Village and Development

Village and Development

Analyzing the Collaboration Network of Livestock Cooperatives toward the Exchange of Information and Resources

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
.R Lavaei Adriani 1
M. Palouj 2
1 Assistant Professor, Agricultural Planning, Economic and Rural Development Research Institute (APERDRI), Tehran, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Agricultural Planning, Economics and Rural Development Research Institute (APERDRI), Tehran, Iran.
10.30490/rvt.2025.367553.1713
Abstract
Introduction
Institutional collaboration is one of the key strategies for reducing costs, sharing information, improving efficiency, and thus increasing competitiveness. Despite having collaboration links, many institutions lack a coherent and efficient network structure for exchanging resources and sharing information. Therefore, without awareness of structural weaknesses, they will not be able to manage network relationships. Despite extensive studies on collaboration networks, research related to the structure and function of collaboration networks in the cooperative sector is limited. Therefore, the current study was conducted with the aim of analyzing the collaboration network of livestock cooperatives in Tehran province in terms of exchanging information and resources.
Materials and Methods
In this study, the relationships of CEOs in 18 livestock cooperatives/unions in Tehran province were collected in the form of a weighted matrix. The data from this matrix were analyzed based on the assumptions and measures of social network analysis. The network was analyzed based on measures including size, density, interconnectedness, geodesic distance, degree, betweenness, closeness, degree centrality, betweenness centrality, closeness centrality, and constraint.
Results and Discussion
The results showed that the collaboration network in the cooperatives had little internal cohesion and the actors interacted with each other through long communication paths. Also, the union, as a key actor, plays an active role in guiding collaboration relations and has formed a coherent tie in relation to some cooperatives. According to the research findings, most cooperatives are in a limited and saturated communication structure and the development of their communication network requires diversification of opportunities and areas of joint collaboration.
Conclusions
Although the union plays a key role in strengthening network cohesion, the over-concentration of relationships around this actor has led to structural dependency and reduced network dynamics. Overall, the distribution of power and influence within the network is highly centralized, concentrated among a few key actors, while most cooperatives possess only limited capacity to shape network dynamics and decision-making processes. Accordingly, strengthening horizontal linkages, developing local clusters, empowering smaller cooperatives, and utilizing digital information exchange platforms can lead to increased cohesion, balance of power, and sustainability of institutional connections in the livestock cooperative cooperation network.
Keywords
Networking
Collaboration Relationships
Livestock Cooperatives
Social Network Analysis
Actor-Network Theory
Subjects
1.      Adomako, S., & Nguyen, N.P. (2024). Digitalization, inter-organizational collaboration, and technology transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 49(4), 1176-1202.‏
2.      Alimohammad, A., Farajallah, S.J., Mirdamadi, S.M. & Dehyouri, S. (2022). Investigating factors affecting the formation of agricultural production cooperatives network: a study in Alborz province. Journal of Cooperation and Agriculture, 11(42), 97-105. [In Persian]
3.      Bencherki, N. (2017). Actor–Network Theory. In C. Scott & L. Lewis (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of organizational communication (pp. 1–13). New York, NY: Wiley.
4.      Burt, R.S. (2003). The social structure of competition. Networks in the Knowledge Economy, 13(2), 57-91.‏
5.   Caldwell, R., & Dyer, C. (2020). The performative practices of consultants in a change network: an actor–network practice perspective on organisational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 33(5), 941-963.
6.      Callon, M. (1984). Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. The Sociological Review, 32(1_suppl), 196-233.
7.      Cheng, J.H., Chen, S.W., & Chen, F.Y. (2013). Exploring how inter-organizational relational benefits affect information sharing in supply chains. Information Technology and Management, 14(4), 283-294.
8.      Clegg, S. (2010). The state, power, and agency: Missing in action in institutional theory?. Journal of Management Inquiry, 19(1), 4-13.
9.      De Nooy, W., Mrvar, A., & Batagelj, V. (2018). Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek. Cambridge University Press.
10.  Faust, K. (2006). Comparing social networks: Size, density, and local structure. Metodološki Zvezki, 3(2), 185-216. 
11.  Faust, K., & Wasserman, S. (1992). Centrality and prestige: A review and synthesis. Journal of Quantitative Anthropology, 4(1), 23-78. 
12.  Hanneman, R.A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. University of California Riverside.
13.  Hearld, L., & Westra, D. (2022). Charting a course: A research agenda for studying the governance of health care networks. Responding to the Grand Challenges in Health Care via Organizational Innovation, 21, 111-132. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/s1474-823120220000021006.
14.  Hearld, L., Alexander, J.A., & Mittler, J.N. (2012). Fostering change within organizational participants of multisectoral health care alliances. Health Care Management Review, 37(3), 267-279. https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0b013e31822aa443.
15.  Hefner, J.L., & Nembhard, I.M. (2021). The contributions of health care management to grand health care challenges. In: Hefner, J.L., Nembhard, I.M. (Eds.), The Contributions of Health Care Management to Grand Health Care Challenges, vol. 20. Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. i–xxiv.
16.  Kalantari, Kh., & Lavaei Adaryani, R. (2016). Identifying and explaining challenges faced by Iranian rural production cooperatives based on a grounded theory paradigm. Journal of Cooperation and Agriculture, 5(17), 33-51. [In Persian]
17.  Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Harvard University Press.
18.  Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press.
19.  ‏Lavaei Adaryani, L., Kalantari, Kh., Asadi, A., & Alambeigi, A. (2019). Content analysis of business cooperatives theories emphasizing network functions. Journal of Business Management, 11(1), 3-4. [In Persian] 
20.  Lavaei Adaryani, R., Kalantari, K., Asadi, A., Alambeigi, A., Gholami, H., & Seifollahi, N. (2023). Information sharing antecedents in the supply chain: A dynamic network perspective. Operations Management Research, 16(2), 887-903.
21.  Lavaei Adaryani, R., Kalantari, Kh, Asadi, A., & Alambeigi, A. (2022). Surveying the institutional collaboration in the food supply chain: A qualitative study of livestock production cooperatives. Journal of Cooperation and Agriculture, 17(41), 106-131. [In Persian]
22.  Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems Practice, 5(4), 379-393.
23.  Law, J., & Hassard, J. (Eds.). (1999). Actor network theory and after. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
24.  Luke, D.A. (2015). A user's guide to network analysis in R. Springer.
25.  Mouritsen, J., Mahama, H., & Chua, W. W. (2010). Actor-network theory and the study of inter-organisational network-relations. Routledge.
26.  Palouj, M., & Joodi Damirchi, M. (2020). Identifying the most appropriate mergers and acquisitions (M&A) strategy for collaboration of agricultural cooperatives. Journal of Cooperation and Agriculture, 9(33), 155-185. [In Persian]
27.  Páscoa, C., & Tribolet, J. (2016). Actor network theory applied to organizational change: A case study. In Web Design and Development: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 1314-1330). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
28.  Provan, K.G., Fish, A., & Sydow, J. (2007). Interorganizational networks at the network level: A review of the empirical literature on whole networks. Journal of Management, 33(3), 479–516.
29.  Ryan, T., Hynes, B., Ryan, N., & Finucane, A. (2024). Investigating the use of actor-network theory in healthcare: A protocol for a systematic review. BMJ Open, 14(5), e079951.
30.  Seyed Naqavi, M., Dehghanan, H., Amiri, M., & Pak Nahad, H. (2021). Proposed pattern of trust-based cooperation in consumer cooperatives. Journal of Cooperation and Agriculture, 9(35), 155–179. [In Persian]
31.  Smith, S.J. (2012). International encyclopedia of housing and home. Elsevier.
32.  Taylor, M., & Doerfel, M.L. (2005). Another dimension to explicating relationships: Measuring inter-organizational linkages. Public Relations Review, 31(1), 121-129.‏
33.    Wang, H., & Zhang, Z. (2021). The influence of corporate networks on the competitive advantage of high technology enterprises in china: The mediating effects of dynamic capacities and ambidextrous combination. International Journal of Financial Studies, 9(3), 42.‏ 1-16.