The Impact Of Health, Environmental And Social Attributes Of Salmon Choice In The United States
AbstractIn recent years, U.S. consumers have increasingly sought information about the health implications of their food purchases, as well as the environmental and social impact of the food production process. While this growing consumer demand has helped facilitate the development of several seafood certification programs, no accessible public or private data shows that U.S. shoppers are willing to pay a premium for certified seafood. To estimate whether a price premium exists for current and forthcoming certifications for wild and farmed salmon producers, and to better understand U.S. consumers’ preferences for salmon, we surveyed a representative sample of 955 shoppers from the United States. We then conducted a conjoint analysis on their willingness to pay for different methods of production (wild or farmed), countries or regions of origin, the Marine Stewardship Council’s wild seafood ‘ecolabel’, and hypothetical certifications assuring that the salmon product is associated with fewer health risks, environmental impacts, or negative social issues. Of the factors which affect consumers’ salmon purchasing decisions, the combination of fresh salmon’s method of production and its region of origin is generally a stronger determinant of U.S. salmon shopper’s purchasing decisions than the salmon’s certifications. Consumers strongly favor wild salmon to farmed salmon, prefer salmon from the United States to salmon from other countries, are willing to pay the largest premiums for environmental certifications, and state they are willing to pay the lowest premium for the health and safety certification. Results show that 1) fresh salmon producers and retailers have financial incentives to display social and environmental labels at seafood counters in markets, 2) a price premium for a health and safety certification of farmed salmon would be limited, since salmon consumers are more responsive to negative than positive information related to health issues associated with the salmon that they purchase, and 3) certifying agencies, and all retailers have financial incentives to inform consumers about the benefits and risks of salmon production and consumption, because informed consumers are willing to pay more for certified fresh salmon as well as most types of uncertified fresh salmon.
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 European Association of Agricultural Economists & Agricultural and Applied Economics Association in its series 115th Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, September 15-17, 2010, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany with number 116398.
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Agricultural and Food Policy; Consumer/Household Economics; Demand and Price Analysis; Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety; Food Security and Poverty; Health Economics and Policy;
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.:
- Johnston, Robert J. & Roheim, Cathy A., 2006. "A Battle of Taste and Environmental Convictions for Ecolabeled Seafood: A Contingent Ranking Experiment," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 31(02), August.
- Jaffry, Shabbar & Pickering, Helen & Ghulam, Yaseen & Whitmarsh, David & Wattage, Prem, 2004. "Consumer choices for quality and sustainability labelled seafood products in the UK," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 215-228, June.
- Cathy R. Wessells & Robert J. Johnston & Holger Donath, 1999. "Assessing Consumer Preferences for Ecolabeled Seafood: The Influence of Species, Certifier, and Household Attributes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1084-1089.
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.