IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/joaaec/43712.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Consumer Preferences for Country-of-Origin Labeling

Author

Listed:
  • Loureiro, Maria L.
  • Umberger, Wendy J.

Abstract

In this paper, we assess consumer willingness to pay for a mandatory country-of-origin labeling (COOL) program applied to beef ribeye steaks, chicken breasts, and pork chops, all labeled as “Certified U.S.†products. A consumer survey was mailed in spring and early summer 2003 to households in the continental United States. Results indicate that consumers are in general very concerned about food safety issues, viewing U.S. meats as the safest among the selection of countries considered. Nevertheless, consumer willingness to pay for Certified U.S. products is relatively small, although above the expected implementation costs associated with a mandatory labeling program. This finding coincides with the fact that only 36% of the sample favored consumers paying directly for the costs related to a mandatory COOL program.

Suggested Citation

  • Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2005. "Assessing Consumer Preferences for Country-of-Origin Labeling," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(01), April.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:joaaec:43712
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/43712
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2003. "Estimating Consumer Willingness to Pay for Country-of-Origin Labeling," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(02), August.
    3. Jayson L. Lusk, 2003. "Effects of Cheap Talk on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Golden Rice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 840-856.
    4. Timothy C. Haab & Ju-Chin Huang & John C. Whitehead, 1999. "Are Hypothetical Referenda Incentive Compatible? A Comment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(1), pages 186-196, February.
    5. John Loomis, 1993. "An investigation into the reliability of intended visitation behavior," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 3(2), pages 183-191, April.
    6. Kwamena K. Quagrainie & James Unterschultz & Michele Veeman, 1998. "Effects of Product Origin and Selected Demographics on Consumer Choice of Red Meats," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 46(2), pages 201-219, July.
    7. John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
    8. Jutta Roosen & Jayson L. Lusk & John A. Fox, 2003. "Consumer demand for and attitudes toward alternative beef labeling strategies in France, Germany, and the UK," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(1), pages 77-90.
    9. Cummings, Ronald G, et al, 1997. "Are Hypothetical Referenda Incentive Compatible?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(3), pages 609-621, June.
    10. Plain, Ronald L. & Grimes, Glenn, 2003. "Benefits Of Cool To The Cattle Industry," Working Papers 26048, University of Missouri Columbia, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    beef; consumer preferences; country-of-origin labeling; dichotomous choice; willingness to pay; Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety; Food Security and Poverty; D12; Q13;

    JEL classification:

    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness

    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:joaaec:43712. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/saeaaea.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.