Consumer benefits of labels and bans on genetically modified food - An empirical analysis using Choice Experiments
Applying an experiment on the choice of consumer goods, we show that Swedish consumers do not regard genetically modified (GM) food as being equivalent to conventional food. A central argument by proponents of GM is that the end products are identical to those where GM has not been used. That respondents in our survey disagree with this argument is supported by two observations. First, a positive significant WTP is found for a mandatory labeling policy. This result confirms previous observations that GM food can be a credence good causing a market failure. Second, consumers are also willing to pay a significantly higher product price to ensure a total ban on the use of GM in animal fodder. Even if scientists and politicians argue that most of today's GM food is indistinguishable from GM-free food, consumers disagree.
|Date of creation:||2004|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003.
"Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation,"
Economic Issues Journal Articles,
Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
- Peter Martinsson, 2002. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper sp200205t2, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised May 2002.
- Alpizar, Francisco & Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2001. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Working Papers in Economics 52, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
- Train,Kenneth E., 2009.
"Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
- Kenneth E. Train, 1998. "Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences over People," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 230-239.
- 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.
- Lusk, Jayson L. & Roosen, Jutta & Fox, John A., 2001.
"Demand For Beef From Cattle Administered Growth Hormones Or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison Of Consumers In France, Germany, The United Kingdom, And The United States,"
2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL
20684, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- Jayson L. Lusk & Jutta Roosen & John A. Fox, 2003. "Demand for Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison of Consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 16-29.
- Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2001. "Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 179-192, March.
- Carter, Colin A. & Gruere, Guillaume P., 2003. "International Approaches to the Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 18(2).
- John M. Antle, 1999. "The New Economics of Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(5), pages 993-1010.
- Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
- Jayson Lusk & Ted Schroeder, 2004.
"Are choice experiments incentive compatible? A test with quality differentiated beef steaks,"
Artefactual Field Experiments
00096, The Field Experiments Website.
- 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.
- Huffman, Wallace, 2003. "Consumer's Acceptance of (and Resistance to) Genetically Modified Foods in High Income Countries: Effects of Labels and Information in an Uncertain Environment," Staff General Research Papers 12255, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Wallace E. Huffman, 2003. "Consumers' Acceptance of (and Resistance to) Genetically Modified Foods in High-Income Countries: Effects of Labels and Information in an Uncertain Environment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1112-1118.
- Akerlof, George A, 1970. "The Market for 'Lemons': Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500, August.
- Lusk, Jayson L. & Fox, John A., 2002. "Consumer Demand For Mandatory Labeling Of Beef From Cattle Administered Growth Hormones Or Fed Genetically Modified Corn," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(01), April.
- Hamilton, Stephen F. & Sunding, David L. & Zilberman, David, 2003. "Public goods and the value of product quality regulations: the case of food safety," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(3-4), pages 799-817, March.
- Ian M. Sheldon, 2002. "Regulation of biotechnology: will we ever 'freely' trade GMOs?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 29(1), pages 155-176, March.
- Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
- repec:inr:wpaper:155594 is not listed on IDEAS
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea04:20370. 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: (AgEcon Search)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.