IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v37y2012i3p335-342.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer valuation of health attributes for soy-based food: A choice modeling approach

Author

Listed:
  • Chang, Jae Bong
  • Moon, Wanki
  • Balasubramanian, Siva K.

Abstract

Given that soy foods possess health-promoting attributes that offer the promise of reducing heart-related chronic diseases, this article employs choice experiments to estimate marginal willingness to pay (WTP) for soy attributes including taste, contents of soy protein, and health claim. Random parameter logit (RPL) models were estimated in consideration of potential heterogeneity across individuals in their preferences for soy food. Standard deviation parameters in the RPL models are highly significant, indicating that individuals have widely varying preferences for soy-based food products. Results suggest that, while taste is the dominating attribute that drives consumers’ WTP for soy food products, consumers do respond to the information provided in the health claim. Yet, consumers do not seem to be recognizing soy protein as the link to health benefits of soy foods.

Suggested Citation

  • Chang, Jae Bong & Moon, Wanki & Balasubramanian, Siva K., 2012. "Consumer valuation of health attributes for soy-based food: A choice modeling approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 335-342.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:37:y:2012:i:3:p:335-342 DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.03.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919212000280
    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. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2001. "Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 179-192, March.
    2. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, December.
    3. Maria L. Loureiro & Azucena Gracia & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2006. "Do consumers value nutritional labels?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 33(2), pages 249-268, June.
    4. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Swait, Joffre & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1996. "A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 243-253, September.
    5. Jayson L. Lusk & Ted C. Schroeder, 2004. "Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 467-482.
    6. Ahmadi-Esfahani, Fredoun Z. & Stanmore, Roland G., 1997. "Export demand for attributes of Australian wheat in Asia and the Middle East," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 145-154, April.
    7. 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.
    8. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, March.
    9. Wang, Zhigang & Mao, Yanna & Gale, Fred, 2008. "Chinese consumer demand for food safety attributes in milk products," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 27-36, February.
    10. Jayson L. Lusk & Jutta Roosen & John A. Fox, 2003. "Demand for Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison of Consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 16-29.
    11. Rolfe, John & Bennett, Jeff & Louviere, Jordan, 2000. "Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 289-302, November.
    12. Dan Rigby & Michael Burton, 2005. "Preference heterogeneity and GM food in the UK," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 32(2), pages 269-288, June.
    13. Moon, Wanki & Balasubramanian, Siva K. & Rimal, Arbindra, 2005. "Perceived Health Benefits and Soy Consumption Behavior: Two-Stage Decision Model Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(02), August.
    14. Wansink, Brian & Park, Sea Bum & Sonka, Steven T. & Morganosky, Michelle A., 2000. "How Soy Labeling Influences Preference And Taste," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA), vol. 3(01).
    15. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Liljenstolpe, Carolina, 2003. "Valuing wetland attributes: an application of choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 95-103, November.
    16. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May.
    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. Giacomo Pallante & Adam Drucker, 2014. "Niche Markets for Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Preference and Scale Heterogeneity Effects on Nepalese Consumers’ WTP for Finger Millet Products," SEEDS Working Papers 1414, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised May 2014.
    2. Pallante, Giacomo & Drucker, Adam G. & Sthapit, Sajal, 2016. "Assessing the potential for niche market development to contribute to farmers' livelihoods and agrobiodiversity conservation: Insights from the finger millet case study in Nepal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 92-105.
    3. repec:ucp:mresec:doi:10.1086/692091 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Abebe, Gumataw K. & Bijman, Jos & Kemp, Ron & Omta, Onno & Tsegaye, Admasu, 2013. "Contract farming configuration: Smallholders’ preferences for contract design attributes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 14-24.
    5. Carlucci, Domenico & Dedevitiis, Biagia & Nardone, Gianluca & Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano, 2016. "Certification Labels Vs Convenience Formats: What drives the market in aquaculture products?," MPRA Paper 75448, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:jfpoli:v:37:y:2012:i:3:p:335-342. 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/foodpol .

    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.