IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/agribz/v38y2022i1p73-92.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are improvements in convenience good enough for consumers to prefer new food processing technologies?

Author

Listed:
  • Dolores Garrido
  • Rosa Karina Gallardo

Abstract

We use choice experiments to investigate heterogeneity in preferences for a refrigerated ready‐to‐heat meal with an extended shelf life and the processing technology (i.e., microwave‐assisted pasteurization) that provides that longevity. On average, an extra day of shelf life decreases the utility associated with purchasing and eating the meal. A segmentation analysis reveals the presence of convenience consumers, who are willing to pay a premium for a more convenient meal (with an extended shelf life), but the interaction effect of shelf life with technology reverts their willingness to pay for an extra day of shelf life, suggesting a negative reaction to the new technology. (EconLit Citations: Q13, Q16, Q19).

Suggested Citation

  • Dolores Garrido & Rosa Karina Gallardo, 2022. "Are improvements in convenience good enough for consumers to prefer new food processing technologies?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(1), pages 73-92, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:agribz:v:38:y:2022:i:1:p:73-92
    DOI: 10.1002/agr.21716
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.21716
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/agr.21716?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chengyan Yue & Shuoli Zhao & Jennifer Kuzma, 2015. "Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences for Nanotechnology and Genetic-modification Technology in Food Products," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 308-328, June.
    2. Jayson L. Lusk & Jutta Roosen & Andrea Bieberstein, 2014. "Consumer Acceptance of New Food Technologies: Causes and Roots of Controversies," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 381-405, October.
    3. Scholderer, Joachim & Grunert, Klaus G., 2005. "Consumers, food and convenience: The long way from resource constraints to actual consumption patterns," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 105-128, February.
    4. Jean-Marie Codron & Lucie Siriex & Thomas Reardon, 2006. "Social and environmental attributes of food products in an emerging mass market: Challenges of signaling and consumer perception, with European illustrations," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 23(3), pages 283-297, October.
    5. Harris, James Michael & Shiptsova, Rimma, 2007. "Consumer Demand for Convenience Foods: Demographics and Expenditures," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 38(3), pages 1-15.
    6. Julie A. Caswell & Eliza M. Mojduszka, 1996. "Using Informational Labeling to Influence the Market for Quality in Food Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1248-1253.
    7. Oral Capps & John R. Tedford & Joseph Havlicek, 1985. "Household Demand for Convenience and Nonconvenience Foods," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 67(4), pages 862-869.
    8. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    9. Daniele Pacifico & Hong il Yoo, 2012. "A Stata module for estimating latent class conditional logit models via the Expectation-Maximization algorithm," Discussion Papers 2012-49, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    10. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    11. Jingjing Wang & Chengyan Yue & Karina Gallardo & Vicki McCracken & James Luby & Jim McFerson, 2017. "What Consumers Are Looking for in Strawberries: Implications from Market Segmentation Analysis," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(1), pages 56-69, January.
    12. Rahkovsky, Ilya & Jo, Young & Carlson, Andrea, 2018. "Consumers Balance Time and Money in Purchasing Convenience Foods," Economic Research Report 276227, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    13. 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.
    14. Kelsey L Conley & Jayson L Lusk, 2019. "What to Eat When Having a Millennial over for Dinner," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 56-70, March.
    15. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    16. Muhammad Bello & Awudu Abdulai, 2018. "The use of a hybrid latent class approach to identify consumer segments and market potential for organic products in Nigeria," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 190-203, March.
    17. Agnes Emberger‐Klein & Marina Zapilko & Klaus Menrad, 2016. "Consumers’ Preference Heterogeneity for GM and Organic Food Products in Germany," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 203-221, April.
    18. Daly, Andrew & Dekker, Thijs & Hess, Stephane, 2016. "Dummy coding vs effects coding for categorical variables: Clarifications and extensions," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 36-41.
    19. Zheng, Xibei & Yue, Chengyan & Gallardo, Karina & McCracken, Vicki & Luby, James & McFerson, Jim, 2016. "What Attributes Are Consumers Looking for in Sweet Cherries? Evidence from Choice Experiments," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(1), pages 124-142, April.
    20. Amani, Pegah & Gadde, Lars-Erik, 2015. "Shelf life extension and food waste reduction," 2015 International European Forum (144th EAAE Seminar), February 9-13, 2015, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 206209, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    21. Grebitus, Carola & Jensen, Helen H. & Roosen, Jutta & Sebranek, Joseph G., 2013. "Fresh Meat Packaging: Consumer Acceptance of Modified Atmosphere Packaging including Carbon Monoxide," Staff General Research Papers Archive 35611, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jingjing Wang & Chengyan Yue & Karina Gallardo & Vicki McCracken & James Luby & Jim McFerson, 2017. "What Consumers Are Looking for in Strawberries: Implications from Market Segmentation Analysis," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(1), pages 56-69, January.
    2. Uddin, Azhar & Gallardo, R. Karina, 2021. "Consumers' willingness to pay for organic, clean label, and processed with a new food technology: an application to ready meals," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(3), March.
    3. Marianne Lefebvre & Pauline Laille & Masha Maslianskaia-Pautrel, 2020. "Individual preferences regarding pesticide-free management of green-spaces: a discret choice experiment with French citizens," Working Papers 2020.02, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    4. Pauline Laille & Marianne Lefebvre & Masha Maslianskaia-Pautrel, 2020. "Individual preferences regarding pesticide-free management of green-spaces: a discret choice experiment with French citizens," Working Papers hal-02867639, HAL.
    5. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    6. Chiadmi, Ines & Traoré, Sidnoma Abdoul Aziz & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2020. "Asian tiger mosquito far from home: Assessing the impact of invasive mosquitoes on the French Mediterranean littoral," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    7. Richartz, P. Christoph & Abdulai, Awudu & Kornher, Lukas, 2020. "Attribute Non Attendance and Consumer Preferences for Online Food Products in Germany," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(1), March.
    8. Rombach, Meike & Widmar, Nicole Olynk & Byrd, Elizabeth & Bitsch, Vera, 2018. "Do all roses smell equally sweet? Willingness to pay for flower attributes in specialized retail settings by German consumers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 91-99.
    9. Wendong Zhang & Brent Sohngen, 2018. "Do U.S. Anglers Care about Harmful Algal Blooms? A Discrete Choice Experiment of Lake Erie Recreational Anglers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(3), pages 868-888.
    10. Houessionon, P. & Fonta, W. M. & Bossa, A. Y. & Sanfo, S. & Thiombiano, N. & Zahonogo, P. & Yameogo, T. B. & Balana, Bedru, "undated". "Economic valuation of ecosystem services from small-scale agricultural management interventions in Burkina Faso: a discrete choice experiment approach," Papers published in Journals (Open Access) H048370, International Water Management Institute.
    11. 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.
    12. Feil, J.-H. & Anastassiadis, F. & Mußhoff, O. & Schilling, P., 2015. "Analysing Farmers’ Use of Price Hedging Instruments: An Experimental Approach," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 50, March.
    13. Tyrväinen, Liisa & Mäntymaa, Erkki & Ovaskainen, Ville, 2014. "Demand for enhanced forest amenities in private lands: The case of the Ruka-Kuusamo tourism area, Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 4-13.
    14. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    15. Varela, Elsa & Kallas, Zein, 2022. "Extensive Mediterranean agroecosystems and their linked traditional breeds: Societal demand for the conservation of the Majorcan black pig," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    16. Balogh, Péter & Török, Áron & Czine, Péter & Horváth, Péter, 2020. "A fogyasztói magatartás elemzése feltételes választási modellekkel - a mangalicakolbász példáján [Analysing consumer behaviour with conditional choice models, with Mangalica sausage as an example]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(5), pages 474-494.
    17. Owusu, Rebecca & Dadzie, Samuel Kwesi Ndzebah, 2021. "Heterogeneity in consumer preferences for organic and genetically modified food products in Ghana," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(2), June.
    18. Oyakhilomen Oyinbo & Jordan Chamberlin & Miet Maertens, 2020. "Design of Digital Agricultural Extension Tools: Perspectives from Extension Agents in Nigeria," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 798-815, September.
    19. Kermagoret, Charlène & Levrel, Harold & Carlier, Antoine & Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne, 2016. "Individual preferences regarding environmental offset and welfare compensation: a choice experiment application to an offshore wind farm project," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 230-240.
    20. Nguyen Tien Thong & Hans Stubbe Solgaard & Wolfgang Haider & Eva Roth & Lars Ravn†Jonsen, 2018. "Using labeled choice experiments to analyze demand structure and market position among seafood products," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 163-189, March.

    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:38:y:2022:i:1:p:73-92. 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.