IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v65y2016icp1-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

U.S. consumers’ preferences for imported and genetically modified sugar: Examining policy consequentiality in a choice experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Lewis, Karen E.
  • Grebitus, Carola
  • Nayga, Rodolfo M.

Abstract

Sugar originating in the United States is produced using both genetically modified (GM) and non-GM seeds and the United States is one of the largest importers of sugar in the world. Therefore, an online choice experiment was used to determine U.S. consumer willingness to pay (WTP) for imported and GM labeled bagged sugar and sugar in soft drinks. The choice experiments included two treatments: one serving as the control and one to test the impact of policy consequentiality. Results from both treatments indicate that consumers prefer bags of sugar and sugar in soft drinks from Canada and the United States compared to unlabeled sugar and sugar from Mexico, Brazil and the Philippines. Consumers also prefer non-GM labeled sugar compared to unlabeled and GM labeled sugar. The results regarding the use of policy consequentiality in an online choice experiment suggest that the application of consequentiality may increase participants’ likelihood of choosing one of the product options presented in the choice set rather than choosing the “none of these” option. Furthermore, participants who saw the consequentiality script had a higher level of belief that their survey responses would be consequential (p < 0.05).

Suggested Citation

  • Lewis, Karen E. & Grebitus, Carola & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2016. "U.S. consumers’ preferences for imported and genetically modified sugar: Examining policy consequentiality in a choice experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-8.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:65:y:2016:i:c:p:1-8
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2016.10.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804316301082
    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. Christian A. Vossler & Maurice Doyon & Daniel Rondeau, 2012. "Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 145-171, November.
    2. Glynn T. Tonsor & Robert S. Shupp, 2011. "Cheap Talk Scripts and Online Choice Experiments: "Looking Beyond the Mean"," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1015-1031.
    3. Scott J. Savage & Donald M. Waldman, 2008. "Learning and fatigue during choice experiments: a comparison of online and mail survey modes," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 351-371.
    4. Herriges, Joseph & Kling, Catherine & Liu, Chih-Chen & Tobias, Justin, 2010. "What are the consequences of consequentiality?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 67-81, January.
    5. Mariah D. Ehmke & Jayson L. Lusk & Wallace Tyner, 2008. "Measuring the relative importance of preferences for country of origin in China, France, Niger, and the United States," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 38(3), pages 277-285, May.
    6. Glynn T. Tonsor & Ted C. Schroeder & Joost M. E. Pennings & James Mintert, 2009. "Consumer Valuations of Beef Steak Food Safety Enhancement in Canada, Japan, Mexico, and the United States," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 57(3), pages 395-416, September.
    7. Colin Carter & Barry Krissoff & Alix Peterson Zwane, 2006. "Can Country-of-Origin Labeling Succeed as a Marketing Tool for Produce? Lessons from Three Case Studies," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 54(4), pages 513-530, December.
    8. Bulte, Erwin & Gerking, Shelby & List, John A. & de Zeeuw, Aart, 2005. "The effect of varying the causes of environmental problems on stated WTP values: evidence from a field study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 330-342, March.
    9. Glynn T. Tonsor & Ted C. Schroeder & Jayson L. Lusk, 2013. "Consumer Valuation of Alternative Meat Origin Labels," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 676-692, September.
    10. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    11. Daly, Andrew & Hess, Stephane & de Jong, Gerard, 2012. "Calculating errors for measures derived from choice modelling estimates," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 333-341.
    12. 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.
    13. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, October.
    14. Astrid Dannenberg & Sara Scatasta & Bodo Sturm, 2011. "Mandatory versus voluntary labelling of genetically modified food: evidence from an economic experiment," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(3), pages 373-386, May.
    15. Senauer, Benjamin, 2013. "Mandatory labeling of genetically engineered (GE) foods: the showdown begins," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 0(Issue 3), pages 1-5.
    16. Lusk, Jayson L. & Jamal, Mustafa & Kurlander, Lauren & Roucan, Maud & Taulman, Lesley, 2005. "A Meta-Analysis of Genetically Modified Food Valuation Studies," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 1-17, April.
    17. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    18. Kar H. Lim & Wuyang Hu & Leigh J. Maynard & Ellen Goddard, 2013. "U.S. Consumers’ Preference and Willingness to Pay for Country-of-Origin-Labeled Beef Steak and Food Safety Enhancements," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 61(1), pages 93-118, March.
    19. Schmitz, Troy G. & Lewis, Karen E., 2015. "Impact of NAFTA on U.S. and Mexican Sugar Markets," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 1-18, September.
    20. Wuyang Hu & Wiktor L. Adamowicz & Michele M. Veeman, 2006. "Labeling Context and Reference Point Effects in Models of Food Attribute Demand," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1034-1049.
    21. Grebitus, Carola & Jensen, Helen H. & Roosen, Jutta & Sebranek, Joseph G., 2013. "Fresh Meat Packaging: Consumer Acceptance of Modified Atmosphere Packaging including Carbon Monoxide," Staff General Research Papers Archive 35611, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    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. McLeod, Elizabeth & Jensen, Kimberly & Griffith, Andrew & Lewis, Karen, 2017. "Tennessee Beef Producers' Willingness to Participate in a Tennessee Branded Beef Program," 2017 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2017, Mobile, Alabama 252649, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    2. Zawojska, Ewa & Bartczak, Anna & Czajkowski, Mikotaj, 2017. "Disentangling impacts of payment and provision consequentiality and risk attitudes on stated preferences," Annual Meeting, 2017, June 18-21, Montreal, Canada 258602, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society.
    3. Ewa Zawojska & Anna Bartczak & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2018. "Disentangling the effects of policy and payment consequentiality and risk attitudes on stated preferences," Working Papers 2018-01, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    4. Gautam, Ruskin & Gustafson, Christopher R. & Brooks, Kathleen R., 2017. "Label Position and it Impacts on WTP for Products Containing GMO," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258105, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Penn, Jerrod & Hu, Wuyang & Ye, Tao, 2018. "Cheap Talk, Consequentiality, and Certainty Follow-up as Hypothetical Bias Mitigation Techniques: A Cross Country Comparison," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274018, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Country of origin labeling; Genetically modified labeling; Ingredients; Policy consequentiality; Soft drinks;

    JEL classification:

    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy

    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:eee:soceco:v:65:y:2016:i:c:p:1-8. 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/inca/620175 .

    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.