IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/agribz/v14y1998i3p247-256.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Opinions of professional buyers toward a new, alternative red meat: Ostrich

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey Gillespie

    (State University of New York, Morrisville)

  • Gary Taylor

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center)

  • Alvin Schupp

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center)

  • Ferdinand Wirth

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center)

Abstract

Professional meat buyers are surveyed to estimate their current and past use of ostrich meat and their preferences for different ostrich meat products. Conjoint analysis is used to estimate the most preferred ostrich meat products for the retail and restaurant sectors, as well as the relative importance of attributes considered in the decision to purchase ostrich meat. Results indicate that buyers have very limited knowledge of ostrich meat. The preferred product in both the restaurant and retail markets is a branded, 6-oz. ostrich filet at the lowest price. Price is the most important factor determining retail and restaurant managers' decisions on the acceptability of the product. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey Gillespie & Gary Taylor & Alvin Schupp & Ferdinand Wirth, 1998. "Opinions of professional buyers toward a new, alternative red meat: Ostrich," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 247-256.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:agribz:v:14:y:1998:i:3:p:247-256
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6297(199805/06)14:3<247::AID-AGR7>3.0.CO;2-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baker, Gregory A. & Crosbie, Peter J., 1993. "Measuring Food Safety Preferences: Identifying Consumer Segments," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 18(2), pages 1-11, December.
    2. Biing-Hwan Lin & Steven Payson & Jane Wertz, 1996. "Opinions of professional buyers toward organic produce: A case study of mid-Atlantic market for fresh tomatoes," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(1), pages 89-97.
    3. Taylor, Gary & Andrews, Linda & Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Schupp, Alvin R. & Prinyawiwatkul, Witoon, 1998. "How Do Ratite Meats Compare with Beef?: Implications for the Ratite Industry," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 16(1), pages 1-18.
    4. Gan, Christopher E.C. & Luzar, E. Jane, 1993. "A Conjoint Analysis Of Waterfowl Hunting In Louisiana," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 1-10, December.
    5. Catherine Halbrendt & J. Richard Bacon & John Pesek, 1992. "Weighted least squares analysis for conjoint studies: The case of hybrid striped bass," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(2), pages 187-198.
    6. Gan, Christopher & Luzar, E. Jane, 1993. "A Conjoint Analysis of Waterfowl Hunting in Louisiana," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 36-45, December.
    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. Steiner, Bodo E. & Srivastava, Lorie & Gao, Fei, 2007. "Assessing the Consumer Acceptance and Market Potential of Alternative Meats," Project Report Series 7708, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    2. Harrison, R. Wes & Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Fields, Deacue, 2005. "Analysis of Cardinal and Ordinal Assumptions in Conjoint Analysis," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 34(2), pages 1-15, October.
    3. Fields, Deacue & Gillespie, Jeffrey M., 2003. "Beef Producer Preferences And Purchase Decisions For Livestock Revenue Insurance Products," 2003 Annual Meeting, February 1-5, 2003, Mobile, Alabama 35089, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    4. Harrison, R. Wes & Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Fields, Deacue, 2001. "Theoretical And Empirical Considerations Of Eliciting Preferences And Model Estimation In Conjoint Analysis," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20680, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    5. Schupp, Alvin R. & Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Prinyawiwatkul, Witoon & O'Neil, Carol E., 2003. "Consumer-Preferred Attributes of a Fresh Ground Beef and Turkey Product: A Conjoint Analysis," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(2), pages 1-7, 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. Sánchez, M. & Gil, José M., 1998. "Comparación de tres métodos de estimación del análisis conjunto: diferencias en las preferencias en el consumo de vino y en la segmentación del mercado," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 10, pages 131-146, Diciembre.
    2. Harrison, R. Wes & Gillespie, Jeffrey & Fields, Deacue, 2005. "Analysis of Cardinal and Ordinal Assumptions in Conjoint Analysis," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(2), pages 238-252, October.
    3. Harrison, R. Wes & Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Fields, Deacue, 2001. "Theoretical And Empirical Considerations Of Eliciting Preferences And Model Estimation In Conjoint Analysis," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20680, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Buller, Virginia & Hudson, Darren & Parkhurst, Gregory M. & Whittington, Andrew, 2006. "The Impact of Hunting Package Attributes on Hunting Package Prices in Mississippi," Research Reports 15798, Mississippi State University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    5. Stevens, T. H. & Belkner, R. & Dennis, D. & Kittredge, D. & Willis, C., 2000. "Comparison of contingent valuation and conjoint analysis in ecosystem management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 63-74, January.
    6. Gil, Jose Maria & Gracia, Azucena & Sanchez Garcia, Mercedes, 2000. "Market Segmentation And Willingness To Pay For Organic Products In Spain," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 3(2), pages 1-20.
    7. Rodolfo Bernabéu & Margarita Brugarolas & Laura Martínez-Carrasco & Roberto Nieto-Villegas & Adrián Rabadán, 2023. "The Price of Organic Foods as a Limiting Factor of the European Green Deal: The Case of Tomatoes in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-15, February.
    8. Francis Oremo & Richard Mulwa & Nicholas Oguge, 2021. "Sustainable water access and willingness of smallholder irrigators to pay for on-farm water storage systems in Tsavo sub-catchment, Kenya," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 1371-1391, February.
    9. Haefele, Michelle A. & Loomis, John B., 1999. "A Comparison Of Conjoint Ratings And Rankings: An Application For Passive Use Values Of Forest Health," 1999 Annual Meeting, July 11-14, 1999, Fargo, ND 35729, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    10. Johnson, F. Reed & Desvousges, William H., 1997. "Estimating Stated Preferences with Rated-Pair Data: Environmental, Health, and Employment Effects of Energy Programs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 79-99, September.
    11. Christian Garavaglia & Paolo Mariani, 2017. "How Much Do Consumers Value Protected Designation of Origin Certifications? Estimates of willingness to Pay for PDO Dry‐Cured Ham in Italy," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(3), pages 403-423, June.
    12. Mingie, James C. & Poudyal, Neelam C. & Bowker, J.M. & Mengak, Michael T. & Siry, Jacek P., 2017. "Big game hunter preferences for hunting club attributes: A choice experiment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 98-106.
    13. Garavaglia, Christian & Mariani, Paolo, 2015. "How Much Do Consumers Value PDO Certifications? Estimates of WTP for PDO Dry-Cured Ham in Italy," 145th Seminar, April 14-15, 2015, Parma, Italy 200376, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Carol A. Jones & Katherine A. Pease, 1997. "Restoration‐Based Compensation Measures In Natural Resource Liability Statutes," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 15(4), pages 111-122, October.
    15. Häggmark-Svensson, Tobias & Elofsson, Katarina & Engelmann, Marc & Gren, Ing-Marie, 2015. "A review of the literature on benefits, costs, and policies for wildlife management," Working Paper Series 2015:1, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department Economics.
    16. F. Reed Johnson & Melissa Ruby Banzhaf & William H. Desvousges, 2000. "Willingness to pay for improved respiratory and cardiovascular health: a multiple‐format, stated‐preference approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(4), pages 295-317, June.
    17. Antonovitz, Frances & Liu, Donald J., 1996. "A HEDONIC PRICE STUDY OF PESTICIDES IN FRUITS AND VEGETABLES; Proceedings of the Fifth Joint Conference on Agriculture, Food, and the Environment, June 17-18, 1996, Padova, Italy," Working Papers 14389, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.
    18. Ronald B. Larson, 1998. "Regionality of food consumption," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 213-226.
    19. Bard, Sharon K. & Craig, Dawn J. & Boehlje, Michael, 2002. "Borrower Preferences In The Agricultural Credit Market: A Conjoint Analysis," Staff Papers 28628, Purdue University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    20. Jeffrey M. Gillespie & Alvin R. Schupp, 2002. "The Role of Speculation and Information in the Early Evolution of the United States Ostrich Industry: An Industry Case Study," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 278-292.

    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:wly:agribz:v:14:y:1998:i:3:p:247-256. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6297 .

    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.