IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/agrerw/v36y2007i02p304-320_00.html

The Impact of Environmental and Health Motivations on the Organic Share of Produce Purchases

Author

Listed:
  • Durham, Catherine A.

Abstract

As demand and supply of organic produce has increased, it has become possible to distinguish between the many individuals that express a preference for organic and the share of their purchases that is organically produced. This study examines the share of a consumer's produce purchases that are organic, and how that is influenced by economic factors, environmental and health motivations, and demographic characteristics. Results from a model of organic preference are compared to those from a model of organic buying proportions. Buying proportion models are also estimated separately for those that preferred organic and those that preferred conventional produce. A limitation in this study is that it evaluates stated buying proportions rather than actual purchases.

Suggested Citation

  • Durham, Catherine A., 2007. "The Impact of Environmental and Health Motivations on the Organic Share of Produce Purchases," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 304-320, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:agrerw:v:36:y:2007:i:02:p:304-320_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1068280500007115/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paragahawewa, Upananda Herath, 2009. "To fence or not to fence: A partial probit analysis," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51026, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Eline Poelmans & Sandra Rousseau, 2017. "Beer and Organic Labels: Do Belgian Consumers Care?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-15, August.
    3. Bergès, Fabian & Monier-Dilhan, Sylvette, 2013. "Do consumers buy organic food for sustainability or selfish reasons?," TSE Working Papers 13-372, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Aug 2013.
    4. Erdenetsetseg, Erdenechimeg & Purevjal, Tserendavaa & Gompil, Battur & Odgerel, Batnyam & Tsogtsaikhan, Мunkhtulga & Jargalsaikhan, Munkhdelger, 2020. "Statistical and multi-criteria decision making analysis for consumer attitude and behavior: in case of the Mongolian organic food market," APSTRACT: Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, AGRIMBA, vol. 14(3-4), December.
    5. Jing Xie & Zhifeng Gao & Marilyn Swisher & Xin Zhao, 2016. "Consumers’ preferences for fresh broccolis: interactive effects between country of origin and organic labels," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(2), pages 181-191, March.
    6. Celine Michaud & Daniel Llerena & Iragael Joly, 2013. "Willingness to pay for environmental attributes of non-food agricultural products: a real choice experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 40(2), pages 313-329, March.
    7. Anna GAVIGLIO & Alberto PIRANI, 2015. "Consumer perception of cured pork meats: the added value of the organic attribute," Czech Journal of Food Sciences, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 33(1), pages 32-36.
    8. Tessitore, Sara & Iraldo, Fabio & Apicella, Andrea & Tarabella, Angela, 2020. "The Link between Food Traceability and Food Labels in the Perception of Young Consumers in Italy," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 12(05), December.

    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:cup:agrerw:v:36:y:2007:i:02:p:304-320_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/age .

    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.