IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae15/212288.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Willingness to pay for a differentiated potato applying a choice modelling experiment by socioeconomics levels of Argentinean consumers

Author

Listed:
  • Rodriguez, Elsa M.M.
  • Lupin, Beatriz
  • Gonzalez, Julia

Abstract

Choice Modelling was applied to assess the importance of attributes and willingness to pay for a fresh potato produced with a low environmental impact production system. Among the stated preference methods, this is the most used to study consumer preferences for attributes of goods with little or no market share. We interviewed 402 individuals, aged 18 and over, in super / hypermarkets and grocery stores. Four different attributes of potato: price, agrochemicals content, cooking quality and treatment were selected according to previous research carried out by the authors. For this purpose, a Conditional Logistic Model (McFadden, 1973) was applied. On average, ceteris paribus, the full sample participants were willing to pay between US$ 0.60 and US$0.49 more per 1kg of potatoes with low agrochemical content. In regards to cooking quality attributes, participants were willing to pay between US$ 0.31 and US$ 0.25 more per kg of high quality potatoes

Suggested Citation

  • Rodriguez, Elsa M.M. & Lupin, Beatriz & Gonzalez, Julia, 2015. "Willingness to pay for a differentiated potato applying a choice modelling experiment by socioeconomics levels of Argentinean consumers," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212288, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae15:212288
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.212288
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/212288/files/ICAE%202015Elsa%20MMRodriguezEtAl.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.212288?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kuhar, Ales & Juvancic, Luka, 2010. "Determinants of purchasing behaviour for organic and integrated fruits and vegetables in Slovenia," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14, August.
    2. Batte, Marvin T. & Hooker, Neal H. & Haab, Timothy C. & Beaverson, Jeremy, 2007. "Putting their money where their mouths are: Consumer willingness to pay for multi-ingredient, processed organic food products," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 145-159, April.
    3. Emily Lancsar & Jordan Louviere, 2008. "Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(8), pages 661-677, August.
    4. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    5. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    6. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    7. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    8. Boccaletti, Stefano & Nardella, Michele, 2000. "Consumer Willingness To Pay For Pesticide-Free Fresh Fruit And Vegetables In Italy," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 3(3), pages 1-14.
    9. Mercade, Lluc & Gil, Jose Maria & Kallas, Zein & Serra, Jordi, 2009. "A choice experiment method to assess vegetables producers’ preferences for crop insurance," 113th Seminar, September 3-6, 2009, Chania, Crete, Greece 58090, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Kuhar, Ales & Juvancic, L., 2012. "Determinants of purchasing behaviour for organic and integrated fruits and vegetables in Slovenia," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Rodriguez, Julieta A. & Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lupín, Beatriz, 2018. "A consumers' valuation of frital INTA: an empirical research that applies the experimental auction method," Nülan. Deposited Documents 2904, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lupín, Beatriz & González, Julia, 2015. "Willingness to pay for a differentiated potato applying a choice modelling experiment by socioeconomics levels of Argentinean consumers," Nülan. Deposited Documents 2301, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    2. Alessandro Mengoni & Chiara Seghieri & Sabina Nuti, 2013. "The application of discrete choice experiments in health economics: a systematic review of the literature," Working Papers 201301, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa, Istituto di Management.
    3. Mesfin G. Genie & Nicolas Krucien & Mandy Ryan, 2021. "Weighting or aggregating? Investigating information processing in multi‐attribute choices," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1291-1305, June.
    4. Alemu I, Jahson Berhane & Schuhmann, Peter & Agard, John, 2019. "Mixed preferences for lionfish encounters on reefs in Tobago: Results from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Chad M. Baum & Robert Weigelt, 2019. "How Where I Shop Influences What I Buy: The Importance of the Retail Format in Sustainable Tomato Consumption," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Chai & Chad M. Baum (ed.), Demand, Complexity, and Long-Run Economic Evolution, pages 141-169, Springer.
    6. Sarfo, Yaw & Musshoff, Oliver & Weber, Ron & Danne, Michael, 2021. "Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Digital Credit: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Madagascar," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315029, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr & Pascual, Unai & Etxano, Iker, 2012. "Valuing a Natura 2000 network site to inform land use options using a discrete choice experiment: An illustration from the Basque Country," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 329-344.
    8. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    9. De Ayala Bilbao, Amaya & Hoyos Ramos, David & Mariel Chladkova, Petr, 2012. "Landscape valuation through discrete choice experiments: Current practice and future research reflections," BILTOKI 1134-8984, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística).
    10. Tavárez, Héctor & Álamo, Carmen & Cortés,Mildred, 2020. "Differentiated coffees and their potential markets in Puerto Rico: An economic valuation approach," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 20(02), December.
    11. Sahan T. M. Dissanayake & Amy W. Ando, 2014. "Valuing Grassland Restoration: Proximity to Substitutes and Trade-offs among Conservation Attributes," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(2), pages 237-259.
    12. Axel Mühlbacher & Uwe Junker & Christin Juhnke & Edgar Stemmler & Thomas Kohlmann & Friedhelm Leverkus & Matthias Nübling, 2015. "Chronic pain patients’ treatment preferences: a discrete-choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(6), pages 613-628, July.
    13. Martin, Inès & Vranken, Liesbet & Ugás, Roberto, 2021. "Farmers’ Preferences to Cultivate Threatened Crop Varieties: Evidence from Peru," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315216, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Chinedu, Obi & Sanou, Edouard & Tur-Cardona, Juan & Bartolini, Fabio & Gheysen, Godelieve & Speelman, Stijn, 2018. "Farmers’ valuation of transgenic biofortified sorghum for nutritional improvement in Burkina Faso: A latent class approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 132-140.
    15. Tavárez, Héctor & Elbakidze, Levan, 2019. "Valuing recreational enhancements in the San Patricio Urban Forest of Puerto Rico: A choice experiment approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    16. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    17. Benoit Chèze & Charles Collet & Anthony Paris, 2021. "Estimating discrete choice experiments : theoretical fundamentals," CIRED Working Papers hal-03262187, HAL.
    18. Francisco Guijarro & Prodromos Tsinaslanidis, 2020. "Analysis of Academic Literature on Environmental Valuation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-14, March.
    19. Vecchiato, D. & Tempesta, T., 2013. "Valuing the benefits of an afforestation project in a peri-urban area with choice experiments," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 111-120.
    20. Jan Vanstockem & Liesbet Vranken & Brent Bleys & Ben Somers & Martin Hermy, 2018. "Do Looks Matter? A Case Study on Extensive Green Roofs Using Discrete Choice Experiments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Consumer/Household Economics; Crop Production/Industries;
    All these keywords.

    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:iaae15:212288. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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/iaaeeea.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.