IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/rutdps/36740.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Predicting Consumer Risk Aversions to Synthetic Pesticide Residues: A Logistic Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Govindasamy, Ramu
  • Italia, John
  • Adelaja, Adesoji O.

Abstract

Growing concerns about pesticide residues in fresh produce could result in increased demand for low-input agriculture with reduced pesticide residues, and decreased demand for conventional fresh produce. The objective of this study was to empirically evaluate consumer concern about pesticide residues and analyze the effect of sociodemographic factors on pesticide residue concern. Two separate surveys were used to provide data about consumer risk perceptions and demographic characteristics. Statistical models using data from both surveys show that females are approximately 9 to 14 percent more likely to be risk averse toward pesticides than males. Furthermore, both surveys indicate that households with children are more likely to be risk averse than those without children. Specifically, the earlier survey (1990) indicates that households with at least one child were 11 percent more likely to be risk averse than households without children. The more recent survey (1997) shows households with two or more children to be 22 percent more likely to be risk averse. Those who frequently purchase organic produce and those who grew vegetables for consumption in their home were both found to be at least 18 percent more likely to be risk averse than those who did not. Individuals over 35 years of age are more likely to have high levels of risk aversion toward pesticide residues and suburban households were found to be 10 percent more likely than rural or urban households to be risk averse. The result also indicated that households with higher levels of income and education generally exhibit lower risk aversions. With sustainable and environmentally safer forms of agriculture likely to comprise a more significant share of the nation’s food production, marketing research must be implemented to ascertain public willingness-to-purchase of such produce. Predicting which consumers are likely to have high concerns about synthetic pesticide residues should be beneficial to identifying those who are more likely to purchase low-input agriculture such as IPM and organically grown produce.

Suggested Citation

  • Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John & Adelaja, Adesoji O., 1998. "Predicting Consumer Risk Aversions to Synthetic Pesticide Residues: A Logistic Analysis," P Series 36740, Rutgers University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:rutdps:36740
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.36740
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/36740/files/pa980198.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.36740?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. Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John & Liptak, Clare, 1997. "Quality of Agricultural Produce: Consumer Preferences and Perceptions," P Series 36739, Rutgers University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics.
    2. Ostiguy, Nancy & Figueroa, Enrique E. & Bisogni, Carole, 1990. "Improving Communication About Risks Associated with Residues of Agricultural Chemicals on Produce," EB Series 186144, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    3. Misra, Sukant K. & Huang, Chung L. & Ott, Stephen L., 1991. "Consumer Willingness To Pay For Pesticide-Free Fresh Produce," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 16(2), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Jordan, Jeffrey L. & Elnagheeb, Abdelmoneim H., 1991. "Public Perceptions Of Food Safety," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 22(3), pages 1-10, September.
    5. Robert D. Weaver & David J. Evans & A. E. Luloff, 1992. "Pesticide use in tomato production: Consumer concerns and willingness-to-pay," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(2), pages 131-142.
    6. Stephen L. Ott, 1990. "Supermarket shoppers' pesticide concerns and willingness to purchase certified pesticide residue-free fresh produce," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(6), pages 593-602.
    7. Peter Kennedy, 2003. "A Guide to Econometrics, 5th Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 5, volume 1, number 026261183x, December.
    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. Peter Nijkamp & Chiara Maria Travisi & Gabriella Vindigni, 2002. "Pesticide Risk Valuation in Empirical Economics," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 02-112/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    2. Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John, 1997. "Consumer Response to Integrated Pest Management and Organic Agriculture: An Econometric Analysis," P Series 36727, Rutgers University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics.
    3. Kelly B. Maguire & Nicole Owens & Nathalie B. Simon, 2004. "Focus on Babies: Evidence on Parental Attitudes Towards Pesticide Risks," NCEE Working Paper Series 200402, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Mar 2004.
    4. Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John & Adelaja, Adesoji O., 2001. "Predicting Willingness-To-Pay A Premium For Integrated Pest Management Produce: A Logistic Approach," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 30(2), pages 1-9, October.
    5. Arahata, Katsumi, 2003. "Income Growth And Pesticide Consumption In The Future: Applying The Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22055, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Chiara M. Travisi & Peter Nijkamp, 2004. "Willingness to pay for Agricultural Environmental Safety," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-070/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    7. Hwang, Yun Jae & Roe, Brian E. & Teisl, Mario F., 2005. "An Empirical Analysis of United States Consumers' Concerns about Eight Food Production and Processing Technologies," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19128, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Travisi, Chiara M. & Nijkamp, Peter, 2004. "Are Italians Willing to Pay for Agricultural Environmental Safety? A Stated Choice Approach," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24988, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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. Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John, 1997. "Consumer Response to Integrated Pest Management and Organic Agriculture: An Econometric Analysis," P Series 36727, Rutgers University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics.
    2. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    3. Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John, 1999. "Predicting Willingness-To-Pay A Premium For Organically Grown Fresh Produce," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 30(2), pages 1-10, July.
    4. Ravenswaay, Eileen O. van, 1993. "Research Needs in the Valuation of Food Safety and Nutrition," Staff Paper Series 201172, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    5. Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John & Adelaja, Adesoji O., 2001. "Predicting Willingness-To-Pay A Premium For Integrated Pest Management Produce: A Logistic Approach," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 30(2), pages 1-9, October.
    6. Ramu Govindasamy & John Italia, 1998. "A willingness-to-purchase comparison of integrated pest management and conventional produce," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(5), pages 403-414.
    7. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2008. "Contingent valuation of consumers' willingness-to-pay for organic food in Argentina," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1022, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    8. Eric Giraud-Héraud & Maria Aguiar Fontes & Alexandra Seabra Pinto, 2014. "Crise sanitaires de l'alimentation et analyses comportementales," Working Papers hal-00949126, HAL.
    9. Biing-Hwan Lin & Steven Payson & Jane Wertz, 1996. "Opinions of professional buyers toward organic produce: A case study of mid-Atlantic market for fresh tomatoes," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(1), pages 89-97.
    10. Maria Travisi, Chiara & Nijkamp, Peter & Vindigni, Gabriella, 2006. "Pesticide risk valuation in empirical economics: a comparative approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 455-474, April.
    11. Powers, Nicholas J. & Heifner, Richard G., 1993. "Federal Grade Standards for Fresh Produce: Linkages to Pesticide Use," Agricultural Information Bulletins 309690, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    12. Roosen, Jutta & Fox, John A. & Hennessy, David A. & Schreiber, Alan, 1998. "Consumers' Valuation Of Insecticide Use Restrictions: An Application To Apples," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 23(2), pages 1-18, December.
    13. Spencer Henson, 1996. "Consumer Willingness To Pay For Reductions In The Risk Of Food Poisoning In The Uk," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1‐4), pages 403-420, January.
    14. Eric Giraud-Héraud & Cristina Grazia & Abdelhakim Hammoudi, 2012. "Explaining the Emergence of Private Standards in Food Supply Chains," Working Papers hal-00749345, HAL.
    15. Raymond J. G. M. Florax & Chiara M. Travisi & Peter Nijkamp, 2005. "A meta-analysis of the willingness to pay for reductions in pesticide risk exposure," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(4), pages 441-467, December.
    16. Rana, Jyoti & Paul, Justin, 2017. "Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food: A review and research agenda," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 157-165.
    17. Wier, Mette & O'Doherty Jensen, Katherine & Andersen, Laura Mørch & Millock, Katrin, 2008. "The character of demand in mature organic food markets: Great Britain and Denmark compared," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 406-421, October.
    18. Durham, Catherine A., 2007. "The Impact of Environmental and Health Motivations on the Organic Share of Produce Purchases," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-17, October.
    19. Gregory A. Baker & Peter J. Crosbie, 1994. "Consumer preferences for food safety attributes: A market segment approach," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 319-324.
    20. Armah, Paul W., 2001. "The Determinants Of Eco-Label Usage In The Organic Produce Market Of Northeast Arkansas," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20694, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

    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:rutdps:36740. 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/darutus.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.