IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v33y2016i1p61-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hot cognition in agricultural policy preferences in Norway?

Author

Listed:
  • Klaus Mittenzwei
  • Stefan Mann
  • Karen Refsgaard
  • Valborg Kvakkestad

Abstract

The paper tests the hypothesis that cultural and social background is far more influential to form preferences about policy than the level of fact-based knowledge a person possesses. The data for the case study stem from a web-based survey among a representative sample of the adult population in Norway. The degree of knowledge of agriculture in this paper is operationalized through questions on five key characteristics of Norwegian agriculture that frequently arise in the public discussion. The results show that the amount of fact-based knowledge of agriculture to a very little extent explains differences within the sample. The cultural background of respondents is much more suited to explain agricultural policy preferences. Knowledge, however, shifts the attention from food price issues towards the delivery of public goods. The results allow us to hint at hot cognition as a possible explanation for such findings. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Suggested Citation

  • Klaus Mittenzwei & Stefan Mann & Karen Refsgaard & Valborg Kvakkestad, 2016. "Hot cognition in agricultural policy preferences in Norway?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 33(1), pages 61-71, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:33:y:2016:i:1:p:61-71
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-015-9597-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10460-015-9597-8
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-015-9597-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James, Sallie & Burton, Michael P., 2003. "Consumer preferences for GM food and other attributes of the food system," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 1-18.
    2. Zein Kallas & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Manuel Arriaza, 2007. "Are citizens willing to pay for agricultural multifunctionality?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 36(3), pages 405-419, May.
    3. Hyytia, Nina & Kola, Jukka, 2005. "Citizens' Attitudes Towards Multifunctional Agriculture," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24736, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Sagoff, M., 1998. "Aggregation and deliberation in valuing environmental public goods:: A look beyond contingent pricing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2-3), pages 213-230, February.
    5. Jayachandran N. Variyam & Jeffrey L. Jordan & James E. Epperson, 1990. "Preferences of Citizens for Agricultural Policies: Evidence from a National Survey," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(2), pages 257-267.
    6. Brenna D. Ellison & Jayson L. Lusk & Brian C. Briggeman, 2010. "Taxpayer Beliefs about Farm Income and Preferences for Farm Policy," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 338-354.
    7. Sydorovych, Olha & Wossink, Ada, 2008. "The meaning of agricultural sustainability: Evidence from a conjoint choice survey," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 10-20, July.
    8. Oddveig Storstad & Hilde Bjørkhaug, 2003. "Foundations of production and consumption of organic food in Norway: Common attitudes among farmers and consumers?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 20(2), pages 151-163, June.
    9. Berrens, Robert P. & Bohara, Alok K. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L. & Weimer, David L., 2004. "Information and effort in contingent valuation surveys: application to global climate change using national internet samples," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 331-363, March.
    10. Schokkaert, Erik, 1987. "Preferences and demand for local public spending," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 175-188, November.
    11. Ajzen, Icek & Brown, Thomas C. & Rosenthal, Lori H., 1996. "Information Bias in Contingent Valuation: Effects of Personal Relevance, Quality of Information, and Motivational Orientation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 43-57, January.
    12. Yrjola, Tapani & Kola, Jukka, 2004. "Consumer Preferences Regarding Multifunctional Agriculture," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 7(2), pages 1-13.
    13. Vatn, Arild, 2009. "An institutional analysis of methods for environmental appraisal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2207-2215, June.
    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. Anna Birgitte Milford & Nina Trandem & Armando José Garcia Pires, 2021. "Fear of pesticide residues and preference for domestically produced strawberries," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(4), pages 369-391, December.
    2. Milford, Anna & Lien, Gudbrand & Reed, Matthew, 2021. "Different Sales Channels for Different Farmers: Local and Mainstream Marketing of Organic Fruits and Vegetables in Norway," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315058, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chr, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    2. Tatyana Deryugina & Barrett Kirwan, 2018. "Does The Samaritan'S Dilemma Matter? Evidence From U.S. Agriculture," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(2), pages 983-1006, April.
    3. Lusk, Jayson L., 2012. "The political ideology of food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 530-542.
    4. Palola, Pirta & Bailey, Richard & Wedding, Lisa, 2022. "A novel framework to operationalise value-pluralism in environmental valuation: Environmental value functions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    5. Malte Welling & Ewa Zawojska & Julian Sagebiel, 2022. "Information, Consequentiality and Credibility in Stated Preference Surveys: A Choice Experiment on Climate Adaptation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 82(1), pages 257-283, May.
    6. Lo, Alex Y. & Spash, Clive L., 2011. "Articulation of Plural Values in Deliberative Monetary Valuation: Beyond Preference Economisation and Moralisation," MPRA Paper 30002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Arvin B. Vista & Randall S. Rosenberger & Alan R. Collins, 2009. "If You Provide It, Will They Read It? Response Time Effects in a Choice Experiment," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 57(3), pages 365-377, September.
    8. Wright, Stuart A.L. & Fritsch, Oliver, 2011. "Operationalising active involvement in the EU Water Framework Directive: Why, when and how?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2268-2274.
    9. Laurans, Yann & Mermet, Laurent, 2014. "Ecosystem services economic valuation, decision-support system or advocacy?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 98-105.
    10. Rosenberger, Randall S. & Peterson, George L. & Clarke, Andrea & Brown, Thomas C., 2003. "Measuring dispositions for lexicographic preferences of environmental goods: integrating economics, psychology and ethics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 63-76, February.
    11. Riccardo Scarpa & Susanne Menzel, 2005. "Protection Motivation Theory and Contingent Valuation: Perceived Realism, Threat and WTP Estimates for Biodiversity Protection," Working Papers 2005.26, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    12. Saarikoski, Heli & Mustajoki, Jyri, 2021. "Valuation through deliberation - Citizens' panels on peatland ecosystem services in Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    13. Kenter, Jasper O. & Reed, Mark S. & Fazey, Ioan, 2016. "The Deliberative Value Formation model," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 194-207.
    14. Franceschini, Simone & Marletto, Gerardo, 2015. "Assessing the benefits and the shortcomings of participation – findings from a test in Bari (Italy)," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 33-42.
    15. Matthews, Yvonne, 2023. "A hybrid and hierarchical stated preference study of freshwater restoration in Aotearoa New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    16. Wang, Xi & Curtis, Kynda R. & Moeltner, Klaus, 2011. "Modeling the Impact of New Information on Consumer Preferences for Specialty Meat Products," 2011 Conference (55th), February 8-11, 2011, Melbourne, Australia 100540, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    17. Collart, Alba J. & Ishee, Shea G. & Coble, Keith H., 2021. "Divvying Up the Pie: U.S. Adults’ Preferences for USDA Expenditures in 2018," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 46(3), September.
    18. Ellison Brenna & Lusk Jayson L & Briggeman Brian, 2010. "Other-Regarding Behavior and Taxpayer Preferences for Farm Policy," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-29, October.
    19. Lienhoop, Nele & Schröter-Schlaack, Christoph, 2018. "Involving multiple actors in ecosystem service governance: Exploring the role of stated preference valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 181-188.
    20. Kenter, Jasper O. & O'Brien, Liz & Hockley, Neal & Ravenscroft, Neil & Fazey, Ioan & Irvine, Katherine N. & Reed, Mark S. & Christie, Michael & Brady, Emily & Bryce, Rosalind & Church, Andrew & Cooper, 2015. "What are shared and social values of ecosystems?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 86-99.

    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:spr:agrhuv:v:33:y:2016:i:1:p:61-71. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.