为什么选择了“准一体化”的基地合约——来自塞飞亚公司与农户签约的证据  

Why the "Quasi-integration" Contracts are Selected?——The Evidences from the Contracts Signed by Sapphire Company and Farmers

作　　者：周立群[1] 邓宏图[2] 

机构地区：[1]南开大学经济研究所 [2]南开大学国际商学院

出　　处：《中国农村观察》2004年第3期2-11,20,共11页China Rural Survey

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目"农业产业化经营中经济组织的演变与创新"(编号 :0 2AJL0 0 5 );国家教育部人文社会科学专项研究基金课题"体制转型期经济组织演变;创新和发展"(编号 :0 1JAZJD790 0 15 )的阶段性成果之一

摘　　要：本文考察了塞飞亚公司与农户签约的“历史” ,分析了从“公司加农户合约”转化为“公司+农户 +基地”的“准一体化合约”的各种现实约束条件 ,解释了公司和农户各自进行“专用性资产”投资 ,却并未缔结成经典企业理论所定义的一体化科层组织结构的原因。通过引进历史主义分析 ,本文论证了“公司 +农户 +基地合约”兼有市场高能激励和降低交易成本的双重优势 ,因而是给定条件下的最优合约。Through reviewing contracts signed by Sapphire Company and farmers,this paper analyzes all kinds of the restrictions,by which the contracts transformed from the form of the “company plus farmers” into the form of the “company plus farmers plus production base”. The paper explains why either the farmers or the company have invested firm-specific assets,but both of them didn’t make the vertical contracts that have been defined by the classical enterprise theory. By means of introducing analysis methodology of historical materialism,this paper proves that the “company plus framers plus production base contract” has both the advantages of high market-incentive and high administrative efficiency,therefore the contract in this form is the best in given conditions.

关 键 词：农业 产业化经营 公司 农户 合同 市场 

分 类 号：F321.4[经济管理—产业经济]