IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/agecon/v56y2025i6p961-975.html

Consumer Preferences Toward Local Versus Carbon: A Study of Value‐Added Dairy Products

Author

Listed:
  • Azita Varziri
  • Shuoli Zhao
  • Timothy A. Woods
  • Favour Esene

Abstract

The growing emphasis on local sourcing and sustainability is reshaping consumer preferences in the food industry. This study investigates how consumers evaluate value‐added dairy products by examining the interplay between local branding and environmental impact. Using a mixed logit model and segmentation analysis, we explore consumer responses to various local labels, including “Kentucky Proud,” “Made with Kentucky Milk,” and “Produced within 100 miles,” as well as carbon footprint metrics. Our findings reveal a strong preference for state‐affiliated labels like “Kentucky Proud” over geographic proximity labels, potentially pointing to the influence of state boundaries on consumer decision‐making. Furthermore, we identify six distinct consumer segments, each characterized by unique priorities regarding local identity and environmental sustainability. These insights provide practical strategies for marketers to promote locally produced, environmentally friendly dairy products, emphasizing the need for integrated labeling approaches that resonate with diverse consumer priorities.

Suggested Citation

  • Azita Varziri & Shuoli Zhao & Timothy A. Woods & Favour Esene, 2025. "Consumer Preferences Toward Local Versus Carbon: A Study of Value‐Added Dairy Products," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 56(6), pages 961-975, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:agecon:v:56:y:2025:i:6:p:961-975
    DOI: 10.1111/agec.70044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.70044
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/agec.70044?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. Stavros Afionis & Marco Sakai & Kate Scott & John Barrett & Andy Gouldson, 2017. "Consumption‐based carbon accounting: does it have a future?," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), January.
    2. Julius Wenzig & Tim Gruchmann, 2018. "Consumer Preferences for Local Food: Testing an Extended Norm Taxonomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-23, April.
    3. Martinez, Steve & Hand, Michael & Da Pra, Michelle & Pollack, Susan & Ralston, Katherine & Smith, Travis & Vogel, Stephen & Clarke, Shellye & Lohr, Luanne & Low, Sarah & Newman, Constance, 2010. "Local food systems: concepts, impacts, and issues," MPRA Paper 24313, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Adam Drucker, 2007. "Measuring Heterogeneous Preferences for Cattle Traits among Cattle-Keeping Households in East Africa," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(4), pages 1005-1019.
    5. von Haefen, Roger H. & Domanski, Adam, 2018. "Estimation and welfare analysis from mixed logit models with large choice sets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 101-118.
    6. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    7. Duke, Joshua M. & Bernard, John C. & Vitz, Gregory, 2021. "A new food label to aid farmland preservation programs: Evidence from a field experiment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    8. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    9. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, Enero-Abr.
    10. Maria Cecilia Mancini & Davide Menozzi & Michele Donati & Beatrice Biasini & Mario Veneziani & Filippo Arfini, 2019. "Producers’ and Consumers’ Perception of the Sustainability of Short Food Supply Chains: The Case of Parmigiano Reggiano PDO," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, January.
    11. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    12. Kar H. Lim & Wuyang Hu, 2016. "How Local Is Local? A Reflection on Canadian Local Food Labeling Policy from Consumer Preference," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(1), pages 71-88, March.
    13. Onozaka, Yuko & Nurse, Gretchen & Thilmany, Dawn D., 2010. "Local Food Consumers: How Motivations and Perceptions Translate to Buying Behavior," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(01), pages 1-6.
    14. repec:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:3b:p:981-992 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Riccardo Scarpa & John M. Rose, 2008. "Design efficiency for non-market valuation with choice modelling: how to measure it, what to report and why ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(3), pages 253-282, September.
    16. Azucena Gracia, 2014. "Consumers’ preferences for a local food product: a real choice experiment," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 111-128, August.
    17. Grebowiec Mariusz, 2021. "Consumer Determinants of Purchasing Decisions on the Dairy Products Market," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3 - Part ), pages 981-992.
    18. Davidson, Kelly A. & Khanal, Badri & Messer, Kent D., 2024. "Are consumers no longer willing to pay more for local foods? A field experiment," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(1), pages 45-65, April.
    19. Lucie L. Sirieix & Marion M. Delanchy & Hervé H. Remaud & Lydia L. Zepeda & Patricia P. Gurviez, 2013. "Consumers' perceptions of individual and combined sustainable food labels: a UK pilot investigation," Post-Print hal-01000413, HAL.
    20. Laura O. Taylor & Ronald G. Cummings, 1999. "Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 649-665, June.
    21. Nick Hanley & Susana Mourato & Robert E. Wright, 2001. "Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuatioin?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    22. Hamparsum Bozdogan, 1987. "Model selection and Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC): The general theory and its analytical extensions," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 345-370, September.
    23. Agata Nicolosi & Valentina Rosa Laganà & Daniel Laven & Claudio Marcianò & Wilhelm Skoglund, 2019. "Consumer Habits of Local Food: Perspectives from Northern Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-25, November.
    24. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    25. Zepeda, Lydia & Leviten-Reid, Catherine, 2004. "Consumers' Views on Local Food," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 35(3), pages 1-6, November.
    26. Ildikó Kovács & Marietta Balázsné Lendvai & Judit Beke, 2022. "The Importance of Food Attributes and Motivational Factors for Purchasing Local Food Products: Segmentation of Young Local Food Consumers in Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-14, 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. Richartz, P. Christoph & Abdulai, Awudu & Kornher, Lukas, . "Attribute Non Attendance and Consumer Preferences for Online Food Products in Germany," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(01).
    2. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    3. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    4. Houessionon, P. & Fonta, W. M. & Bossa, A. Y. & Sanfo, S. & Thiombiano, N. & Zahonogo, P. & Yameogo, T. B. & Balana, Bedru, "undated". "Economic valuation of ecosystem services from small-scale agricultural management interventions in Burkina Faso: a discrete choice experiment approach," Papers published in Journals (Open Access) H048370, International Water Management Institute.
    5. Faustin, Vidogbèna & Adégbidi, Anselme A. & Garnett, Stephen T. & Koudandé, Delphin O. & Agbo, Valentin & Zander, Kerstin K., 2010. "Peace, health or fortune?: Preferences for chicken traits in rural Benin," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1848-1857, July.
    6. Eric Ruto & Riccardo Scarpa, 2010. "Using Choice Experiments to Investigate Preferences for Cattle Traits in Kenya," Chapters, in: Jeff Bennett & Ekin Birol (ed.), Choice Experiments in Developing Countries, chapter 14, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Prosper Houessionon & William M. Fonta & Aymar Y. Bossa & Safiétou Sanfo & Noel Thiombiano & Pam Zahonogo & Thomas B. Yameogo & Bedru Balana, 2017. "Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Services from Small-Scale Agricultural Management Interventions in Burkina Faso: A Discrete Choice Experiment Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-16, September.
    8. Liu, Ruifeng & ,, 2021. "What We Can Learn from the Interactions of Food Traceable Attributes? a Case Study of Fuji Apple in China," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315916, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Kevin W. Maina & Martin C. Parlasca & Elizaphan J. O. Rao & Matin Qaim, 2024. "Farmer‐friendly delivery of veterinary services: Experimental insights from the Kenyan dairy sector," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(3), pages 829-846, September.
    10. Novikova, Anastasija & Rocchi, Lucia & Vitunskienė, Vlada, 2017. "Assessing the benefit of the agroecosystem services: Lithuanian preferences using a latent class approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 277-286.
    11. Jae Eun You & Jong Woo Choi, 2022. "An analysis of food culture and technology acceptance for youth: Using a choice experiment and a latent class model," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(2), pages 510-522, March.
    12. Oyakhilomen Oyinbo & Jordan Chamberlin & Miet Maertens, 2020. "Design of Digital Agricultural Extension Tools: Perspectives from Extension Agents in Nigeria," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 798-815, September.
    13. George E. Halkos & Panagiotis‐Stavros C. Aslanidis, 2026. "The Socio‐Cultural and Spiritual Dimensions on Non‐Marketed Environmental Valuation," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(S1), pages 407-426, January.
    14. Julia Blasch & Robert W. Turner, 2016. "Environmental art, prior knowledge about climate change, and carbon offsets," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 6(4), pages 691-705, December.
    15. Wang, Shuxian & Wu, Linhai & Zhu, Dian & Wang, Hongsha & Xu, Lingling, 2014. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food attributes: The case of pork," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 165639, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Ching-Hua Yeh & Monika Hartmann, 2021. "To Purchase or Not to Purchase? Drivers of Consumers’ Preferences for Animal Welfare in Their Meat Choice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-25, August.
    17. Kermagoret, Charlène & Levrel, Harold & Carlier, Antoine & Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne, 2016. "Individual preferences regarding environmental offset and welfare compensation: a choice experiment application to an offshore wind farm project," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 230-240.
    18. Venus, Terese E. & Sauer, Johannes, 2022. "Certainty pays off: The public's value of environmental monitoring," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    19. Wu, Linhai & Wang, Shuxian & Zhu, Dian & Hu, Wuyang & Wang, Hongsha, 2015. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food quality and safety attributes: The case of pork," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 121-136.
    20. Japelj, Anže & Mavsar, Robert & Hodges, Donald & Kovač, Marko & Juvančič, Luka, 2016. "Latent preferences of residents regarding an urban forest recreation setting in Ljubljana, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 71-79.

    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:bla:agecon:v:56:y:2025:i:6:p:961-975. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.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.