IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea14/169826.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences for Nanotechnology and Genetic-Modification Technology in Food Products

Author

Listed:
  • Yue, Chengyan
  • Zhao, Shuoli
  • Kuzma, Jennifer

Abstract

This study investigates heterogeneous consumer preferences for nano-food and genetic-modified (GM) food and the associated benefits using the results of choice experiments with 1117 U.S. consumers. We employ a mixed logit model and a latent class logit model to capture the heterogeneity in consumer preferences by identifying consumer segments. Our results show that nano-food evokes less negative reactions compared with GM food. We identify four consumer groups: “Price Oriented/Technology Adopters,” “Technology Averse,” “Benefit Oriented/Technology Accepters,” and “New Technology Rejecters.” Each consumer group has distinctive demographic backgrounds, which generates deeper insights in the diversified public acceptance for nano-food and GM food. Our results have important policy implications in the adoption of new food technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Yue, Chengyan & Zhao, Shuoli & Kuzma, Jennifer, 2014. "Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences for Nanotechnology and Genetic-Modification Technology in Food Products," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 169826, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea14:169826
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.169826
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/169826/files/Poster%204582.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.169826?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Zhao, Shuoli & Yue, Chengyan & Wang, Yumeng, 2016. "How Information Affects Consumer Acceptance of Nano-packaged Food Products," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235602, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Yang Yang & Jill E. Hobbs, 2020. "Food values and heterogeneous consumer responses to nanotechnology," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 289-313, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Dolores Garrido & Ana Espínola‐Arredondo & Felix Munoz‐Garcia, 2020. "Can mandatory certification promote greenwashing? A signaling approach," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(6), pages 1801-1851, December.
    5. Valerie Kilders & Vincenzina Caputo, 2021. "Is Animal Welfare Promoting Hornless Cattle? Assessing Consumer’s Valuation for Milk from Gene‐edited Cows under Different Information Regimes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 735-759, September.
    6. Caputo, Vincenzina & Scarpa, Riccardo & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Ortega, David L., 2018. "Are preferences for food quality attributes really normally distributed? An analysis using flexible mixing distributions," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 10-27.
    7. Ajewole, Kayode & Peterson, Hikaru H. & Yamaura, Koichi, 2015. "Japanese Consumer Preferences toward GM Foods after the Great East Japan Earthquake," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205611, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Yang Yang & Jill E. Hobbs, 2020. "How Do Cultural Worldviews Shape Food Technology Perceptions? Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 465-492, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Consumer/Household Economics; Institutional and Behavioral Economics; Marketing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aaea14:169826. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.