Assessing marketing preference heterogeneity

INSERT FIGURE 1 HERE Prior to the collection of the survey data, the expected relationship between participation in the SSC and the contractual attributes was defined on the basis of the in- depth interviews and a review of previous literature (Table 1): • Price structure: Fixing price with the buyer at the time of planting is associated with significant negotiation costs between the parties. [...] The segments, their proportion of the sample and the coefficients of the attributes are shown in Table 4. INSERT TABLE 4 HERE. [...] At the same time, the high level of heterogeneity in the marketing preferences of farmers is easy observable by looking at the six segments estimated in the model (Table 4 and 5). [...] That is farmers in Segments 1, 2 and 3 predominantly supplied the SM alone, while nearly all farmers supplying the SSC were in Segments in 4, 5 or 6. 18 (a) Relationship of attributes and segments with transaction costs The fixing of price with the buyer at the time of planting is positive and significant at the one percent level for Segments 2, 4, 5 and 6, although is of relatively greater import [...] The farther the selling place from the place of production the greater the costs borne by the farmer and the greater the risks, for example associated with product rejections or level of market demand.