining legitimacy. Journal of Management Studies, 48(8), 1804–1836. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00990.x.
Ponte, S., & Gibbon, P. (2005). Quality standards, conventions and the governance of global value chains. Economy and Society, 34(1), 1–31. http://doi.org/10.1080/0308514042000329315.
Reardon, T., Codron, J. M., Busch, L., Bingen, J., & Harris, C. (2000). Global change in agrifood grades and standards: Agribusiness strategic responses in developing countries. The International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 2(3), 421–435.
Renard, M.-C. (2003). Fair trade: Quality, market and conventions. Journal of Rural Studies, 19(1), 87–96. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(02)00051-7.
Thévenot, L. (2006, July). Institutions and agency: Differentiating regimes of engagement. Presented at the Conference on Economy and Society, Italy.
Thévenot, L. (2007). The plurality of cognitive formats and engagements moving between the familiar and the public. European Journal of Social Theory, 10(3), 409–423.
Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: Executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958–1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801–843. http://doi.org/10.1086/210361.
Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (2008). Institutional logics. In R. Greenwood, K. Sahlin, & R. Suddaby (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 99–129). Los Angeles: Sage.
Weber, K., Patel, H., & Heinze, K. L. (2013). From cultural repertoires to institutional logics: A content-analytic method. In M. Lounsbury & E. Boxenbaum (Eds.), Institutional logics in action, part B (Vol. 39, pp. 351–382). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Duhamel, F., Picazo-Vela, S., Gutiérrez-Martínez, I., Luna-Reyes, L.F. (2016). Long-Term Goals and Shifting Power Structures: A Convention-Based View. In: Jarman, H., Luna-Reyes, L. (eds) Private Data and Public Value. Public Administration and Information Technology, vol 26. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27823-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27823-0_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-27821-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-27823-0
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)