A dynamic multiple-indicator multiple-cause (MIMIC) framework was used to estimate the latent variable reputation with price premiums for Washington apples and attributes that covered the period July 1996 to November 1999. A maximum likelihood two-stage approach was employed. For comparison purposes, a hedonic regression was also estimated. Results from the first stage of the estimation procedure in the MIMIC reputation model suggest that price premiums are good indicators of reputation. The indicator coefficients, also called factor loadings, imply that the estimated reputation variable is common to the five indicators chosen and that the measurement of reputation is not likely to be obscured by a wide diversity in the indicators. The common factor issue suggests a possible existence of collective 'Washington' reputation. Results from the second stage of the MIMIC reputation model are compared to those from the Hedonic proxy model. In general, results from the MIMIC reputation model make more intuitive sense and are in line with the theoretical literature on reputation than the results from the Hedonic proxy model. Reputation is found to be stationary and that shocks to Washington's reputation are temporary. In the MIMIC reputation model, all the estimated coefficients on the explanatory cause variables had positive signs, except the Red Delicious variety variable. The magnitude of the coefficient on the logo term is large, suggesting a strong impact on reputation. The estimated constant term in the MIMIC reputation model is negative and relatively large, which suggests that reputation is declining. The concerns of declining perceived "eating" quality in Washington varieties thus appear to be real. It appears then that the apple industry is currently benefiting from past/accrued reputation. The current standards in the apple industry give room for some Washington producers to free ride on the collective reputation. Hence, there may be some justification for minimum quality standards. For efficient public policy purposes, our findings suggest that policymakers and the apple industry as a whole should consider reputation in their cost-benefit analysis for purposes of resource allocation.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association) in its series 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL with number
20592.
Length: Date of creation: 2001 Date of revision: Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea01:20592
Contact details of provider: Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202 Phone: (414) 918-3190 Fax: (414) 276-3349 Email: Web page: http://www.aaea.org More information through EDIRC
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: