IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/jlaare/393800.html

Heterogeneous Effects of Proposition 12 on Californian Consumer Welfare

Author

Listed:
  • Bina, Justin
  • Tonsor, Glynn T.
  • Lusk, Jayson L.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Bina, Justin & Tonsor, Glynn T. & Lusk, Jayson L., 2026. "Heterogeneous Effects of Proposition 12 on Californian Consumer Welfare," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 0(Preprint), August.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:jlaare:393800
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.393800
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/393800/files/Bina_preprint.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.393800?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jayson L. Lusk, 2017. "Consumer Research with Big Data: Applications from the Food Demand Survey (FooDS)," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(2), pages 303-320.
    2. Hanbin Lee & Richard J. Sexton & Daniel A. Sumner, 2023. "National and subnational regulation of farm practices for consumer products sold within a jurisdiction: California's Proposition 12," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(6), pages 838-853, November.
    3. Paul, Andrew S. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Norwood, F. Bailey & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2019. "An experiment on the vote-buy gap with application to cage-free eggs," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 102-109.
    4. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    5. Hamilton, Stephen F. & Sunding, David L. & Zilberman, David, 2003. "Public goods and the value of product quality regulations: the case of food safety," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(3-4), pages 799-817, March.
    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. Van Loo, Ellen J. & Caputo, Vincenzina & Lusk, Jayson L., 2020. "Consumer preferences for farm-raised meat, lab-grown meat, and plant-based meat alternatives: Does information or brand matter?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    2. Justin D. Bina, 2026. "Effects of Aerobic and Strength‐Based Exercise on Consumer Preference for Protein," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 57(1), January.
    3. Jayson Lusk & Tomas Nilsson & Ken Foster, 2007. "Public Preferences and Private Choices: Effect of Altruism and Free Riding on Demand for Environmentally Certified Pork," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(4), pages 499-521, April.
    4. Tonsor, Glynn T. & Olynk, Nicole & Wolf, Christopher, 2009. "Consumer Preferences for Animal Welfare Attributes: The Case of Gestation Crates," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 713-730, December.
    5. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Frykblom & Carl-Johan Lagerkvist, 2004. "Consumer Benefits of Labels and Bans on GMO Foods: An Emprical Analysis Using Choice Experiments," Working Papers 04-02, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    6. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Lagerkvist, Carl Johan, 2007. "Farm Animal Welfare—Testing for Market Failure," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 61-73, April.
    7. Balcombe, Kelvin & Chalak, Ali & Fraser, Iain, 2009. "Model selection for the mixed logit with Bayesian estimation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 226-237, March.
    8. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Lagerkvist, Carl Johan, 2004. "Consumer benefits of labels and bans on genetically modified food - An empirical analysis using Choice Experiments," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20370, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    9. Elliott J. Dennis & Glynn T. Tonsor & Jayson L. Lusk, 2021. "Choosing quantities impacts individuals choice, rationality, and willingness to pay estimates," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(6), pages 945-962, November.
    10. Lauren Chenarides & Carola Grebitus & Jayson L Lusk & Iryna Printezis, 2022. "A calibrated choice experiment method," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(5), pages 971-1004.
    11. Albert Boaitey, 2024. "Farm animal welfare regulatory preferences and food choice: survey evidence from the US," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 12(1), pages 1-23, December.
    12. Justin D. Bina, 2026. "Beyond Metropolitan Averages: Food Demand Across Local Markets," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 57(4), July.
    13. Jill Fitzsimmons & Hikaru Hanawa Peterson & Nathalie Lavoie, 2026. "Farmers' pro‐social motivations and willingness‐to‐accept in markets with public goods," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 108(3), pages 799-828, May.
    14. Dan Yavorsky & Elisabeth Honka & Keith Chen, 2021. "Consumer search in the U.S. auto industry: The role of dealership visits," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 1-52, March.
    15. Laser, Falk & Hellwig, Michael, 2019. "Agony of Choice – Trading off Stability and Competition in the Banking Markets," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203536, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    16. Cheng, Leilei & Yin, Changbin & Chien, Hsiaoping, 2015. "Demand for milk quantity and safety in urban China: evidence from Beijing and Harbin," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(2), April.
    17. Sebastian Heidenreich & Andrea Phillips-Beyer & Bruno Flamion & Melissa Ross & Jaein Seo & Kevin Marsh, 2021. "Benefit–Risk or Risk–Benefit Trade-Offs? Another Look at Attribute Ordering Effects in a Pilot Choice Experiment," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 14(1), pages 65-74, January.
    18. Juan Carlos Suárez Serrato & Owen Zidar, 2016. "Who Benefits from State Corporate Tax Cuts? A Local Labor Markets Approach with Heterogeneous Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(9), pages 2582-2624, September.
    19. Wen, Chieh-Hua & Huang, Chia-Jung & Fu, Chiang, 2020. "Incorporating continuous representation of preferences for flight departure times into stated itinerary choice modeling," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 10-20.
    20. Frith, Michael J., 2019. "Modelling taste heterogeneity regarding offence location choices," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 33(C).

    More about this item

    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:jlaare:393800. 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/waeaaea.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.