IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Fairness and food choice

  • Chang, Jae Bong
  • Lusk, Jayson L.

Although experimental studies have reported a wide array of other-regarding behavior, the pervasiveness of such behavior in the field is an open question. Using a stated-preference experiment, we first estimate people's preferences, when purchasing food products, for the distribution of benefits accruing to participants in the food supply chain. Although none of the existing fairness models exhibit much predictive power, we find that people are in-fact concerned about the distribution of benefits resulting from food purchases, and that modifications to the models to fit the food context significantly improves explanatory power. Finally, we find that the measured preferences, along with elicited beliefs are significant predictors of people's willingness-to-pay a premium for organic food.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VCB-4X5HY8K-1/2/a138142e6aeaa10bb01bad47964e991d
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Food Policy.

Volume (Year): 34 (2009)
Issue (Month): 6 (December)
Pages: 483-491

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:34:y:2009:i:6:p:483-491
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Engelmann Dirk & Strobel Martin, 2002. "Inequality Aversion, Efficiency, and Maximin Preferences in Simple Distribution Experiments," Research Memorandum 015, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
  2. Andreoni,J. & Vesterlund,L., 1998. "Which is the fair sex? : Gender differences in altruism," Working papers 10, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  3. John List, 2006. "The behavioralist meets the market: Measuring social preferences and reputation effects in actual transactions," Natural Field Experiments 00300, The Field Experiments Website.
  4. Gary E. Bolton & Axel Ockenfels, 2006. "Inequality Aversion, Efficiency, and Maximin Preferences in Simple Distribution Experiments: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1906-1911, December.
  5. Georg Kirchsteiger & Ernst Fehr & Arno Riedl, 1993. "Does Fairness Prevent Market Clearing? An Experimental Investigation," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/5927, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  6. Mathias Erlei, 2003. "Heterogeneous Social Preferences," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0001, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal), revised Jun 2004.
  7. Gracia, Azucena & de Magistris, Tiziana, 2008. "The demand for organic foods in the South of Italy: A discrete choice model," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 386-396, October.
  8. Jayson L. Lusk & Brian C. Briggeman, 2009. "Food Values," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 184-196.
  9. Peter C. Verhoef, 2005. "Explaining purchases of organic meat by Dutch consumers," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 32(2), pages 245-267, June.
  10. Charness, Gary B & Rabin, Matthew, 2001. "Understanding Social Preferences With Simple Tests," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt0dc3k4m5, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
  11. James Konow, 2000. "Fair Shares: Accountability and Cognitive Dissonance in Allocation Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1072-1091, September.
  12. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory Of Fairness, Competition, And Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868, August.
  13. Durham, Catherine A. & Andrade, Diego, 2005. "Health vs. Environmental Motivation in Organic Preferences and Purchases," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19221, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  14. Ernst Fehr & Michael Naef & Klaus M. Schmidt, 2006. "Inequality Aversion, Efficiency, and Maximin Preferences in Simple Distribution Experiments: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1912-1917, December.
  15. Padel, Susanne & Röcklinsberg, Helena & Schmid, Otto, 2009. "The implementation of organic principles and values in the European Regulation for organic food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 245-251, June.
  16. David L. Sunding, 2003. "The Role for Government in Differentiated Product Markets: Looking to Economic Theory," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(3), pages 720-724.
  17. Huang, Chung L, 1996. "Consumer Preferences and Attitudes towards Organically Grown Produce," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 23(3), pages 331-42.
  18. Kolodinsky, Jane, 2008. "Affect or information? Labeling policy and consumer valuation of rBST free and organic characteristics of milk," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 616-623, December.
  19. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
  20. Wendy J. Umberger & Dawn D. Thilmany McFadden & Amanda R. Smith, 2009. "Does altruism play a role in determining U.S. consumer preferences and willingness to pay for natural and regionally produced beef?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(2), pages 268-285.
  21. Costa-Font, Montserrat & Gil, José M. & Traill, W. Bruce, 2008. "Consumer acceptance, valuation of and attitudes towards genetically modified food: Review and implications for food policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 99-111, April.
  22. W. Guth & R. Schmittberger & B. Schwartz, 2010. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Levine's Working Paper Archive 291, David K. Levine.
  23. Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
  24. Bereby-Meyer, Yoella & Niederle, Muriel, 2005. "Fairness in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 173-186, February.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:34:y:2009:i:6:p:483-491. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.