اثرتنوع‌پذیری برند بر تقاضا و رفاه مصرف‌کنندگان محصول پنیر شرکت کاله و پگاه (مطالعه موردی: شهرمشهد)

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان

2 دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی

3 استاد گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

چکیده

یکی از اهداف اصلی برندها در بازار، حفظ و توسعه سهم بازار است و تنوع ‌پذیری برند می‌تواند کمک به‌سزایی به این امر کند. تنوع ‌پذیری در شرکت‌ها بایستی با توجه به شناخت از نیازهای مصرف‌کنندگان‏ و افزایش رفاه اجتماعی صورت بگیرد. در این مطالعه، تنوع، قیمت و ارزش ترجیحی برندهای کاله و پگاه محصول پنیر در بازار مشهد با استفاده از داده‌های پروژه نوشاد و شرکت صنایع شیر پگاه (شامل 425 فروشگاه‌ مواد غذایی درسال 1393) و با روش سیستم معادلات به ظاهر نامرتبط در قالب 4 سناریو برآورد و سپس تغییرات مازاد مصرف کننده، سود و رفاه اجتماعی به ازای یک واحد افزایش در تنوع هر برند محاسبه شد. نتایج نشان داد که درسناریوی 1، افزایش قیمت برند کاله نسبت به قیمت برند پگاه باعث کاهش تغییر مازاد مصرف کننده برند کاله، افزایش سود فروشگاه‌های مواد غذایی و کاهش مازاد رفاه اجتماعی می‌شود. سناریوی دوم نشان داد که کاهش قیمت برند کاله نسبت به قیمت برند پگاه به ترتیب باعث افزایش تغییر مازاد مصرف‌کننده، کاهش تغییرات سود برند کاله و افزایش رفاه اجتماعی می‌شود. برای سناریوی سوم تغییر مازاد مصرف کننده به ازای یک واحد افزایش در تنوع برند پگاه کاهش می‌یابد. همچنین در سناریوی سوم تغییرات سود به ازای یک واحد افزایش در تنوع برند پگاه افزایش می‌یابد. در سناریوی چهارم، یک واحد افزایش در تنوع برند پگاه باعث اندکی تغییر در مازاد مصرف کننده برند پگاه می‌شود. تغییرات سود در سناریوی چهارم به ازای یک واحد افزایش در تنوع برند پگاه، کاهش می‌یابد و رفاه اجتماعی را مقدار کمی می‏کاهد. بر اساس نتایج این مطالعه، زمانی تنوع پذیری برند کاله رفاه اجتماعی را افزایش می‌دهد که با یک واحد افزایش در تنوع پذیری برند کاله، قیمت برند کاله نسبت به برند پگاه افزایش نیابد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Impact of Brand Diversity on Demand and Welfare of Cheese Consumers of Kaleh and Pegah Companies (Case Study: Mashhad County)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Amir A. Dadrasmoghadam 1
  • Mohammad Ghorbani 2
  • Alireza Karbasi 3
  • Mohammadreza ohansal 3
1 Assistant Professor of Agricultural Economics, Sistan and Baluchestan University, Zahedan, Iran
2 Professor of Agricultural Economics, Department of Agricultural Economics, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
3 Professor of Agricultural Economics, Department of Agricultural Economics, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
چکیده [English]

One of the main objectives of brands in the market is to preserve and develop market share that brand diversity can play significant role in this regard. Diversification in companies should be performed based on recognizing the consumers’ needs and increased social welfare of them.  In this study, diversity, price, and preferred value of Kaleh and Pegah brands of cheese in Mashhad market were estimated using data of Naushad project and Pegah Milk Industry (including 425 food stores in 2014) and using seemingly unrelated regression system in the form of four scenarios. Then, changes in consumer surplus, and social welfare and profit per one unit increase in diversity of each brand have been calculated. The results showed that in the first scenario, increasing the the price of Kaleh brand compared to Pegah brand caused reduction in change of consumer surplus for Kaleh brand, increasing the profit of food stores and reducing the social welfare surplus. The second scenario showed that reducing the price of Kaleh brand compared to Pegah brand leads respectively to increase change in consumer surplus, reducing the profit changes for Kaleh brand and increased social welfare. In the third scenario, change in consumer surplus reduces per one unit increase in Pegah brand diversity. Also in third scenario, profit changes increases per one unit of increase in diversity of Pegah brand. In the fourth scenario, per one unit increase in the diversity of the Pegah brand leads to a slightly change in consumer surplus of the Pegah brand. In the fourth scenario, the change in profit per unit increase in the diversity of Pegah brands decreases and leads to a slight decline in social welfare. Based on the results of this study, it can be said that the time of diversification of Kaleh brand increases the social welfare, which, with an increase in the diversity of Kaleh brand, does not increase the price of Kaleh brand compared to Pegah brand.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Product Diversity of Brand
  • Changes in Consumer Surplus
  • Social Welfare Changes
  • Seemingly Unrelated Regression System
  1. Amir Shahi, M., Yazdani, H. and Parsa, C. (2012). The effect of cognition of the product category and the diversity between the brands in adoption of brand extensions. Strategic Management Thought, 6 (11): 107-132. (Persian)
  2. Ammari, H. and Zendedel, A. (2012). Evaluation of the influence of brand image on the formation of brand equity. Beyond Management, 5 (20): 78-59. (Persian)
  3. Bakhshodeh, M. (1996). Study of the demand for all types of meat in Iran. Proceedings of the First Conference on Agricultural Economics, Sistan and Balouchestan University, Zabol, 585-558. (Persian)
  4. Brand Report. (2008). Ministry of commerce, Iran trade development organization, office of the bureau. (Persian)
  5. Draganska, M. and Dipak, C.J. (2005). Product-line length as a competitive tool. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 14(1):1-28.
  6. Edward, F., Laura, N. and John, S.(2014). A dynamic model of shopping and consumption, Southern Methodist University.
  7. Elroy, M. B. (1977). Goodness of fit for seemingly unrelated regressions: glans R2 y, x and hoops r2. Journal of Econometrics, 6(3): 381-387.
  8. Esfandiari, N. (1996). Investigating demand for wheat and some other commodities in Iran: the Almost Ideal Demand System, MSc Dissertation, Shiraz University. (Persian)
  9. Gharibnavaz, M. (2007). Effect of income distribution on the consumption patterns of rural and urban households in Iran: application of the almost ideal model-2 demand system model. Master's Thesis, Shiraz University. (Persian)
  10. Gilbert, R.J. and Carmen, M. (1993).Product line rivalry with brand differentiation. Journal of Industrial Economics, 41(3): 223-240.
  11. Green,W. H. (2002). Econometric analysis (5thed).Prentice Hall.
  12. Horrace, R.H., William, C. and Jeffrey, M.P. (2009). Variety: consumer choice and optimal diversity. Food Marketing Policy, Center Research Report, No. 115.
  13. Iranzadeh, S., Rancher, A. and Poursadegh, N. (2012). A review of the impact of marketing on special pricing. Journal of Research on New Marketing Research, 3 (6): 172-155. (Persian)
  14. Israilevich, G. (2004).Assessing supermarket product-line decisions: The impact of slotting fees. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 2:141-167.
  15. Kadiyali, V., Naufel, V. and Pradeep, C. (1999). Product line extensions and competitive market interactions: An empirical analysis. Journal of Econometrics, 89(1-2): 339-363.
  16. Kim, J., Greg, M.A. and Peter, E.R. (2002). Modeling consumer demand for variety. Marketing Science, 21(3): 229-250.
  17. Krebs-Smith, S., Smiciklas-Wright, H., Guthrie, J. and Krebs-Smith, J. (1987).The effects of variety in food choices on dietary quality. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 87: 897–903.
  18. Meagher, K.J. (2012). Optimal product variety in a Hotelling model. Economics Letters, 117(1): 71-73.
  19. Nevo, A. (2003). New products, quality changes, and welfare measures computed from estimated demand systems. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(2):266-275.
  20. Noushad project data and Pegah Milk Industries (2014). (Persian)
  21. OmidiKia, K., Mashbaki, A., Khodadad Hosseini, S. and Azizi, P. (2012). Understanding the organizational capabilities of the company's brand positioning in the food industry using data theory foundation. Thought of Strategic Management, 1 (11): 72-35. (Persian)
  22. Pakravan, M. R., Mehrabi Bosharabadi, H. and Gilanpour, A. (2010). Investigating factors affecting the supply and demand of Iranian agricultural exports. Economics and Agricultural Development, 24 (4): 471-478. (Persian)
  23. Preeti, D. and Sodani. K. C. (2014).The new era of marketing: Brand marketing impact of product varietyon brand choice. Masters International Journal of Management Research and Development, 2 : 2347-9043.
  24. Randall, E., Nichaman, M.Z. and Constant, C.F. (1985). Diet diversity and nutrient intake. Journal of American Dietetic Association, 85: 830–836.
  25. Shahbazi, M., Khatami Firoozabadi, S., Bamdad Sufi, C. and Kazazi, A. (2013). A model based on simultaneous engineering for product diversity management in the garment industry supply chain. Organizational Culture Management, 11 (4): 85-109. (Persian)
  26. Villas-Boas, J. M. (2004). Communication strategies and product line design. Marketing Science, 23(3):304-316.
  27. Zellner, A. (1962). An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regression and tests of regression bias. Journal of American Statistical Association, 57:500-509.