IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v204y2023ipbs0921800922003524.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Flagship species and certification types affect consumer preferences for wildlife-friendly rice labels

Author

Listed:
  • Mameno, Kota
  • Kubo, Takahiro
  • Ujiie, Kiyokazu
  • Shoji, Yasushi

Abstract

Wildlife-friendly food labels are used to reduce information asymmetry and thus enhance agrobiodiversity conservation via marketing mechanisms. The labels make different claims depending on the certification requirements and conservation targets. However, little is known about consumer preferences for the different claims on the labels. Here, we evaluated consumer preferences for wildlife-friendly labels, with a focus on input- and outcome-based claims, by applying a choice experiment. Our results showed that consumers preferred fish labels with outcome claims to those with input claims; in contrast, consumer utility was not increased by outcome claims but by input claims in bird labels. The differences in preferences for certification requirements and for flagship species highlight the importance of strategic certification and labelling in encouraging people to conserve biodiversity. Our empirical evidence provides insights to balance biodiversity conservation with food security through conservation marketing.

Suggested Citation

  • Mameno, Kota & Kubo, Takahiro & Ujiie, Kiyokazu & Shoji, Yasushi, 2023. "Flagship species and certification types affect consumer preferences for wildlife-friendly rice labels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PB).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:204:y:2023:i:pb:s0921800922003524
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107691
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800922003524
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107691?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nathan Berg & Jeong‐Yoo Kim & Ilgyun Seon, 2021. "A performance‐based payment: Signaling the quality of a credence good," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(5), pages 1117-1131, July.
    2. Kota Mameno & Takahiro Kubo, 2022. "Socio-economic drivers of irrigated paddy land abandonment and agro-ecosystem degradation: Evidence from Japanese agricultural census data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Nick Hanley & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2019. "The Role of Stated Preference Valuation Methods in Understanding Choices and Informing Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 248-266.
    4. Nathan Berg & Yuki Watanabe, 2020. "Conservation of behavioral diversity: on nudging, paternalism-induced monoculture, and the social value of heterogeneous beliefs and behavior," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 19(1), pages 103-120, June.
    5. Lydia Zepeda & Lucie Sirieix & Ana Pizarro & François Coderre & Francine Rodier, 2013. "A conceptual framework for analyzing consumers’ food label preferences: an exploratory study of sustainability labels in France, Quebec, Spain and the US," Post-Print hal-02650512, HAL.
    6. Seroa da Motta, Ronaldo & Ortiz, Ramon Arigoni, 2018. "Costs and Perceptions Conditioning Willingness to Accept Payments for Ecosystem Services in a Brazilian Case," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 333-342.
    7. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    8. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, June.
    9. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, 2002. "Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2427, December.
    10. Britwum, Kofi & Bernard, John C., 2018. "A field experiment on consumer willingness to accept milk that may have come from cloned cows," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1-8.
    11. Fabio Iraldo & Francesco Testa & Irene Bartolozzi, 2014. "An application of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as a green marketing tool for agricultural products: the case of extra-virgin olive oil in Val di Cornia, Italy," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(1), pages 78-103, January.
    12. Jules Pretty & Tim G. Benton & Zareen Pervez Bharucha & Lynn V. Dicks & Cornelia Butler Flora & H. Charles J. Godfray & Dave Goulson & Sue Hartley & Nic Lampkin & Carol Morris & Gary Pierzynski & P. V, 2018. "Global assessment of agricultural system redesign for sustainable intensification," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(8), pages 441-446, August.
    13. Johan Blomquist & Valerio Bartolino & Staffan Waldo, 2020. "Price premiums for eco-labelled seafood: effects of the MSC certification suspension in the Baltic Sea cod fishery [The MSC experience: developing an operational certification standard and a market," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 47(1), pages 50-70.
    14. Stephane Hess & John Rose, 2009. "Should Reference Alternatives in Pivot Design SC Surveys be Treated Differently?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 42(3), pages 297-317, March.
    15. Katayama, Naoki & Baba, Yuki G. & Kusumoto, Yoshinobu & Tanaka, Koichi, 2015. "A review of post-war changes in rice farming and biodiversity in Japan," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 73-84.
    16. Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2007. "An assessment of market-based approaches to providing ecosystem services on agricultural lands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 321-332, December.
    17. Berg, Nathan & Preston, Kate L., 2017. "Willingness to pay for local food?: Consumer preferences and shopping behavior at Otago Farmers Market," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 343-361.
    18. Roe, Brian E. & Teisl, Mario F., 1998. "The Economics Of Labeling: An Overview Of Issues For Health And Environmental Disclosure," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 1-11, October.
    19. Elmiger, By Noëmi & Finger, Robert & Ghazoul, Jaboury & Schaub, Sergei, 2023. "Biodiversity indicators for result-based agri-environmental schemes – Current state and future prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    20. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1990. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities: A Correction," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 72(1), pages 189-190, February.
    21. Moser, Riccarda & Raffaelli, Roberta & Thilmany, Dawn D., 2011. "Consumer Preferences for Fruit and Vegetables with Credence-Based Attributes: A Review," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 14(2), pages 1-22, May.
    22. Kotchen, Matthew J., 2005. "Impure public goods and the comparative statics of environmentally friendly consumption," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 281-300, March.
    23. Herring, Matthew W. & Garnett, Stephen T. & Zander, Kerstin K., 2022. "Producing rice while conserving the habitat of an endangered waterbird: Incentives for farmers to integrate water management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    24. Harrison, Glenn W. & Rutström, E. Elisabet, 2008. "Experimental Evidence on the Existence of Hypothetical Bias in Value Elicitation Methods," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 81, pages 752-767, Elsevier.
    25. Wuepper, David & Clemm, Alexandra & Wree, Philipp, 2019. "The preference for sustainable coffee and a new approach for dealing with hypothetical bias," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 475-486.
    26. Daniele Asioli & Jessica Aschemann-Witzel & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2020. "Sustainability-Related Food Labels," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 171-185, October.
    27. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2010. "Construction of experimental designs for mixed logit models allowing for correlation across choice observations," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 720-734, July.
    28. Sunstein, Cass R., 2021. "Viewpoint: Are food labels good?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    29. Vlaeminck, Pieter & Jiang, Ting & Vranken, Liesbet, 2014. "Food labeling and eco-friendly consumption: Experimental evidence from a Belgian supermarket," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 180-190.
    30. Van Loo, Ellen J. & Caputo, Vincenzina & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Verbeke, Wim, 2014. "Consumers’ valuation of sustainability labels on meat," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 137-150.
    31. F. Testa & F. Iraldo & A Vaccari & E. Ferrari, 2015. "Why Eco‐labels can be Effective Marketing Tools: Evidence from a Study on Italian Consumers," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 252-265, May.
    32. Janssen, Meike & Hamm, Ulrich, 2014. "Governmental and private certification labels for organic food: Consumer attitudes and preferences in Germany," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P2), pages 437-448.
    33. McFadden, Daniel, 1974. "The measurement of urban travel demand," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 303-328, November.
    34. Krittinee Nuttavuthisit & John Thøgersen, 2017. "The Importance of Consumer Trust for the Emergence of a Market for Green Products: The Case of Organic Food," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 323-337, January.
    35. Vossler, Christian A. & Watson, Sharon B., 2013. "Understanding the consequences of consequentiality: Testing the validity of stated preferences in the field," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 137-147.
    36. Lybbert, Travis J. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Narjisse, Hamid, 2002. "Market-based conservation and local benefits: the case of argan oil in Morocco," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 125-144, April.
    37. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-719, November.
    38. Jennifer McGowan & Linda J. Beaumont & Robert J. Smith & Alienor L. M. Chauvenet & Robert Harcourt & Scott C. Atkinson & John C. Mittermeier & Manuel Esperon-Rodriguez & John B. Baumgartner & Andrew B, 2020. "Conservation prioritization can resolve the flagship species conundrum," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-7, December.
    39. Violet Muringai & Ellen Goddard & Heather Bruce & Graham Plastow & Lifen Ma, 2017. "Trust and Consumer Preferences for Pig Production Attributes in Canada," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 65(3), pages 477-514, September.
    40. Chen, Xuqi & Gao, Zhifeng & Swisher, Marilyn & House, Lisa & Zhao, Xin, 2018. "Eco-labeling in the Fresh Produce Market: Not All Environmentally Friendly Labels Are Equally Valued," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 201-210.
    41. Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood, 2005. "Effect of Experimental Design on Choice-Based Conjoint Valuation Estimates," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(3), pages 771-785.
    42. Sandra J. Milberg & Francisca Sinn & Ronald C. Goodstein, 2010. "Consumer Reactions to Brand Extensions in a Competitive Context: Does Fit Still Matter?," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(3), pages 543-553, October.
    43. Loureiro, Maria L. & McCluskey, Jill J. & Mittelhammer, Ronald C., 2001. "Assessing Consumer Preferences For Organic, Eco-Labeled, And Regular Apples," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-13, December.
    44. Wang, Erpeng & Gao, Zhifeng & Heng, Yan & Shi, Lijia, 2019. "Chinese consumers’ preferences for food quality test/measurement indicators and cues of milk powder: A case of Zhengzhou, China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    45. Brian Roe & Ian Sheldon, 2007. "Credence Good Labeling: The Efficiency and Distributional Implications of Several Policy Approaches," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(4), pages 1020-1033.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mameno, Kota & Kubo, Takahiro & Tsuge, Takahiro & Yamano, Hiroya, 2025. "Reducing red-soil runoff from farmland provides heterogeneous economic benefits through coastal ecosystems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).

    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. Yokessa, Maïmouna & Marette, Stéphan, 2019. "A Review of Eco-labels and their Economic Impact," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 13(1-2), pages 119-163, April.
    2. Rombach, Meike & Widmar, Nicole Olynk & Byrd, Elizabeth & Bitsch, Vera, 2018. "Do all roses smell equally sweet? Willingness to pay for flower attributes in specialized retail settings by German consumers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 91-99.
    3. Mameno, Kota & Kubo, Takahiro & Tsuge, Takahiro & Yamano, Hiroya, 2025. "Reducing red-soil runoff from farmland provides heterogeneous economic benefits through coastal ecosystems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    4. Chiara Mazzocchi & Guido Sali, 2022. "Supporting mountain agriculture through “mountain product” label: a choice experiment approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 701-723, January.
    5. De Bauw, Michiel & Franssens, Samuel & Vranken, Liesbet, 2022. "Trading off environmental attributes in food consumption choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    6. Roy Brouwer & Solomon Tarfasa, 2020. "Testing hypothetical bias in a framed field experiment," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 343-357, September.
    7. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    8. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    9. Rinaldo Brau, 2008. "Demand-Driven Sustainable Tourism? A Choice Modelling Analysis," Tourism Economics, , vol. 14(4), pages 691-708, December.
    10. Johnston, Robert J. & Ramachandran, Mahesh & Schultz, Eric T. & Segerson, Kathleen & Besedin, Elena Y., 2011. "Characterizing Spatial Pattern in Ecosystem Service Values when Distance Decay Doesn’t Apply: Choice Experiments and Local Indicators of Spatial Association," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103374, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Norton, Daniel & Hynes, Stephen, 2014. "Valuing the non-market benefits arising from the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 84-96.
    12. Katherine Fuller & Carola Grebitus, 2023. "Consumers' preferences and willingness to pay for coffee sustainability labels," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1007-1025, October.
    13. Zhu, Zhanguo & Zhang, Tong & Hu, Wuyang, 2023. "The accumulation and substitution effects of multi-nation certified organic and protected eco-origin food labels in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    14. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2007. "Discrete choice survey experiments: A comparison using flexible methods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 122-139, January.
    15. Nannan Kang & Erda Wang & Yang Yu, 2019. "Valuing forest park attributes by giving consideration to the tourist satisfaction," Tourism Economics, , vol. 25(5), pages 711-733, August.
    16. Chiara Mazzocchi & Luigi Orsi & Guido Sali, 2021. "Consumers’ Attitudes for Sustainable Mountain Cheese," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    17. Lin, Wen & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2022. "Green identity labeling, environmental information, and pro-environmental food choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    18. Marianne Zandersen & Mette Termansen & Frank S. Jensen, 2005. "Benefit Transfer over Time of Ecosystem Values: the Case of Forest Recreation," Working Papers FNU-61, Research unit Sustainability and Global Change, Hamburg University, revised Mar 2005.
    19. Sackett, Hillary & Shupp, Robert & Tonsor, Glynn, 2016. "Differentiating “Sustainable” From “Organic” And “Local” Food Choices: Does Information About Certification Criteria Help Consumers?," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 4(3), pages 1-15, July.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:204:y:2023:i:pb:s0921800922003524. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.