IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea11/103630.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consumer Structure of the Blueberry Market: A Double Hurdle Model Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Shi, Lijia
  • House, Lisa
  • Gao, Zhifeng

Abstract

Rapid growth has been observed in the fresh blueberry market since 2000, but at the same time, there is no obvious consumption increase in the market for frozen blueberries. In this study, we analyze the different consumer structures in the fresh and frozen blueberry markets by classifying consumers into “buyers”, “potential buyers” and “non-buyers” of blueberries. A double hurdle count data model is used. The results show that while the fresh blueberry market is mainly composed of buyers, most of the consumers in the frozen blueberry market are non-buyers. The difference in growth trends may be due to the fact that it is more difficult to convert non-buyers to buyers than to increase consumption of buyers.

Suggested Citation

  • Shi, Lijia & House, Lisa & Gao, Zhifeng, 2011. "Consumer Structure of the Blueberry Market: A Double Hurdle Model Approach," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103630, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea11:103630
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.103630
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/103630/files/AAEA%20paper%202.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.103630?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. Roger H. von Haefen & D. Matthew Massey & Wiktor L. Adamowicz, 2005. "Serial Nonparticipation in Repeated Discrete Choice Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(4), pages 1061-1076.
    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. Lijia Wang & Jianhua Wang & Xuexi Huo, 2019. "Consumer’s Willingness to Pay a Premium for Organic Fruits in China: A Double-Hurdle Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-14, January.
    2. Jiang, Yuan & House, Lisa A. & Kim, Hyeyoung & Percival, Susan S., 2017. "Zero-inflated ordered probit approach to modeling mushroom consumption in the United States," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 20(5).
    3. Jiang, Yuan & House, Lisa & Tejera, Christian & Percival, Susan S., 2015. "Consumption of Mushrooms: A double-hurdle Approach," 2015 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2015, Atlanta, Georgia 196902, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    4. Jiang, Yuan & Kim, Hyeyoung & House, Lisa & Percival, Susan S., 2016. "Zero inflated ordered probit approach to modeling mushroom consumption in the US," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236007, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Wang, L., 2018. "Willingness to Pay for Certified Fresh Fruits in China: A Double-Hurdle Approach," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277413, 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. Filiptseva, Anna & Filler, Günther & Odening, Martin, 2022. "Compensation Options for Quarantine Costs in Plant Production," 62nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 7-9, 2022 329595, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    2. Joachim Marti, 2012. "Assessing preferences for improved smoking cessation medications: a discrete choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(5), pages 533-548, October.
    3. Jill Windle & John Rolfe, 2010. "Restricted versus unrestricted choice in labelled choice experiments: exploring the tradeoffs of expanding choice dimensions," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1056, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    4. Jürgen Meyerhoff & Ulf Liebe, 2009. "Status Quo Effect in Choice Experiments: Empirical Evidence on Attitudes and Choice Task Complexity," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(3), pages 515-528.
    5. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John & Brouwer, Roy, 2009. "Public values for improved water security for domestic and environmental use," Research Reports 94818, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    6. Lawrence Goulder, 2007. "Distributional and Efficiency Impacts of Increased U.S. Gasoline Taxes," Discussion Papers 07-009, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    7. Tu, Gengyang & Faure, Corinne & Schleich, Joachim & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte, 2021. "The heat is off! The role of technology attributes and individual attitudes in the diffusion of Smart thermostats – findings from a multi-country survey," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    8. Naspetti, Simona & Zanoli, Raffaele, 2011. "Communicating Ethical Arguments to Organic Consumers: A Study Across Five European Countries," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 2(3), pages 1-21, December.
    9. Juutinen, Artti & Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ovaskainen, Ville, 2014. "Estimating the benefits of recreation-oriented management in state-owned commercial forests in Finland: A choice experiment," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 396-412.
    10. Zheng Li, 2020. "Experimental Evidence on Socioeconomic Differences in Risk‐Taking and Risk Premiums," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 96(313), pages 140-152, June.
    11. Bruno Lanz & Allan Provins, 2015. "Using discrete choice experiments to regulate the provision of water services: do status quo choices reflect preferences?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 300-324, June.
    12. Nielsen, Anne Sofie Elberg & Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2016. "Local consequences of national policies - A spatial analysis of preferences for forest access reduction," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 68-77.
    13. Ladenburg, Jacob & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2014. "Augmenting short Cheap Talk scripts with a repeated Opt-Out Reminder in Choice Experiment surveys," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 39-63.
    14. Zack Dorner & Daniel A. Brent & Anke Leroux, 2019. "Preferences for Intrinsically Risky Attributes," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 95(4), pages 494-514.
    15. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2009. "Comparing responses from web and paper-based collection modes in a choice modelling experiment," Research Reports 94941, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    16. Wan Norhidayah W Mohamad & Ken Willis & Neil Powe, 2019. "The Status Quo In Discrete Choice Experiments: Is It Relevant?," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 65(02), pages 507-532, March.
    17. Thomas Lundhede & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen & Nick Hanley & Niels Strange & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, 2015. "Incorporating Outcome Uncertainty and Prior Outcome Beliefs in Stated Preferences," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(2), pages 296-316.
    18. Ponce Oliva, Roberto D. & Vasquez-Lavín, Felipe & San Martin, Valeska A. & Hernández, José Ignacio & Vargas, Cristian A. & Gonzalez, Pablo S. & Gelcich, Stefan, 2019. "Ocean Acidification, Consumers' Preferences, and Market Adaptation Strategies in the Mussel Aquaculture Industry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 42-50.
    19. Anna Bartczak & Jürgen Meyerhoff, 2012. "Valuing the chances of survival of two distinct Eurasian lynx populations in Poland – do people want to keep doors open?," Working Papers 2012-14, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    20. Bruno Lanz & Allan Provins, 2012. "Do status quo choices reflect preferences? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment in the context of water utilities' investment planning," CEPE Working paper series 12-87, CEPE Center for Energy Policy and Economics, ETH Zurich.

    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:ags:aaea11:103630. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.