IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/gewipr/261850.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Die Anreizwirkungen von Transparenzsystemen auf die Gesetzestreue der Lebensmittelunternehmen – Das Beispiel des Pankower Smiley

Author

Listed:
  • Fietz, A.V.
  • Grüner, S.
  • Bavarova, M.

Abstract

Das wiederholte Auftreten von Lebensmittelskandalen und lebensmittelbedingten Erkrankungen hat das Verbrauchervertrauen in die Lebensmittelsicherheit und die für die Überwachung zuständigen Behörden nachhaltig erschüttert. Vor diesem Hintergrund werden weltweit zunehmend Transparenzsysteme als innovative Form zur Verhaltenssteuerung der Unternehmer genutzt, um die Gesetzestreue zu erhöhen. Um beurteilen zu können, welche Regulierungsstrategien sich als effektiv erweisen können, ist ein umfassendes Verständnis der Determinanten die das Verhalten tatsächlich beeinflussen nötig. In dieser Arbeit untersuchen wir den Einfluss von materiellen und immateriellen Determinanten, im Kontext von verpflichtenden Transparenzsystemen im Lebensmittelbereich, auf unternehmerisches Entscheidungsverhalten. Eine solche Analyse ist gerade vor dem Hintergrund der aktuellen Diskussion um Transparenzsysteme in Deutschland von besonderer Bedeutung. Um die Wirkung der sog. „Smileysysteme“ bewerten zu können, haben wir eine empirische Untersuchung unter Lebensmittelunternehmen in Berlin Pankow, Lichtenberg und Marzahn-Hellersdorf durchgeführt, da dort ein deutschlandweit einmaliges Pilotprojekt, der verpflichtenden Veröffentlichungen der Ergebnisse der behördlichen Kontrollen, eingeführt wurde. Mit Hilfe eines Generalized Ordered Logit Modells wird der Einfluss der Verhaltensdeterminanten auf die Gesetzestreue (als abhängige Variable), in Abhängigkeit von der Art des Lebensmittelunternehmens (handelt es sich um Restaurants oder nicht), bestimmt. Wir finden wenige Determinanten die sich unabhängig von der Unternehmensart förderlich auf die Gesetzestreue der Unternehmer auswirken. Faktoren deren Wirkungen abhängig von der Art des Unternehmens variieren dominieren in unserem Modell. Nur eine Variable wirkt für alle Unternehmensgruppen und Unternehmer gleichartig in eine Richtung. In unserem Modell ist das Gefühl der Fairness/Angemessenheit des erhaltenen Smileys für alle Unternehmen ein positiv
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Fietz, A.V. & Grüner, S. & Bavarova, M., 2016. "Die Anreizwirkungen von Transparenzsystemen auf die Gesetzestreue der Lebensmittelunternehmen – Das Beispiel des Pankower Smiley," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 51, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:gewipr:261850
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.261850
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/261850/files/Bd51Nr02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/261850/files/Bd51Nr02.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.261850?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. Ernst Fehr & Alexander Klein & Klaus M. Schmidt, "undated". "Fairness, Incentives and Contractual Incompleteness," IEW - Working Papers 072, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    2. Richard Williams, 2010. "Fitting heterogeneous choice models with oglm," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 10(4), pages 540-567, December.
    3. Chen, Yongmin, 2000. "Promises, Trust, and Contracts," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 209-232, April.
    4. Ginger Zhe Jin & Phillip Leslie, 2003. "The Effect of Information on Product Quality: Evidence from Restaurant Hygiene Grade Cards," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(2), pages 409-451.
    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. repec:dgr:rugsom:04g06 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Jong, Gjalt de & Klein Woolthuis, Rosalinde, 2004. "The effects of trust on performance of high-tech business relationships," Research Report 04G06, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    3. Lazzarini, Sergio G., 2002. "Order With Some Law: Complementarity VS. Substitution of Formal and Informal Arrangements," Insper Working Papers wpe_24, Insper Working Paper, Insper Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa.
    4. Irlenbusch, Bernd, 2004. "Relying on a man's word?: An experimental study on non-binding contracts," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 299-332, September.
    5. Ginger Zhe Jin & Andrew Kato & John A. List, 2010. "That’S News To Me! Information Revelation In Professional Certification Markets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(1), pages 104-122, January.
    6. Villas-Boas, Sofia B, 2020. "Reduced Form Evidence on Belief Updating Under Asymmetric Information," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt08c456vk, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    7. Susan Feng Lu, 2012. "Multitasking, Information Disclosure, and Product Quality: Evidence from Nursing Homes," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 673-705, September.
    8. Tahir Andrabi & Jishnu Das & Asim Ijaz Khwaja, 2017. "Report Cards: The Impact of Providing School and Child Test Scores on Educational Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(6), pages 1535-1563, June.
    9. David W. Lehman & Balázs Kovács & Glenn R. Carroll, 2014. "Conflicting Social Codes and Organizations: Hygiene and Authenticity in Consumer Evaluations of Restaurants," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(10), pages 2602-2617, October.
    10. Felipe Arteaga & Adam J Kapor & Christopher A Neilson & Seth D Zimmerman, 2022. "Smart Matching Platforms and Heterogeneous Beliefs in Centralized School Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 137(3), pages 1791-1848.
    11. Hallstein, Eric & Villas-Boas, Sofia Berto, 2009. "Are Consumers Color Blind?: an empirical investigation of a traffic light advisory for sustainable seafood," CUDARE Working Papers 120535, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    12. Laurent Bouton, 2011. "Good rankings are bad - Why reliable rankings can hurt consumers," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2011-002, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    13. Rolf Uwe Fülbier & Thorsten Sellhorn, 2023. "Understanding and improving the language of business: How accounting and corporate reporting research can better serve business and society," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(6), pages 1089-1124, August.
    14. Dowling, Michael & O’Gorman, Colm & Puncheva, Petya & Vanwalleghem, Dieter, 2019. "Trust and SME attitudes towards equity financing across Europe," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 1-1.
    15. Seth Freedman & Melissa Kearney & Mara Lederman, 2012. "Product Recalls, Imperfect Information, and Spillover Effects: Lessons from the Consumer Response to the 2007 Toy Recalls," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(2), pages 499-516, May.
    16. Chen, Simiao & Jin, Zhangfeng & Bloom, David E., 2020. "Act Early to Prevent Infections and Save Lives: Causal Impact of Diagnostic Efficiency on the COVID-19 Pandemic," IZA Discussion Papers 13749, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Samuel Bazzi & Lisa Cameron & Simone Schaner & Firman Witoelar, 2021. "Information, Intermediaries, and International Migration," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2021n30, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    18. Wong, Woei Chyuan & Batten, Jonathan A. & Ahmad, Abd Halim & Mohamed-Arshad, Shamsul Bahrain & Nordin, Sabariah & Adzis, Azira Abdul, 2021. "Does ESG certification add firm value?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    19. Belay, Dagim G. & Jensen, Jørgen D., 2020. "‘The scarlet letters’: Information disclosure and self-regulation: Evidence from antibiotic use in Denmark," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    20. Kekezi, Orsa & Mellander, Charlotta, 2017. "Geography and Media – Does a Local Editorial Office Increase the Consumption of Local News?," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 447, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    21. Makofske, Matthew Philip, 2020. "Disclosure policies in inspection programs: The role of specific deterrence," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).

    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:gewipr:261850. 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/gewisea.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.