IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/agecon/v50y2019i6p707-721.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do consumers value hydroponics? Implications for organic certification

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel N. Gilmour
  • Claudia Bazzani
  • Rodolfo M. Nayga
  • Heather A. Snell

Abstract

Recent controversy about the inclusion of hydroponics in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) organic program has highlighted uncertainty about marketing hydroponic crops. In a controversial vote in November 2017, the National Organic Standards Board chose not to recommend that hydroponic farms be banned from organic certification. It is still unclear, however, how consumers perceive and value hydroponic production. This study used a nonhypothetical choice experiment to estimate consumers’ willingness to pay for hydroponic and traditional lettuce both with and without organic certification. No hydroponic premium was found, but exposing consumers to different kinds of information about hydroponics significantly affected consumers’ preference formation. Findings generally suggest that the National Organic Program should consider ways to ensure the stability of organic premiums as perceptions about hydroponics evolve.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel N. Gilmour & Claudia Bazzani & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Heather A. Snell, 2019. "Do consumers value hydroponics? Implications for organic certification," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 50(6), pages 707-721, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:agecon:v:50:y:2019:i:6:p:707-721
    DOI: 10.1111/agec.12519
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12519
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/agec.12519?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Lin Bai & Zhanguo Zhu & Tong Zhang, 2021. "How to Improve Food Quality in the Domestic Market: The Role of “Same Line Same Standard Same Quality”—Evidence from a Consumer Choice Experiment in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Haotian Cheng & Dayton M. Lambert & Karen L. DeLong & Kimberly L. Jensen, 2022. "Inattention, availability bias, and attribute premium estimation for a biobased product," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 53(2), pages 274-288, March.
    4. Monica Allaby & Graham K. MacDonald & Sarah Turner, 2021. "Growing pains: Small-scale farmer responses to an urban rooftop farming and online marketplace enterprise in Montréal, Canada," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 677-692, September.
    5. Asioli, Daniele & Fuentes-Pila, Joaquìn & Alarcón, Silverio & Han, Jia & Liu, Jingjing & Hocquette, Jean-Francois & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2022. "Consumers’ valuation of cultured beef Burger: A Multi-Country investigation using choice experiments," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    6. Ding, Ye & Nayga Jr, Rodolfo M. & Zeng, Yinchu & Yang, Wei & Arielle Snell, Heather, 2022. "Consumers’ valuation of a live video feed in restaurant kitchens for online food delivery service," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    7. Katsuhito Nohara, 2024. "Willingness to pay for pesticide-free vegetables in Hokkaido, Japan: the relationship between appearance and pesticide use," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    8. Vincenzina Caputo, 2020. "Does information on food safety affect consumers' acceptance of new food technologies? The case of irradiated beef in South Korea under a new labelling system and across different information regimes," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(4), pages 1003-1033, October.
    9. Kyungdeok Noh & Byoung Ryong Jeong, 2021. "Increased Carbon Dioxide by Occupants Promotes Growth of Leafy Vegetables Grown in Indoor Cultivation System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-19, November.
    10. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    11. H. Holly Wang & Jing Yang & Na Hao, 2022. "Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Rice from Remediated Soil: Potential from the Public in Sustainable Soil Pollution Treatment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-22, July.
    12. András István Kun & Marietta Kiss, 2021. "On the Mechanics of the Organic Label Effect: How Does Organic Labeling Change Consumer Evaluation of Food Products?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-25, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:agecon:v:50:y:2019:i:6:p:707-721. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.