Search results

The aim of this paper is to explain the organizational changes along supply chains when a geographical brand, i.e. a place name that has value for commercial purposes, becomes a geographical indication (GI).

Using a case study research design, this paper compares GI vs non-GI supply chains in the European Union and describes the organizational changes that occur in supply chains when a GI is adopted.

When a GI is adopted, an additional “public” level of governance is added along the supply chain that forces it to reallocate and specialize quality controls between the public and private levels of governance to avoid redundancies and to adopt more market-oriented mechanisms of governance in dyadic relationships. The paper argues that these changes occur because the private and public levels of governance complement one another.

More aspects of supply chain management (the power balance or relationship stability) and a more systematic longitudinal analysis using supply chains in various agrifood industries should be considered to generalize the conclusions. An econometric analysis formally testing the main conclusions (propositions) is also required.

The changes needed to successfully adopt a GI are identified, and an explanatory map of these changes is offered.

The structural governance tensions created by the use of common-pool resources within supply chains are explored. It is hypothesized, first, that when a “common-pool resource”, namely, a geographical name, is used in a supply chain, some type of public level of governance that promotes cooperation is required to preserve its value. Second, this public level of governance complements the dyadic mechanisms of governance, requiring the specialization and reallocation of quality controls and the move toward more market-oriented transactions.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate the role of emotions in the polarization that emerged during the first months of the pandemic. So, the authors will analyze the social response of two opposing social actors: political elites that have minimized the risks of the pandemic and grassroots groups that have promoted mutual support for vulnerable people suffering from the various effects of the pandemic.

For the analysis, the authors will primarily refer to Hochschild's proposal and the recent literature on emotions and protest. The method is to analyze official statements by politicians from the UK, USA, Mexico, Brazil, Spain and Italy and the social responses that have emerged from different mutual support groups and solidarity networks in those countries, as well as in Chile and Argentina.

The authors will show how the conflicting responses can exacerbate social polarization in our societies. This polarization goes beyond the political spectrum, and in some cases even social classes, and reaches into the realms of values, emotions and practices. The authors will also show how the response from grassroots activism makes it possible to overcome guilt, shame and other emotions of trauma, among other things.

An analysis of the emotional dimension of two opposing responses to the pandemic will show how these responses have a deep impact on society, ranging from demands for values and practices that legitimize a status quo, to discussing, breaking away from or overcoming social behavior based on individualism and social determinism.