IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/arerjl/59249.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuations of ‘Sustainably Produced’ Labels on Beef, Tomato, and Apple Products

Author

Listed:
  • Tonsor, Glynn T.
  • Shupp, Robert S.

Abstract

This study evaluates consumer perceptions of what “sustainably produced” food labels imply and estimates corresponding demand for products carrying these labels. Results suggest that the typical U.S. consumer is not willing to pay a positive premium for beef, tomatoes, or apple products labeled as “sustainably produced.” Demand is particularly sensitive to inferences consumers make regarding what a “sustainably produced” food label implies. Suggestions for future work and implications of standardizing the definition of sustainability are provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Tonsor, Glynn T. & Shupp, Robert S., 2009. "Valuations of ‘Sustainably Produced’ Labels on Beef, Tomato, and Apple Products," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:arerjl:59249
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.59249
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/59249/files/ARER%2038-3%20371-383%20Tonsor.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.59249?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marta-Pedroso, Cristina & Freitas, Helena & Domingos, Tiago, 2007. "Testing for the survey mode effect on contingent valuation data quality: A case study of web based versus in-person interviews," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 388-398, May.
    2. Johnson, Richard D & Levin, Irwin P, 1985. "More than Meets the Eye: The Effect of Missing Information on Purchase Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 12(2), pages 169-177, September.
    3. Kaiser, Harry M. & Scherer, Clifford W. & Barbano, David M., 1992. "Consumer Perceptions And Attitudes Towards Bovine Somatotropin," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 21(01), pages 1-11, April.
    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. White, Robin R. & Brady, Michael, 2014. "Can consumers’ willingness to pay incentivize adoption of environmental impact reducing technologies in meat animal production?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 41-49.
    2. Tonsor, Glynn T. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2011. "On mandatory labeling of animal welfare attributes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 430-437, June.
    3. Aluisio Goulart Silva & Maurizio Canavari & Alcido Elenor Wander, 2018. "Consumer preferences and willingness-to-pay for integrated production label on common beans," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 20(1), pages 11-28.
    4. Deely, John & Hynes, Stephen & Barquín, José & Burgess, Diane & Álvarez-Martínez, Jose Manuel & Silió, Ana & Finney, Graham, 2022. "Are consumers willing to pay for beef that has been produced without the use of uncontrolled burning methods? A contingent valuation study in North-West Spain," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 577-590.
    5. Sackett, Hillary M. & Shupp, Robert S. & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2012. "Discrete Choice Modeling of Consumer Preferences for Sustainably Produced Steak and Apples," 2012 AAEA/EAAE Food Environment Symposium 123517, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Wen Lin, 2023. "The effect of product quantity on willingness to pay: A meta‐regression analysis of beef valuation studies," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(3), pages 646-663, July.
    7. White, Robin R. & Brady, Michael & Capper, Judith L. & Johnson, Kristen A., 2014. "Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 1-12.
    8. Chengyan Yue & Ben Campbell & Charles Hall & Bridget Behe & Jennifer Dennis & Hayk Khachatryan, 2016. "Consumer Preference for Sustainable Attributes in Plants: Evidence from Experimental Auctions," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 222-235, April.
    9. Leach, Allison M. & Emery, Kyle A. & Gephart, Jessica & Davis, Kyle F. & Erisman, Jan Willem & Leip, Adrian & Pace, Michael L. & D’Odorico, Paolo & Carr, Joel & Noll, Laura Cattell & Castner, Elizabet, 2016. "Environmental impact food labels combining carbon, nitrogen, and water footprints," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 213-223.
    10. Tait, Dr Peter & Saunders, Prof Caroline & Guenther, Meike & Rutherford, Paul, 2013. "Valuing environmental sustainability attributes of food products in India and China: decomposing the value of New Zealand’s ‘Clean-Green’ brand," 2013 Conference, August 28-30, 2013, Christchurch, New Zealand 187036, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    11. Sackett, Hillary M., 2011. "Consumer Perceptions of Sustainable Farming Practices: A Best-Worst Scenario," Graduate Research Master's Degree Plan B Papers 115966, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    12. Sackett, Hillary & Shupp, Robert & Tonsor, Glynn, 2016. "Differentiating “Sustainable” From “Organic” And “Local” Food Choices: Does Information About Certification Criteria Help Consumers?," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 4(3), pages 1-15, July.
    13. De Salvo, Maria & Scarpa, Riccardo & Capitello, Roberta & Begalli, Diego, 2020. "Multi-country stated preferences choice analysis for fresh tomatoes," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 9(3), December.

    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. Caswell, Margriet F. & Fuglie, Keith O. & Klotz, Cassandra A., 1994. "Agricultural Biotechnology: An Economic Perspective," Agricultural Economic Reports 262025, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Zawojska, Ewa & Czajkowski, Mikotaj, 2017. "Are preferences stated in web vs. personal interviews different? A comparison of willingness to pay results for a large multi-country study of the Baltic Sea eutrophication reduction," Annual Meeting, 2017, June 18-21, Montreal, Canada 258604, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society.
    3. Zhifeng Gao & Lisa A. House & Jing Xie, 2016. "Online Survey Data Quality and Its Implication for Willingness-to-Pay: A Cross-Country Comparison," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(2), pages 199-221, June.
    4. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2011. "Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Comparison of Survey Modes," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(4), pages 309-351, September.
    5. Penn, Jerrod & Hu, Wuyang, 2016. "Making the Most of Cheap Talk in an Online Survey," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236171, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Susaeta, Andres & Lal, Pankaj & Alavalapati, Janaki & Mercer, Evan, 2011. "Random preferences towards bioenergy environmental externalities: A case study of woody biomass based electricity in the Southern United States," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1111-1118.
    7. Ting Li & Robert J. Kauffman & Eric van Heck & Peter Vervest & Benedict G. C. Dellaert, 2014. "Consumer Informedness and Firm Information Strategy," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 345-363, June.
    8. Carol Kaufman-Scarborough, 2019. "Publicly-Researchable Accessibility Information: Problems, Prospects and Recommendations for Inclusion," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(1), pages 164-172.
    9. Jura Liaukonyte & Nadia A. Streletskaya & Harry M. Kaiser, 2015. "The Long-Term Impact of Positive and Negative Information on Food Demand," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 63(4), pages 539-562, December.
    10. Kevin J. Boyle & Mark Morrison & Darla Hatton MacDonald & Roderick Duncan & John Rose, 2016. "Investigating Internet and Mail Implementation of Stated-Preference Surveys While Controlling for Differences in Sample Frames," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(3), pages 401-419, July.
    11. Chiu, Leslie J. Verteramo & Tauer, Loren W. & Smith, Rebecca L. & Grohn, Yrjo T., 2020. "Economic Effects of a Potential Foodborne Disease: Potential Relationship between Mycobacterium Avium Subs. Paratuberculosis (MAP) in Dairy and Crohn’s in Humans," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 11(05), December.
    12. Aguilar, Francisco X. & Cai, Zhen, 2010. "Conjoint effect of environmental labeling, disclosure of forest of origin and price on consumer preferences for wood products in the US and UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 308-316, December.
    13. I. Bateman & R. Brouwer & S. Ferrini & M. Schaafsma & D. Barton & A. Dubgaard & B. Hasler & S. Hime & I. Liekens & S. Navrud & L. De Nocker & R. Ščeponavičiūtė & D. Semėnienė, 2011. "Making Benefit Transfers Work: Deriving and Testing Principles for Value Transfers for Similar and Dissimilar Sites Using a Case Study of the Non-Market Benefits of Water Quality Improvements Across E," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(3), pages 365-387, November.
    14. Kaiser, Harry M., 1992. "Market Impacts Of Bovine Somatropin: A Supply And Demand Analysis," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(01), pages 1-12, July.
    15. Mozumder, Pallab & Vásquez, William F. & Marathe, Achla, 2011. "Consumers' preference for renewable energy in the southwest USA," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1119-1126.
    16. Bernard, Daria J. & Mathios, Alan D., 2005. "Factors Affecting Consumer Choice and Willingness to Pay for Milk Attributes," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19366, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    17. Mota, Rui Pedro & Domingos, Tiago & Martins, Victor, 2008. "Analysis of green net national product and genuine saving in Portugal, 1991 - 2005," MPRA Paper 13347, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Meise, Jan Niklas & Rudolph, Thomas & Kenning, Peter & Phillips, Diane M., 2014. "Feed them facts: Value perceptions and consumer use of sustainability-related product information," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 510-519.
    19. Jamil Paolo S. Francisco, 2011. "Are Metro Manila Households Willing to Pay for Cleaner Public Transport?," EEPSEA Research Report rr2011011, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Jan 2011.
    20. Wang, Fude & Boisvert, Richard N. & Kaiser, Harry, 1992. "U.S. Dairy Policy Alternatives Under Bovine Somatotropin," Staff Papers 197594, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Marketing;

    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:arerjl:59249. 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/nareaea.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.