Consumers’ Response When Regulators Are Uncertain About the Source of Foodborne Illness
Health and safety officials are sometimes placed in an awkward position: knowing that a foodborne disease outbreak is occurring but not knowing which food is responsible. They have to advise consumers, but relying on ambiguous and evolving information raises the question, how do consumers respond to changing advice? Here, we estimate a model of the retail demand for tomatoes in the USA, accounting for the 2008 events in the USA in which consumers were advised that some types of tomatoes were contaminated with Salmonella bacteria, and later were advised that tomatoes were safe and peppers were not. Using the quantity of news media attention given to the Salmonella issue, we show that consumers generally responded to the advice that tomatoes were contaminated, but did not respond to the declaration that tomatoes were safe. The magnitude of response to contemporaneous news depended on the extent of coverage in previous weeks. Copyright © Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012 (outside the USA) 2013
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 36 (2013)
Issue (Month): 1 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/social+sciences/journal/10603/PS2|
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.:
- Roger A. Dahlgran & Dean G. Fairchild, 2002. "The demand impacts of chicken contamination publicity-a case study," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(4), pages 459-474.
- Richards, Timothy J. & Patterson, Paul M., 1999. "The Economic Value Of Public Relations Expenditures: Food Safety And The Strawberry Case," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(02), December.
- T. A. Lloyd & S. McCorriston & C. W. Morgan & A. J. Rayner, 2006. "Food scares, market power and price transmission: the UK BSE crisis," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 33(2), pages 119-147, June.
- Alain Carpentier & Hervé Guyomard, 2001. "Unconditional Elasticities in Two-Stage Demand Systems: An Approximate Solution," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(1), pages 222-229.
- Lusk Jayson L, 2010. "The Effect of Proposition 2 on the Demand for Eggs in California," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-20, April.
- David G. Swartz & Ivar E. Strand, Jr., 1981. "Avoidance Costs Associated with Imperfect Information: The Case of Kepone," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 57(2), pages 139-150.
- Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1980. "An Almost Ideal Demand System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 312-26, June.
- Nicholas E. Piggott & Thomas L. Marsh, 2004. "Does Food Safety Information Impact U.S. Meat Demand?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 154-174.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jcopol:v:36:y:2013:i:1:p:17-36. 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: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.