IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i8p4542-d539089.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecosystem-Based Food Production: Consumers′ Preferred Practices and Willingness to Buy and Pay

Author

Listed:
  • Eija Pouta

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Latokartanonkaari 9, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Eero Liski

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Latokartanonkaari 9, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Annika Tienhaara

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Latokartanonkaari 9, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Kauko Koikkalainen

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Latokartanonkaari 9, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Antti Miettinen

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Latokartanonkaari 9, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland)

Abstract

Ecosystem-based agricultural practices that utilize ecosystem processes aim to either reduce the negative externalities of agricultural production or increase the production of ecosystem services other than food provision. We examined consumer interest in buying and paying for food produced using ecosystem-based agricultural practices. According to the results, the most preferred practices were the more efficient use of livestock manure, the use of nitrogen-fixing crops, biological pest control, and the addition of soil carbon. Having these practices as an attribute of a food product increased the interest in buying the product for 43% of consumers. Their median willingness to pay (WTP) was 20% higher than for conventional products. Using socioeconomic and attitudinal variables, a hurdle model revealed the characteristics of a consumer segment interested in ecosystem-based agricultural practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Eija Pouta & Eero Liski & Annika Tienhaara & Kauko Koikkalainen & Antti Miettinen, 2021. "Ecosystem-Based Food Production: Consumers′ Preferred Practices and Willingness to Buy and Pay," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-15, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4542-:d:539089
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4542/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4542/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Onken, Kathryn A. & Bernard, John C. & Pesek, John D., 2011. "Comparing Willingness to Pay for Organic, Natural, Locally Grown, and State Marketing Program Promoted Foods in the Mid-Atlantic Region," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 33-47, April.
    2. Wirth, Ferdinand F. & Stanton, John L. & Wiley, James B., 2011. "The Relative Importance of Search versus Credence Product Attributes: Organic and Locally Grown," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-15, April.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639.
    6. Lucia Rocchi & Antonio Boggia & Luisa Paolotti, 2020. "Sustainable Agricultural Systems: A Bibliometrics Analysis of Ecological Modernization Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-16, November.
    7. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    8. Wirth, Ferdinand F. & Stanton, John L. & Wiley, James B., 2011. "The Relative Importance of Search versus Credence Product Attributes: Organic and Locally Grown," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 48-62, April.
    9. Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene & Francesco Marangon, 2008. "Using Flexible Taste Distributions to Value Collective Reputation for Environmentally Friendly Production Methods," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(2), pages 145-162, June.
    10. Alicia Rihn & Hayk Khachatryan & Benjamin Campbell & Charles Hall & Bridget Behe, 2016. "Consumer preferences for organic production methods and origin promotions on ornamental plants: evidence from eye-tracking experiments," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(6), pages 599-608, November.
    11. Onken, Kathryn A. & Bernard, John C. & Pesek, John D., Jr., 2011. "Comparing Willingness to Pay for Organic, Natural, Locally Grown, and State Marketing Program Promoted Foods in the Mid-Atlantic Region," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-15, April.
    12. Jayson L. Lusk & Darren Hudson, 2004. "Willingness-to-Pay Estimates and Their Relevance to Agribusiness Decision Making," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 152-169.
    13. Carlos E. Carpio & Olga Isengildina-Massa, 2009. "Consumer willingness to pay for locally grown products: the case of South Carolina," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(3), pages 412-426.
    14. Jayson Lusk & Tomas Nilsson & Ken Foster, 2007. "Public Preferences and Private Choices: Effect of Altruism and Free Riding on Demand for Environmentally Certified Pork," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(4), pages 499-521, April.
    15. Cranfield, John A.L. & Magnusson, Erik, 2003. "Canadian Consumer's Willingness-To-Pay For Pesticide Free Food Products: An Ordered Probit Analysis," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 6(4), pages 1-18.
    16. Yu, Xiaohua & Gao, Zhifeng & Zeng, Yinchu, 2014. "Willingness to pay for the “Green Food” in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 80-87.
    17. Cristiana Peano & Nadia Tecco & Egidio Dansero & Vincenzo Girgenti & Francesco Sottile, 2015. "Evaluating the Sustainability in Complex Agri-Food Systems: The SAEMETH Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-21, May.
    18. Ramu Govindasamy & John Italia, 1998. "A willingness-to-purchase comparison of integrated pest management and conventional produce," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(5), pages 403-414.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ying, Jiahui & Shonkwiler, Vanessa P. & Campbell, Benjamin L., 2018. "Willingness to Pay or Not to Pay: Valuing Foods Some Respondents Find Distasteful," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274065, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. 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.
    3. Carroll, Kathryn A. & Bernard, John C. & Pesek, John D. Jr., 2013. "Consumer Preferences for Tomatoes: The Influence of Local, Organic, and State Program Promotions by Purchasing Venue," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-18.
    4. Wongprawmas, Rungsaran & Canavari, Maurizio, 2017. "Consumers’ willingness-to-pay for food safety labels in an emerging market: The case of fresh produce in Thailand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 25-34.
    5. Gupta, Clare & Jablonski, Becca B.R., 2016. "Farm Impacts of Farm-to-Grocer Sales: The Case of Hawai’i," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 47(3), pages 1-23, November.
    6. Iryna Printezis & Carola Grebitus & Stefan Hirsch, 2019. "The price is right!? A meta-regression analysis on willingness to pay for local food," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, May.
    7. Printezis, Iryna & Grebitus, Carola, 2018. "Marketing Channels for Local Food," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 161-171.
    8. Enthoven, Laura & Van den Broeck, Goedele, 2021. "Local food systems: Reviewing two decades of research," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    9. Shi, Wei & Halstead, John & Huang, Ju-Chin, 2016. "Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Locally Grown Produce: Comparison of New Hampshire and Massachusetts Results," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236109, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Tienhaara, Annika & Ahtiainen, Heini & Pouta, Eija, 2015. "Consumer and citizen roles and motives in the valuation of agricultural genetic resources in Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1-10.
    11. Shi, Wei & Halstead, John M. & Huang, Ju-Chin, 2017. "Market Experience Matters: Status Quo Effect in the Economic Valuation of Consumer Preferences for Local Produce," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258290, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Yiwen Yang & PingSun Leung & Chu‐wei Tseng, 2022. "Price premium or price discount for locally produced food products? A 5W1H approach in meta‐analysis," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 2261-2274, September.
    13. Wongprawmas, Rungsaran & Canavari, Maurizio, 2015. "Heterogeneity in consumer preferences for food safety lavel in Thailand," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202744, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Jelena Vapa-Tankosić & Svetlana Ignjatijević & Jelena Kiurski & Jovana Milenković & Irena Milojević, 2020. "Analysis of Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Organic and Local Honey in Serbia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-23, June.
    15. Hayk Khachatryan & Alicia Rihn & Ben Campbell & Bridget Behe & Charles Hall, 2018. "How do consumer perceptions of “local†production benefits influence their visual attention to state marketing programs?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 390-406, March.
    16. Jennifer Porter & David Conner & Jane Kolodinsky & Amy Trubek, 2017. "Get real: an analysis of student preference for real food," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 921-932, December.
    17. Perla, Joseph M. & Rickard, Bradley J. & Schmit, Todd M., 2014. "Looking for Locapours: Using Zagat Survey Data to Examine Restaurant Demand for Local Wine," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(1), pages 69-86, April.
    18. Jingjing Wang & Chengyan Yue & Karina Gallardo & Vicki McCracken & James Luby & Jim McFerson, 2017. "What Consumers Are Looking for in Strawberries: Implications from Market Segmentation Analysis," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(1), pages 56-69, January.
    19. Campbell, Benjamin L. & Mhlanga, Saneliso & Lesschaeve, Isabelle, 2013. "Consumer Preferences for Peach Attributes: Market Segmentation Analysis and Implications for New Marketing Strategies," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 42(3), pages 1-24, December.
    20. Azucena Gracia, 2014. "Consumers’ preferences for a local food product: a real choice experiment," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 111-128, August.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4542-:d:539089. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.