IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jagaec/v50y2018i02p233-254_00.html

Consumer Willingness To Pay For Tennessee Certified Beef

Author

Listed:
  • MERRITT, MEAGAN G.
  • DELONG, KAREN LEWIS
  • GRIFFITH, ANDREW P.
  • JENSEN, KIMBERLY L.

Abstract

Although Tennessee has Advanced Master Beef Producer (AMBP) and Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) certifications for cattle producers, currently there is no state-certified beef labeling program. A choice experiment was administered to Tennessee consumers to determine their willingness to pay for Tennessee Certified Beef (TCB) and other attributes such as labels indicating producer participation in AMBP and BQA. Random parameter logit model results indicate consumers most valued TCB steak and no-hormones-administered ground beef. Consumers also valued many labels when appearing alongside the TCB label. The impact of providing participants label definitions prior to the choice experiment was examined.

Suggested Citation

  • Merritt, Meagan G. & Delong, Karen Lewis & Griffith, Andrew P. & Jensen, Kimberly L., 2018. "Consumer Willingness To Pay For Tennessee Certified Beef," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(2), pages 233-254, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:50:y:2018:i:02:p:233-254_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1074070817000359/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. Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano & Lamonaca, Emilia, 2020. "Objective risk and subjective risk: The role of information in food supply chains," MPRA Paper 104515, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Iryna Printezis & Carola Grebitus & Stefan Hirsch, 2019. "The price is right!? A meta-regression analysis on willingness to pay for local food," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Paudel, Bindu & Zhou, Mo, 2024. "Are consumers “green” enthusiasts or skeptics? Evidence from nontimber forest products," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    4. Horvath, Camille & Koning, Martin & Raton, Gwenaëlle & Combes, François, 2024. "Short food supply chains: The influence of outlet and accessibility on farmer and consumer preferences. Two discrete choice experiments," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    5. Balcombe, Kelvin & Bradley, Dylan & Fraser, Iain, 2022. "Consumer preferences for chlorine-washed chicken, attitudes to Brexit and implications for future trade agreements," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    6. Maki Nakajima, 2022. "Sustainable Food Consumption: Demand for Local Produce in Singapore," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-22, September.
    7. Lacy, Katherine & Ward, Ruby & Bordigioni, Malieka & Emm, Staci & Allen, Karin & Whyte, Anne, 2021. "Issues and Implications of New Conversations Around Meat Supply in the West," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 19(01), June.
    8. DeLong, Karen L. & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Upendram, Sreedhar & Eckelkamp, Elizabeth, . "Consumer Preferences for Tennessee Milk," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 51(2).
    9. Ruoye Yang & Kellie Curry Raper, 2025. "Misconceptions and meat: The impact of new knowledge on meat demand," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(2), pages 570-587, April.
    10. McKay, Lettie & DeLong, Karen L. & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Griffith, Andrew P. & Boyer, Christopher N., "undated". "Restaurants’ Willingness to Pay for Tennessee Certified Beef," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266578, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    11. Rihn, Alicia L. & Jensen, Kimberly & Hughes, David W., "undated". "Tennessee's Wine Industry: Consumer Perceptions, Quality Assurance Programs and Marketing Strategies," Extension Reports 319853, University of Tennessee, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    12. Riccardo Testa & Francesco Vella & Giuseppina Rizzo & Giorgio Schifani & Giuseppina Migliore, 2025. "Meat attachment or health awareness? Understanding the factors influencing the consumption of local red meat in Italy," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Yiwen Yang & PingSun Leung & Chu‐wei Tseng, 2022. "Price premium or price discount for locally produced food products? A 5W1H approach in meta‐analysis," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 2261-2274, September.
    14. Shijun Gao & Carola Grebitus & Karen L. DeLong, 2024. "Explaining consumer willingness to pay for country‐of‐origin labeling with ethnocentrism, country image, and product image: Examples from China's beef market," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 72(2), pages 149-166, June.
    15. DeLong, Karen L. & Syrengelas, Konstantinos G. & Grebitus, Carola & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2021. "Visual versus Text Attribute Representation in Choice Experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    16. Grashuis, Jasper & Su, Ye, 2023. "Consumer Preferences for State-Sponsored Designations: The Case of the Missouri Grown Label," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 48(01), January.
    17. Azucena Gracia & Ana María Sánchez & Francesc Jurado & Cristina Mallor, 2020. "Making Use of Sustainable Local Plant Genetic Resources: Would Consumers Support the Recovery of a Traditional Purple Carrot?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-17, August.
    18. Shalynn Sumrow & Darren Hudson & Oscar Sarasty & Carlos Carpio & Christy Bratcher, 2024. "Consumer preferences for worker and supply chain risk mitigation in the beef supply chain in response to COVID‐19 pandemic," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(1), pages 299-315, January.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General
    • 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:cup:jagaec:v:50:y:2018:i:02:p:233-254_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/aae .

    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.