IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nim/nimawp/55-2014.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Origin or organoleptic characteristics of Pears: which is more valued in the market?

Author

Listed:
  • Anabela Botelho

    (Universidade do Minho, NIMA)

  • Isabel Dinis
  • Lina Sofia Lourenço-Gomes

    (University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro)

  • Jorge Moreira

    (CERNAS, Instituto Politécnico de Coimbra, Escola Superior Agrária de Coimbra)

  • Lígia Costa Pinto

    (Universidade do Minho, NIMA)

Abstract

Consumers’ decision when buying fruit and vegetables is determined by tangible and intangible attributes. In general, intangible attributes, such as the origin of the variety, are not perceived by consumers before or after purchase; thus, information on these characteristics of products must be provided. The origin of the variety is a particularly important intangible attribute in the case of fruit and vegetables. Its relevance is due to the role that traditional varieties may play in the conservation of biodiversity, and also in the local economy. In many instances, however, the higher production costs and lower profitability associated with traditional varieties discourage the continuation of this activity. Arguably, the farmers shall then be compensated by the market (through a price premium) to ensure the maintenance of local traditional varieties. The purpose of the present study is to enhance information about the relative importance of several attributes or characteristics of the product Pears, and to assess consumers’ willingness to pay for the specific attribute Origin of Variety, detecting and quantifying the potential existence of a price premium.

Suggested Citation

  • Anabela Botelho & Isabel Dinis & Lina Sofia Lourenço-Gomes & Jorge Moreira & Lígia Costa Pinto, 2014. "Origin or organoleptic characteristics of Pears: which is more valued in the market?," NIMA Working Papers 55, Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho.
  • Handle: RePEc:nim:nimawp:55/2014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www3.eeg.uminho.pt/publications/NIMAwp55.pdf
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: none
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marco Costanigro & Dawn Thilmany McFadden & Stephan Kroll & Gretchen Nurse, 2011. "An in‐store valuation of local and organic apples: the role of social desirability," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(4), pages 465-477, September.
    2. Jean Philippe Perrouty & François d'Hauteville & Larry Lockshin, 2006. "The influence of wine attributes on region of origin equity: An analysis of the moderating effect of consumer's perceived expertise," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(3), pages 323-341.
    3. Adalja, Aaron & Hanson, James & Towe, Charles & Tselepidakis, Elina, 2015. "An Examination of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Local Products," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 253-274, December.
    4. Ulrich Enneking, 2004. "Willingness-to-pay for safety improvements in the German meat sector: the case of the Q&S label," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 31(2), pages 205-223, June.
    5. Nelson, Phillip, 1970. "Information and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(2), pages 311-329, March-Apr.
    6. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    7. Combris, Pierre & Pinto, Alexandra Seabra & Fragata, Antonio & Giraud-Heraud, Eric, 2007. "Does taste beat food safety? Evidence from the "Pera Rocha" case in Portugal," 105th Seminar, March 8-10, 2007, Bologna, Italy 7879, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Mara Thiene & Riccardo Scarpa & Luigi Galletto & Vasco Boatto, 2013. "Sparkling wine choice from supermarket shelves: the impact of certification of origin and production practices," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(4-5), pages 523-536, July.
    9. Maria Luz Loureiro & Jill J. McCluskey, 2000. "Assessing consumer response to protected geographical identification labeling," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(3), pages 309-320.
    10. 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.
    11. Jason A. Winfree & Jill J. McCluskey, 2005. "Collective Reputation and Quality," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(1), pages 206-213.
    12. Nelson, Philip, 1974. "Advertising as Information," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(4), pages 729-754, July/Aug..
    13. Editors The, 2007. "From the Editors," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-5, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    2. Trestini, Samuele & Giampietri, Elisa & Szathvary, Serena & Dal Bianco, Andrea, 2018. "Insights on the Alleged Imitation of Prosecco Wine Name: The Case of the German Market," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 9(4), August.
    3. Pecchioli, Bruno & Moroz, David, 2023. "Do geographical appellations provide useful quality signals? The case of Scotch single malt whiskies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    4. Sporleder, Eva M. & Kayser, Maike & Friedrich, Nina & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2014. "Consumer Preferences for Sustainably Produced Bananas: A Discrete Choice Experiment," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 17(1), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Linhai Wu & Xiaoru Gong & Shasha Qin & Xiujuan Chen & Dian Zhu & Wuyang Hu & Qingguang Li, 2017. "Consumer preferences for pork attributes related to traceability, information certification, and origin labeling: Based on China's Jiangsu Province," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(3), pages 424-442, June.
    6. Alessandro Bonanno & Carlo Russo & Luisa Menapace, 2018. "Market power and bargaining in agrifood markets: A review of emerging topics and tools," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(1), pages 6-23, December.
    7. J. K. Pappalardo, 2022. "Economics of Consumer Protection: Contributions and Challenges in Estimating Consumer Injury and Evaluating Consumer Protection Policy," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 201-238, June.
    8. Dhaval M. Dave, 2013. "Effects of Pharmaceutical Promotion: A Review and Assessment," NBER Working Papers 18830, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Marco Costanigro & Yuko Onozaka, 2020. "A Belief‐Preference Model of Choice for Experience and Credence Goods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 70-95, February.
    10. Charity, Nabwire Ephamia Juma, 2016. "Economic Analysis Of Consumers’ Awareness And Willingness To Pay For Geographical Indicators And Other Quality Attributes Of Honey In Kenya," Research Theses 265574, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    11. Sharon Horsky, 2006. "The Changing Architecture of Advertising Agencies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 367-383, 07-08.
    12. Olivier Gergaud & Florine Livat, 2004. "Team versus individual reputations: a model of interaction and some empirical evidence," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques bla04015, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    13. Michael Hutter, 2011. "Experience Goods," Chapters, in: Ruth Towse (ed.), A Handbook of Cultural Economics, Second Edition, chapter 29, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Keisuke Hattori & Keisaku Higashida, 2012. "Misleading advertising in duopoly," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 45(3), pages 1154-1187, August.
    15. Robert B. Ekelund & Mark Thornton, 2019. "Extreme Credence and Imaginary Goods," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 47(3), pages 361-371, September.
    16. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Panagiotis Lazaridis & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2009. "Would consumers value food-away-from-home products with nutritional labels?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 550-575.
    17. Ehmke, Mariah Dolsen & Bonanno, Alessandro & Boys, Kathryn & Smith, Trenton G., 2019. "Food fraud: economic insights into the dark side of incentives," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(4), October.
    18. Verbeke, Wim & Ward, Ronald W., 2003. "Importance of EU Label Requirements: An Application of Ordered Probit Models to Belgium Beef Labels," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22077, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Jie Wu & Zefu Wu & Kathryn Rudie Harrigan, 2019. "Process quality management and technological innovation revisited: a contingency perspective from an emerging market," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1871-1890, December.
    20. Shalom Levy & Israel Nebenzahl, 2008. "The influence of product involvement on consumers’ interactive processes in interactive television," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 65-77, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Valuation methods; Agro-food economics; BDM-mechanism; Hypothetical bias;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
    • Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General
    • Q20 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - General
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General

    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:nim:nimawp:55/2014. 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: NIMA (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://nima.eeg.uminho.pt/ .

    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.