IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/gewipr/261851.html

How Fragile Is The Credibility of a Quality Label? A Quasi-Natural Experiment Using the Example of Stiftung Warentest

Author

Listed:
  • Hildenbrand, A.
  • Kühl, R.
  • Piper, A.

Abstract

In 2013, Stiftung Warentest tested hazelnut chocolate for their leading magazine, called Test. Stiftung Warentest is one of the most important consumer organizations in Germany. Ritter Sport is a high-quality producer of chocolate in Germany. Their hazelnut chocolate did not pass the test. It was given the grade of unsatisfactory. Stiftung Warentest accused Ritter Sport of labeling an artificial flavoring as a natural flavoring. Ritter Sport rejected the accusation. They went to court and won the trial. Using the Ritter Sport versus Stiftung Warentest case, we analyze whether negative headlines really undermine the credibility of a quality label by examining Stiftung Warentest and their Test label. In addition, we examine what can be done to restore or, more generally, increase the credibility of a quality label. Based on a quasi-natural experiment, we find that the negative headlines on Stiftung Warentest have undermined the credibility of the Test label. We also find that the credibility of the Test label can be restored by providing reference values to the tests, strengthening the independence of Stiftung Warentest, and using laboratory methods in the tests.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Hildenbrand, A. & Kühl, R. & Piper, A., . "How Fragile Is The Credibility of a Quality Label? A Quasi-Natural Experiment Using the Example of Stiftung Warentest," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 51.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:gewipr:261851
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.261851
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/261851/files/Bd51Nr03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/261851/files/Bd51Nr03.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.261851?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:

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:gewipr:261851. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.