Who should set cosmetic standards in agricultural live-streaming supply chains: farmer or live streamer?

Live streaming is increasingly being applied in the agricultural industry by directly connecting farmers with consumers and shifting supply chains from wholesale contracts to revenue-sharing contracts. This transformation grants farmers greater authority over product selection, including decisions regarding cosmetic standards for produce. Motivated by this practice, this study explores cosmetic standard authority and its supply chain implications within an agricultural live-streaming context involving a farmer and a live streamer. We find that under either authority model, when consumer additional utility for high-standard produce is high, the decision maker prefers selling high-standard produce and otherwise opts for low-standard produce. Surprisingly, a higher agency fee rate makes both parties more likely to sell low-standard produce. When consumer additional utility for high-standard produce is either very high or very low, consensus on unified cosmetic standards can be reached; otherwise, their preferences diverge. In such conflicting cases, live streamer-controlled standards lead to greater farmer effort but also to higher food loss and lower consumer welfare. Interestingly, under certain conditions, either party controlling the decision right can improve overall supply chain profit. This study highlights live-streaming's role in transforming agricultural supply chains and offers managerial insights into cosmetic standard authority and food loss.