MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7020926717

Marketing, branding and sales agreements : case studies from small-scale farms in Canada and Sweden

2008· other· en· W7020926717 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueEpsilon Archive for Student Projects (University of Southampton) · 2008
Typeother
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésProduction (economics)Order (exchange)PerceptionQualitative researchSales managementFocus groupQualitative propertyVertical integration
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

We are presently living in a complex society where there is a great distance between the production and the consumption. The debate about the importance of "eating locally produced food" escalates as research shows correlation between life styles and a climate in change. The interest for value-added food is steadily increasing in Sweden but also in other countries. Even if small-scale food production is obtaining great support, small producers have a lot of challenges and considerations to make, due to their lack of resources. 
\n
\nThe aim with this study is to investigate and to get a better understanding of how farmers successfully manage to communicate their brand and if a brand can facilitate the sales agreements. This thesis and the result are based upon qualitative case studies, since the aim is to explore and develop knowledge in the area of small-scale production rather than to try a hypothesis or to obtain exact results through sampling. Also, secondary data was used. The primary focus of this study is on the producer level, their perception on successful marketing, branding strategies and what kind and form of sales agreements that is practicable and favourable. 
\n
\nIn order to be able to reach a market and to become successful, the small-scale producer has to make strategic choices. By using theories that cover why small-scale farms tend to offer more than just a "product" and which sales channels, these strategic choices can be facilitated. Finding out if a brand is considered essential and what kind of sales agreements to use are also theories that can make this dilemma easier to understand. 
\n
\nThe analysis clearly indicated that these small-scale producers work with different value grounds and pointed out quality and taste, local production and the processing stage as the most essential value grounds. Reasons for introducing the brand were, in general, to create an identity and to differentiate themselves from other brand products. The local touch was generally highlighted, to create a "home" feeling and a connection to customers. The study indicates that the majority of the case studies are an embryonic branding type, which means that they are aware of their brand but no active work is done to increase the awareness. The case studies usually had an extended time exchange with their customers since the purpose of exchange is often to create long term initiatives, where no distinct obligations and needs are required. One main distinction between the two countries is that none of the Canadian case studies sold to any retail chains. The reason was that it is impossible for them to compete with large-scale producers and supply a regular quantity. Additionally, there is no pronounced support and demand from the retailers in Canada, like there currently is in Sweden. 
\n
\nThe conclusion states that small-scale producers have to be consequent in how they communicate their brand in order to become successful. By attending events and meeting new customers, are two possible ways to communicate the brand. The study also indicated that when moving away from the farm level and aiming at bigger volumes, it gets harder to communicate the message and the meaning of the brand grows. The brand can be communicated by using information brochures and place them in a near location to the meat. Another vital approach is to use ambassadors for communicating the brand. The study also showed that the farmers generally do not want to bond to written agreements since they can not guarantee a supply on a regular basis. To secure the transaction and to protect the brand, the possible need for a written agreement increases, the further the small-scale producer gets from the farm level.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,220
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,026
Tête enseignante GPT0,242
Écart entre enseignants0,216 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEpsilon Archive for Student Projects (University of Southampton)Même sujetAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesTravaux en français237 207