Economics Of Food Labeling
AbstractFederal intervention in food labeling is often proposed with the aim of achieving a social goal such as improving human health and safety, mitigating environmental hazards, averting international trade disputes, or supporting domestic agricultural and food manufacturing industries. Economic theory suggests, however, that mandatory food-labeling requirements are best suited to alleviating problems of asymmetric information and are rarely effective in redressing environmental or other spillovers associated with food production and consumption. Theory also suggests that the appropriate role for government in labeling depends on the type of information involved and the level and distribution of the costs and benefits of providing that information. This report traces the economic theory behind food labeling and presents three case studies in which the government has intervened in labeling and two examples in which government intervention has been proposed.
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 United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service in its series Agricultural Economics Reports with number 34069.
Date of creation: 2000
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 1400 Independence Ave.,SW, Mail Stop 1800, Washington, DC 20250-1800
Web page: http://www.ers.usda.gov/
More information through EDIRC
labeling; information policy; Nutrition Labeling and Education Act; dolphin-safe tuna; national organic standards; country-of-origin labels; biotech food labeling; Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety;
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.:
- Elitzak, Howard, 1999. "Food Cost Review, 1950-97," Agricultural Economics Reports 34053, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
- Ippolito, Pauline M & Mathios, Alan D, 1995. "Information and Advertising: The Case of Fat Consumption in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(2), pages 91-95, May.
- Pauline M. Ippolito & Alan D. Mathios, 1990. "Information, Advertising and Health Choices: A Study of the Cereal Market," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(3), pages 459-480, Autumn.
- Eliza M. Mojduszka & Julie A. Caswell, 2000. "A Test of Nutritional Quality Signaling in Food Markets Prior to Implementation of Mandatory Labeling," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 298-309.
- Moschini, GianCarlo & Lapan, Harvey E. & Sobolevsky, Andrei, 2000.
"Roundup Ready Soybeans and Welfare Effects in the Soybean Complex,"
Staff General Research Papers
1799, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan & Andrei Sobolevsky, 2000. "Roundup ready� soybeans and welfare effects in the soybean complex," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 33-55.
- Salop, Steven, 1976. "Information and Monopolistic Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 240-45, May.
- Wesley A. Magat & W. Kip Viscusi, 1992. "Informational Approaches to Regulation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026213277x, January.
- Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
- Gary D. Thompson & Julia Kidwell, 1998. "Explaining the Choice of Organic Produce: Cosmetic Defects, Prices, and Consumer Preferences," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(2), pages 277-287.
- 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.
- Nelson, Phillip, 1970. "Information and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(2), pages 311-29, March-Apr.
- Gordon Tullock, 1975. "The Transitional Gains Trap," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 6(2), pages 671-678, Autumn.
- Steve Salop, 1976. "Information and monopolistic competition," Special Studies Papers 74, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
- Dobbs, Thomas L., 1998. "Price Premiums for Organic Crops," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 13(2).
- Variyam, Jayachandran N. & Blaylock, James & Smallwood, David, 1995. "Modeling Nutrient Intake: The Role of Dietary Information," Technical Bulletins 156772, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
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.