IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i16p6549-d398447.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Making Use of Sustainable Local Plant Genetic Resources: Would Consumers Support the Recovery of a Traditional Purple Carrot?

Author

Listed:
  • Azucena Gracia

    (Unidad de Economía Agroalimentaria y de los Recursos Naturales, Centro de Investigación y Tecnología Agroalimentaria de Aragón (CITA), Avda Montañana, 930, 50059 Zaragoza, Spain
    Instituto Agroalimentario de Aragón-IA2, (CITA-Universidad de Zaragoza), Zaragoza, Spain)

  • Ana María Sánchez

    (Instituto Agroalimentario de Aragón-IA2, (CITA-Universidad de Zaragoza), Zaragoza, Spain
    Unidad de Hortofruticultura, Centro de Investigación y Tecnología Agroalimentaria de Aragón (CITA), Avda Montañana, 930, 50059 Zaragoza, Spain)

  • Francesc Jurado

    (Unidad de Economía Agroalimentaria y de los Recursos Naturales, Centro de Investigación y Tecnología Agroalimentaria de Aragón (CITA), Avda Montañana, 930, 50059 Zaragoza, Spain)

  • Cristina Mallor

    (Instituto Agroalimentario de Aragón-IA2, (CITA-Universidad de Zaragoza), Zaragoza, Spain
    Unidad de Hortofruticultura, Centro de Investigación y Tecnología Agroalimentaria de Aragón (CITA), Avda Montañana, 930, 50059 Zaragoza, Spain)

Abstract

Local plant genetic resources are of vital importance for the resilience of the agroecosystems, especially under conditions of global climate change. The diversification of production using these resources is postulated as an alternative for the development of rural areas with non-optimal farming conditions and/or disadvantaged by depopulation. However, in order to sustainably utilize local genetic resources, their use has also to provide products accepted by consumers. The aim of this study was to evaluate consumer acceptance of a local purple carrot that is a Spanish landrace at risk of genetic erosion from Teruel, a province in the Aragón region seriously affected by depopulation and extreme weather conditions, to contribute to its sustainable recovery. Consumer preferences for carrots with different characteristics (color, price, variety, and production system) were studied, and their willingness to pay (WTP) for the local purple carrots was assessed. Data from a survey conducted in this Spanish region was used. We identified two segments of consumers with different willingness to pay, hedonic liking, and intention to purchase the purple local carrots. These traditional purple carrots would be accepted by the segment of consumers more willing to pay for and more likely to purchase these carrots. The traditional purple carrots should be promoted, emphasizing that they are produced by a local landrace whose purple color is due to anthocyanic pigments with known antioxidant properties.

Suggested Citation

  • Azucena Gracia & Ana María Sánchez & Francesc Jurado & Cristina Mallor, 2020. "Making Use of Sustainable Local Plant Genetic Resources: Would Consumers Support the Recovery of a Traditional Purple Carrot?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-17, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:16:p:6549-:d:398447
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/16/6549/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/16/6549/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Merritt, Meagan G. & Delong, Karen Lewis & Griffith, Andrew P. & Jensen, Kimberly L., 2018. "Consumer Willingness To Pay For Tennessee Certified Beef," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(2), pages 233-254, May.
    2. Thong Meas & Wuyang Hu & Marvin T. Batte & Timothy A. Woods & Stan Ernst, 2015. "Substitutes or Complements? Consumer Preference for Local and Organic Food Attributes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(4), pages 1044-1071.
    3. Carroll, Kathryn A. & Bernard, John C. & Pesek, John D. Jr., 2013. "Consumer Preferences for Tomatoes: The Influence of Local, Organic, and State Program Promotions by Purchasing Venue," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-18.
    4. Nganje, William E. & Hughner, Renee Shaw & Lee, Nicholas E., 2011. "State-Branded Programs and Consumer Preference for Locally Grown Produce," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-13, April.
    5. Steiner, B.E. & Peschel, A.O. & Grebitus, C., 2017. "Multi-Product Category Choices Labeled for Ecological Footprints: Exploring Psychographics and Evolved Psychological Biases for Characterizing Latent Consumer Classes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 251-264.
    6. Wuyang Hu, 2004. "Trading off health, environmental and genetic modification attributes in food," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 31(3), pages 389-408, September.
    7. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    8. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    9. Boncinelli, Fabio & Contino, Caterina & Romano, Caterina & Scozzafava, Gabriele & Casini, Leonardo, 2016. "Territory, environment, and healthiness in traditional food choices: insights into consumer heterogeneity," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 20(1), October.
    10. Marcello Di Muro & Rungsaran Wongprawmas & Maurizio Canavari, 2016. "Consumers? Preferences and Willingness-To-Pay for Misfit Vegetables," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 18(2), pages 133-154.
    11. Laura O. Taylor & Ronald G. Cummings, 1999. "Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 649-665, June.
    12. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    13. Anoush Ficiciyan & Jacqueline Loos & Stefanie Sievers-Glotzbach & Teja Tscharntke, 2018. "More than Yield: Ecosystem Services of Traditional versus Modern Crop Varieties Revisited," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, August.
    14. Chengyan Yue & Ben Campbell & Charles Hall & Bridget Behe & Jennifer Dennis & Hayk Khachatryan, 2016. "Consumer Preference for Sustainable Attributes in Plants: Evidence from Experimental Auctions," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 222-235, April.
    15. Peschel, Anne & Grebitus, Carola & Steiner, Bodo & Veeman, Michele, 2016. "How does consumer knowledge affect environmentally sustainable choices? Evidence from a cross-country latent class analysis of food labels," MPRA Paper 69864, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Peter C. Verhoef, 2005. "Explaining purchases of organic meat by Dutch consumers," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(2), pages 245-267, June.
    17. Chang, Jae Bong & Moon, Wanki & Balasubramanian, Siva K., 2012. "Consumer valuation of health attributes for soy-based food: A choice modeling approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 335-342.
    18. Xiang Wu & Bin Hu & Jie Xiong, 2020. "Understanding Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences in Chinese Milk Markets: A Latent Class Approach," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 184-198, February.
    19. Xiang Wu & Bin Hu & Jie Xiong, 2020. "Understanding Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences in Chinese Milk Markets: A Latent Class Approach," Post-Print hal-02489646, HAL.
    20. Yuko Onozaka & Dawn Thilmany Mcfadden, 2011. "Does Local Labeling Complement or Compete with Other Sustainable Labels? A Conjoint Analysis of Direct and Joint Values for Fresh Produce Claim," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(3), pages 689-702.
    21. Timothy J. Richards & Stephen F. Hamilton & Miguel Gomez & Elliot Rabinovich, 2017. "Retail Intermediation and Local Foods," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(3), pages 637-659.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Georgiana-Raluca Ladaru & Diana Maria Ilie & Maria Claudia Diaconeasa & Ionut Laurentiu Petre & Florian Marin & Valentin Lazar, 2020. "Influencing Factors of a Sustainable Vegetable Choice. The Romanian Consumers’ Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Luis Pérez y Pérez & Azucena Gracia, 2023. "Consumer Preferences for Olive Oil in Spain: A Best-Worst Scaling Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-14, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Azucena Gracia & Miguel I. Gómez, 2020. "Food Sustainability and Waste Reduction in Spain: Consumer Preferences for Local, Suboptimal, And/Or Unwashed Fresh Food Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-15, May.
    2. Printezis, Iryna & Grebitus, Carola, 2018. "Marketing Channels for Local Food," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 161-171.
    3. Zhu, Zhanguo & Zhang, Tong & Hu, Wuyang, 2023. "The accumulation and substitution effects of multi-nation certified organic and protected eco-origin food labels in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    4. Chad M. Baum & Robert Weigelt, 2019. "How Where I Shop Influences What I Buy: The Importance of the Retail Format in Sustainable Tomato Consumption," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Chai & Chad M. Baum (ed.), Demand, Complexity, and Long-Run Economic Evolution, pages 141-169, Springer.
    5. Iryna Printezis & Carola Grebitus & Stefan Hirsch, 2019. "The price is right!? A meta-regression analysis on willingness to pay for local food," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, May.
    6. Giovanna Piracci & Fabio Boncinelli & Leonardo Casini, 2022. "Wine consumers' demand for social sustainability labeling: Evidence for the fair labor claim," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(4), pages 1742-1761, December.
    7. Grashuis, Jasper & Su, Ye, 2023. "Consumer Preferences for State-Sponsored Designations: The Case of the Missouri Grown Label," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 48(1), January.
    8. Elisa Giampietri & Dieter B. A. Koemle & Xiaohua Yu & Adele Finco, 2016. "Consumers’ Sense of Farmers’ Markets: Tasting Sustainability or Just Purchasing Food?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-14, November.
    9. Julia Blasch & Robert W. Turner, 2016. "Environmental art, prior knowledge about climate change, and carbon offsets," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 6(4), pages 691-705, December.
    10. Faical Akaichi & Klaus Glenk & Cesar Revoredo‐Giha, 2022. "Bundling food labels: What role could the labels “Organic,” “Local” and “Low Fat” play in fostering the demand for animal‐friendly meat," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 349-370, April.
    11. Iván Pérez-Rubio & Daniel Flores & Christian Vargas & Francisco Jiménez & Iker Etxano, 2021. "To What Extent Are Cattle Ranching Landholders Willing to Restore Ecosystem Services? Constructing a Micro-Scale PES Scheme in Southern Costa Rica," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-24, July.
    12. Rebecca Boehm & Hannah Kitchel & Selena Ahmed & Anaya Hall & Colin M. Orians & John Richard Stepp & Al Robbat, Jr. & Timothy S. Griffin & Sean B. Cash, 2019. "Is Agricultural Emissions Mitigation on the Menu for Tea Drinkers?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-20, September.
    13. Steiner, B.E. & Peschel, A.O. & Grebitus, C., 2017. "Multi-Product Category Choices Labeled for Ecological Footprints: Exploring Psychographics and Evolved Psychological Biases for Characterizing Latent Consumer Classes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 251-264.
    14. 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.
    15. Falck-Zepeda, José & Kilkuwe, Enoch & Wesseler, Justus, 2008. "Introducing a genetically modified banana in Uganda: Social benefits, costs, and consumer perceptions," IFPRI discussion papers 767, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    16. Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano & Lamonaca, Emilia, 2020. "Objective risk and subjective risk: The role of information in food supply chains," MPRA Paper 104515, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Kikulwe, Enoch & Birol, Ekin & Wesseler, Justus & Falck-Zepeda, José, 2009. "A latent class approach to investigating consumer demand for genetically modified staple food in a developing country: The case of GM bananas in Uganda," IFPRI discussion papers 938, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    18. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren B. Olsen & Suzanne E. Vedel & Kennedy O. Pambo & Victor O. Owino, 2015. "Consumer acceptance and willingness to pay for edible insects as food in Kenya: the case of white winged termites," IFRO Working Paper 2015/10, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    19. Oyinbo, Oyakhilomen & Chamberlin, Jordan & Vanlauwe, Bernard & Vranken, Liesbet & Kamara, Alpha & Craufurd, Peter & Maertens, Miet, 2018. "Farmers' preferences for site-specific extension services: Evidence from a choice experiment in Nigeria," Working Papers 276175, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    20. Baldi, Lucia & Trentinaglia, Maria Teresa & Mancuso, Teresina & Peri, Massimo, 2021. "Attitude Toward Environmental Protection and Toward Nature: How Do They Shape Consumer Behaviour for a Sustainable Tomato?," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315181, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:16:p:6549-:d:398447. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.