This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

The Relative Importance of Preferences for Country-of-Origin in China, France, Niger and the United States

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Ehmke, Mariah Tanner
Lusk, Jayson
Tyner, Wallace

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Country-of-origin (COO) is an increasingly politicized credence attribute in the globalizing food system. While international policy development in this area is geographically far-reaching, the benefits of country-of-origin labels (COOL) to producers and consumers from countries in different locations and levels of economic development are not clear. Previous work investigates the importance of COO to consumers, but is typically limited in scope to consumers in one nation. In addition, little is known about the importance of COO information relative toother credence attributes, especially in non-meat food products. This study measures the benefits of COOL to an internationally diverse set of consumers (in developed and developing countries) and estimates their priority rank in policy development. The paper draws upon research in the management literature suggesting consumer information needs are not based on quality alone, but also relate to affective (emotional) and normative (social acceptance) needs. A conjoint experiment is conducted in China, France, Niger and the United States to elicit consumer preferences for COO information, organic production, and genetic modification. The results indicate COO information is not as important as genetically modified content information (France, the United States, and Niger) or organic production information (China). Findings reveal individuals with quality and food safety information needs place higher importance on genetically modified and organic food information than COO information.

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.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/25408
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by International Association of Agricultural Economists in its series 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia with number 25408.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae06:25408

Contact details of provider:
Email:
Web page: http://www.iaae-agecon.org/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).

Related research
Keywords: country-of-origin; genetic modification; organic; conjoint; onion; information; food policy; International Relations/Trade; Q13; Q18; Q17;

Other versions of this item:

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.:
  1. Caswell, Julie A. & Mojduszka, Eliza M., 1996. "Using Informational Labeling To Influence The Market For Quality In Food Products," Working Papers 25989, Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance. [Downloadable!]
  2. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521855167 is not listed on IDEAS
  3. Jayson L. Lusk & Ted C. Schroeder, 2004. "Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, American Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 467-482, 05. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2002. "Estimating Consumer Willingness-To-Pay For Country Of-Origin-Labels For Beef Products," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19745, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association). [Downloadable!]
  5. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2003. "Estimating Consumer Willingness to Pay for Country-of-Origin Labeling," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(02), August. [Downloadable!]
  6. Jayson L. Lusk & Jutta Roosen & John A. Fox, 2003. "Demand for Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison of Consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, American Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 16-29, 02. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  7. Lusk, Jayson, 2002. "Effects Of Cheap Talk On Consumer Willingness-To-Pay For Golden Rice," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19597, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association). [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  8. Akerlof, George A, 1970. "The Market for 'Lemons': Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521671248 is not listed on IDEAS
  10. Charles Noussair & StÈphane Robin & Bernard Ruffieux, 2004. "Do Consumers Really Refuse To Buy Genetically Modified Food?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(492), pages 102-120, 01. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. J.L. Lusk & T.C. Schroeder, 2004. "Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks," Artefactual Field Experiments 0067, The Field Experiments Website. [Downloadable!]
  12. Noussair, Charles & Robin, Stephane & Ruffieux, Bernard, 2002. "Do consumers not care about biotech foods or do they just not read the labels?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 47-53, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  13. W. Bruce Traill, 2004. "Effect of information about benefits of biotechnology on consumer acceptance of genetically modified food: evidence from experimental auctions in the United States, England, and France," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press for the Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 31(2), pages 179-204, June.
  14. Murray Fulton & Konstantinos Giannakas, 2004. "Inserting GM Products into the Food Chain: The Market and Welfare Effects of Different Labeling and Regulatory Regimes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, American Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 42-60, 02. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  15. Raynolds, Laura T., 2004. "The Globalization of Organic Agro-Food Networks," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 725-743, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  16. Grunert, Suzanne C. & Juhl, Hans Jorn, 1995. "Values, environmental attitudes, and buying of organic foods," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 39-62, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

  1. Bolliger, C. & Reviron, S., 2008. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Swiss Chicken Meat: An In-store Survey to Link Stated and Revealed Buying Behaviour," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44155, European Association of Agricultural Economists. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Apart from a small start up grant in the 1990's, RePEc has received no funding and lives on the help of volunteers.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-26.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.