IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v95y2013icp118-127.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer stated purchasing preferences and corporate social responsibility in the wood products industry: A conjoint analysis in the U.S. and China

Author

Listed:
  • Cai, Zhen
  • Aguilar, Francisco X.

Abstract

The impacts of disclosed level of corporate social responsibility (CSR), domestic versus imported origin and type of construction on consumers' stated wood product purchasing preferences were examined in the U.S. and China. Hierarchical logit models based on a Bayesian framework were utilized to test the magnitude and statistical significance of each wood product attribute using survey data. Results indicate that U.S. and Chinese respondents: (a) were more likely to choose products from manufacturing companies with a higher level of CSR rating compared with an unknown one; (b) preferred domestically manufactured wood products compared to imported ones; and (c) expressed higher interest in wood products made of solid wood compared with composites. In terms of demographics, respondents' higher education levels corresponded with higher preferences for products from companies with the highest (five-star) CSR rating in the U.S. Statistically-significant income effects were detected only in the Chinese sample when respondents indicated their purchasing preferences for wood products with three-star or five-star CSR levels. Implications for improving wood products companies' managerial performance and suggestions for future studies are provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Cai, Zhen & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2013. "Consumer stated purchasing preferences and corporate social responsibility in the wood products industry: A conjoint analysis in the U.S. and China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 118-127.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:95:y:2013:i:c:p:118-127
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.08.017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800913002747
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Isabelle Maignan & David A Ralston, 2002. "Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe and the U.S.: Insights from Businesses' Self-presentations," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 33(3), pages 497-514, September.
    2. 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.
    3. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Johan Lagerkvist, Carl, 2005. "Using cheap talk as a test of validity in choice experiments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 147-152, November.
    4. Norbert L. W. Wilson, 2012. "How the Cookie Crumbles: A Case Study of Gluten-Free Cookies and Random Utility," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(2), pages 576-582.
    5. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    6. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    7. William S. Breffle & Robert D. Rowe, 2002. "Comparing Choice Question Formats for Evaluating Natural Resource Tradeoffs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(2), pages 298-314.
    8. Aguilar, Francisco X. & Vlosky, Richard P., 2007. "Consumer willingness to pay price premiums for environmentally certified wood products in the U.S," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 1100-1112, May.
    9. William Shafer & Kyoko Fukukawa & Grace Lee, 2007. "Values and the Perceived Importance of Ethics and Social Responsibility: The U.S. versus China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 70(3), pages 265-284, February.
    10. Kevin J. Boyle & Thomas P. Holmes & Mario F. Teisl & Brian Roe, 2001. "A Comparison of Conjoint Analysis Response Formats," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(2), pages 441-454.
    11. Aguilar, Francisco X. & Cai, Zhen, 2010. "Conjoint effect of environmental labeling, disclosure of forest of origin and price on consumer preferences for wood products in the US and UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 308-316, December.
    12. David A Ralston & David J Gustafson & Fanny M Cheung & Robert H Terpstra, 1993. "Differences in Managerial Values: A Study of U.S., Hong Kong and PRC Managers," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 24(2), pages 249-275, June.
    13. Zhang, Jian & gan, Jianbang, 2007. "Who will Meet China's Import Demand for Forest Products?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 2150-2160, December.
    14. Dmitrovic, Tanja & Vida, Irena & Reardon, James, 2009. "Purchase behavior in favor of domestic products in the West Balkans," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 523-535, October.
    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. Wan, Minli & Toppinen, Anne, 2016. "Effects of perceived product quality and Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability (LOHAS) on consumer price preferences for children's furniture in China," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 52-67.
    2. Menegaki, Angeliki, N. & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Tsagarakis, Konstantinos P., 2016. "Towards a common standard – A reporting checklist for web-based stated preference valuation surveys and a critique for mode surveys," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 18-50.
    3. Huh, Sung-Yoon & Woo, JongRoul & Lim, Sesil & Lee, Yong-Gil & Kim, Chang Seob, 2015. "What do customers want from improved residential electricity services? Evidence from a choice experiment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 410-420.
    4. repec:eee:joreco:v:34:y:2017:i:c:p:240-247 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Johannes Dahlin & Verena Halbherr & Peter Kurz & Michael Nelles & Carsten Herbes, 2016. "Marketing Green Fertilizers: Insights into Consumer Preferences," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(11), pages 1-15, November.

    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:95:y:2013:i:c:p:118-127. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.