IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/uwp/landec/v80y2004i1p125-135.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating the Public Value of Conflicting Information: The Case of Genetically Modified Foods

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew C. Rousu
  • Wallace E. Huffman
  • Jason F. Shogren
  • Abebayehu Tegene

Abstract

Environmental groups have be- food products other than those that norcome the chief antagonists toward agricultural bio- mally carry allergens (See Friends of the technology innovations. They demonstrate and dis- Earth 2001; Greenpeace International 2001). seminate private information with the objective of Through press releases, web sites, and pro- changing the behavior of consumers and productests, environmental ers. We use experimental auctions with adult U.S. groups have been succonsumers and show that this information reduces cessful at publicizing their negative views significantly the demand for genetically modified on GM foods and affecting consumers’ and (GM)-food products and that it has significant producer s’ behavior.2 public good value—an average of 3 cents per prod- Environmental groups share the costs uct purchased, or roughly $2 billion annually. We of producing negative GM information.3 also show that the dissemination of independent third-party information about agricultural biotech- Their members benefit collectively from nology dissipatesmost of the public good value of reductions in demand for GM products negative GM-product information.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew C. Rousu & Wallace E. Huffman & Jason F. Shogren & Abebayehu Tegene, 2004. "Estimating the Public Value of Conflicting Information: The Case of Genetically Modified Foods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(1), pages 125-135.
  • Handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:80:y:2004:i:1:p:125-135
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://le.uwpress.org/content/vol80/issue1/125
    Download Restriction: A subscripton is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.

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

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • 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:uwp:landec:v:80:y:2004:i:1:p:125-135. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://le.uwpress.org/ .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.