臺大管理論叢 NTU Management Review VOL.29 NO.1

27 NTU Management Review Vol. 29 No. 1 Apr. 2019 grain supply is destroyed by a reoccurring disaster, e.g., typhoons, the management of risk and recovery in the grain supply chain becomes extremely time consuming and demanding. Furthermore, once a severe disaster occurs the logistics and financial flows of entire grain supply chains are impacted. These impacts are reflected in the daily transactional grain markets rapidly. From the perspective of psychological behavior, the opportunistic people usually stockpile grains no matter which position they play in the grain supply chain. To put it another way, the disruption management in unusual fluctuations of grain prices result from the reduced supply after the disaster (Gilbert, 2010; Tadasse, Algieri, Kalkuhl, and von Braun, 2014). Finally, the regime aid directly supports farmers who suffer losses from the natural disaster. This strategy is considered the medium to long-term supply-oriented agricultural management. If the supply chain is disrupted, the demands of end-consumers will not be satisfied in the short-term. On the other hand, steadying the grain prices and mitigating the fear of end-customers are crucial for supply chain recovery after disasters. Moreover, the regime intervenes by using various instruments which may aggravate the issues of disruptive supply chain management. Take the minimum purchase price policy for grain as an example: when market prices for grains fall below the protective price, the Chinese regime will purchase grains from markets, and sell advanced stockpiling grains to markets to mitigate price fluctuations (Yang, Wang, and Geng, 2008). This study investigates the supplier behavior ambiguity connected to hoarding intention under the effects of regime moderation in disrupted grain supply chain after disasters. We adopted an empirical study to verify a proposed research model that discriminates the cause-effect relation among all constructs, e.g., supplier hoarding intention, regime intervention, and related factors. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we review literature related to the position and contribution of this study. In Section 3, we illustrate a conceptual framework by discovering that there may be causes behind supplier hoarding intentions and propose five hypotheses confirmed. In Section 4 and 5, we test the hypotheses by collecting survey data was obtained from a survey conducted using structural equation modeling (SEM). In Section 6, we discuss the academic and managerial implications of this study. We conclude by noting some concerns and offer some recommendations that may inspire future studies on uncertainties disrupting supply.