IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/agribz/v25y2009i3p395-411.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer preference for production-derived quality: analyzing perceptions of premium chicken production methods

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Innes

    (Department of Bioresource Policy, Business & Economics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada)

  • John Cranfield

    (Department of Food, Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada)

Abstract

The authors assess consumer interest in a food product containing production-derived attributes. They use the French Label Rouge system in the Ontario chicken market as an example of a producer-controlled quality system. Conjoint analysis reveals a significant proportion of respondents value nonprice attributes; medication and housing had the highest importance scores, followed by price and brand ownership. Cluster analysis of the part-worth utilities revealed three consumer segments: price conscious consumers; consumers focused on naturalness; and those focused on animal health. Segments do not appear to differ on the basis of socioeconomic and demographic profile of respondents. However, multiitem scales reflecting attitudes towards production systems vary significantly across segments. Price-conscious respondents show agreement with use of medication and express concern over quality. Respondents in the naturalness segment express concern over quality, locality of production and impact of production methods on own health. Animal-health-conscious respondents show agreement with the use of medications, concern over quality, locality and impact of production methods on own health, but neutrality towards byproducts and traditional production methods. [EconLit citations: D120, Q130]. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Innes & John Cranfield, 2009. "Consumer preference for production-derived quality: analyzing perceptions of premium chicken production methods," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(3), pages 395-411.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:agribz:v:25:y:2009:i:3:p:395-411
    DOI: 10.1002/agr.20206
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/agr.20206
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/agr.20206?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sergio H. Lence & Stéphan Marette & Dermot J. Hayes & William Foster, 2007. "Collective Marketing Arrangements for Geographically Differentiated Agricultural Products: Welfare Impacts and Policy Implications," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(4), pages 947-963.
    2. Baker, Gregory A. & Crosbie, Peter J., 1993. "Measuring Food Safety Preferences: Identifying Consumer Segments," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 18(2), pages 1-11, December.
    3. Julie A. Caswell & Mary E. Bredahl & Neal H. Hooker, 1998. "How Quality Management Metasystems Are Affecting the Food Industry," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(2), pages 547-557.
    4. Jutta Roosen & Jayson L. Lusk & John A. Fox, 2003. "Consumer demand for and attitudes toward alternative beef labeling strategies in France, Germany, and the UK," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(1), pages 77-90.
    5. Baker, Gregory A. & Burnham, Thomas A., 2001. "The Market For Genetically Modified Foods: Consumer Characteristics And Policy Implications," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 4(4), pages 1-10.
    6. Baker, Gregory A., 1998. "Strategic Implications Of Consumer Food Safety Preferences," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 1(4), pages 1-13.
    7. Alfnes, Frode & Rickertsen, Kyrre, 2003. "Sc-X: Calibrating Stated Choice Surveys With Experimental Auction Markets," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25814, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Farina, Tatiana M.Q. & de Almeida, Silvia F., 2003. "Consumer Perception On Alternative Poultry," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 5(2), pages 1-11.
    9. Dermot J. Hayes & Sergio H. Lence & Andrea Stoppa, 2004. "Farmer-owned brands?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(3), pages 269-285.
    10. Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E M & van Trijp, Hans C M, 1996. "Quality Guidance: A Consumer-Based Approach to Food Quality Improvement Using Partial Least Squares," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 23(2), pages 195-215.
    11. Hayes, Dermot J. & Lence, Sergio H. & Babcock, Bruce A., 2005. "Geographic Indications and Farmer-Owned Brands: Why Do the U.S. And E.U. Disagree?," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12418, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Meuwissen, Miranda P.M. & van der Lans, Ivo A.C.M., 2004. "Trade-offs Between Consumer Concerns: An Application for Pork Production," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24996, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Rinus Haaijer & Michel Wedel, 2007. "Conjoint Choice Experiments: General Characteristics and Alternative Model Specifications," Springer Books, in: Anders Gustafsson & Andreas Herrmann & Frank Huber (ed.), Conjoint Measurement, edition 0, chapter 11, pages 199-229, Springer.
    14. Randall E. Westgren, 1999. "Delivering Food Safety, Food Quality, and Sustainable Production Practices: The Label Rouge Poultry System in France," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1107-1111.
    15. Baker, Gregory A., 1999. "Consumer Preferences For Food Safety Attributes In Fresh Apples: Market Segments, Consumer Characteristics, And Marketing Opportunities," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 1-18, July.
    16. Baker, Gregory A. & Burnham, Thomas A., 2001. "Consumer Response To Genetically Modified Foods: Market Segment Analysis And Implications For Producers And Policy Makers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-17, December.
    17. Klaus G. Grunert, 2005. "Food quality and safety: consumer perception and demand," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 32(3), pages 369-391, September.
    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. Picardy, Jamie Ann & Cash, Sean B. & Peters, Christian, . "Uncommon Alternative: Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Niche Pork Tenderloin in New England," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 51(2).
    2. Cash, Sean B. & Slade, Peter & Cranfield, John, 2013. "The Chicken Wears No Skin: Ordering Effects in Elicitation of Willingness to Pay for Multiple Credence Attributes in Ethical and Novel Food Products," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150364, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Trey Malone & Jayson L. Lusk, 2018. "If you brew it, who will come? Market segments in the U.S. beer market," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 204-221, March.

    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. Stephan Marette & Roxanne Clemens & Bruce Babcock, 2008. "Recent international and regulatory decisions about geographical indications," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 453-472.
    2. Kim, Renee B. & Boyd, Milton S., 2004. "Identification of Niche Market for Hanwoo Beef: Understanding Korean Consumer Preference for Beef using Market Segment Analysis," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 7(3), pages 1-19.
    3. John Cranfield & Spencer Henson & James Northey & Oliver Masakure, 2010. "An assessment of consumer preference for fair trade coffee in Toronto and Vancouver," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(2), pages 307-325.
    4. Baker, Gregory A. & Mazzocco, Michael A., 2005. "Who Should Certify the Safety of Genetically Modified Foods?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 8(2), pages 1-20.
    5. Luisa Menapace & Gregory Colson & Carola Grebitus & Maria Facendola, 2011. "Consumers' preferences for geographical origin labels: evidence from the Canadian olive oil market," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 38(2), pages 193-212, June.
    6. Donatella Baiardi & Riccardo Puglisi & Simona Scabrosetti, 2012. "Individual Attitudes on Food Quality and Safety: Empirical Evidence on EU Countries," DEM Working Papers Series 014, University of Pavia, Department of Economics and Management.
    7. Wendy J. Umberger & Dawn D. Thilmany McFadden & Amanda R. Smith, 2009. "Does altruism play a role in determining U.S. consumer preferences and willingness to pay for natural and regionally produced beef?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(2), pages 268-285.
    8. Alexander E. Saak, 2011. "A Model of Labeling with Horizontal Differentiation and Cost Variability," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1131-1150.
    9. Umberger, Wendy J. & Feuz, Dillon M. & Calkins, Chris R. & Sitz, Bethany M., 2003. "Country-Of-Origin Labeling Of Beef Products: U.S. Consumers' Perceptions," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(3), pages 1-14, November.
    10. Kaneko, Naoya & Chern, Wen S., 2006. "Identification of Consumer Segments and Its Implication on the Willingness-to-Pay Distribution: The Case of Demand for Non-Genetically Modified Vegetable Oil in the United States," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21194, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Ziehl, Amanda & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2005. "A Cluster Analysis of Natural Beef Product Consumers by Shopping Behavior, Importance of Production Attributes, and Demographics," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 36(1), pages 1-9, March.
    12. Yiling Deng & Ian A. Munn & Haibo Yao, 2021. "Attributes‐based conjoint analysis of landowner preferences for standing timber insurance," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 24(4), pages 421-444, December.
    13. Craig A. Bond & Dawn Thilmany & Jennifer Keeling Bond, 2008. "Understanding consumer interest in product and process-based attributes for fresh produce," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(2), pages 231-252.
    14. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    15. Verbeke, Wim & Ward, Ronald W., 2003. "Importance of EU Label Requirements: An Application of Ordered Probit Models to Belgium Beef Labels," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22077, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Onyango, Benjamin M., 2004. "Consumer Acceptance Of Genetically Modified Foods: The Role Of Product Benefits And Perceived Risks," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 35(1), pages 1-8, March.
    17. à frica Martínez-Poveda & Margarita Brugarolas Mollá-Bauzá & Francisco José del Campo Gomis & Laura Martínez Carrasco Martínez & Asunción Agulló Torres, 2019. "Consumer Perception of Gm Foods. Profiles of Potential Consumers and Non-Consumers in Spain," Current Investigations in Agriculture and Current Research, Lupine Publishers, LLC, vol. 7(3), pages 942-952, August.
    18. 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.
    19. Travisi, Chiara M. & Nijkamp, Peter, 2004. "Are Italians Willing to Pay for Agricultural Environmental Safety? A Stated Choice Approach," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24988, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Jianyu Yu & Zohra Bouamra-Mechemache, 2016. "Production standards, competition and vertical relationship," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 43(1), pages 79-111.

    More about this item

    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:wly:agribz:v:25:y:2009:i:3:p:395-411. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6297 .

    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.