Absolute Versus Relative Risk Perceptions: An Application To Economic Values Of Seafood Safety
AbstractWe examine the impact of multiple risks of related goods on consumption of a risky good. We argue that the consumption of a risky good depends on both its absolute risk level and its relative risks to other risky goods. Seafood consumption in eastern North Carolina is studied. We elicit, in a survey, the individual perceived risks as the reference points to derive the economic value of reducing health risk in seafood consumption. Revealed and stated data are combined to trace out demand changes in response to absolute and relative risk reductions. Our results show that seafood consumption is affected by the perceived absolute risk and by the relative risk to poultry, which confirms that individuals react to the multiple risks in a nonlinear way--as predicted by our analytical model.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper 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 20731.
Date of creation: 2001
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC
Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety;
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.:
- Wang, Hua, 1997. "Treatment of "Don't-Know" Responses in Contingent Valuation Surveys: A Random Valuation Model," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 219-232, February.
- Puto, Christopher P, 1987. " The Framing of Buying Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(3), pages 301-15, December.
- Adamowicz, Wiktor & Swait, Joffre & Boxall, Peter & Louviere, Jordan & Williams, Michael, 1997. "Perceptions versus Objective Measures of Environmental Quality in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Models of Environmental Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 65-84, January.
- McCluskey, Jill Jennifer & Rausser, Gordon C, 2000.
"Estimation of perceived risk and its effect on property values,"
CUDARE Working Paper Series
879R, University of California at Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Policy.
- Jill J. McCluskey & Gordon C. Rausser, 2001. "Estimation of Perceived Risk and Its Effect on Property Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 42-55.
- McCluskey, Jill & Rausser, Gordon C., 2000. "Estimation of perceived risk and its effect on property values," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt46x0r71b, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979.
"Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
7656, David K. Levine.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
- Smith, V Kerry & Johnson, F Reed, 1988. "How Do Risk Perceptions Respond to Information? The Case of Radon," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 70(1), pages 1-8, February.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.