IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea13/150296.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Voting or Buying: Inconsistency in Preferences toward Food Safety in Restaurants

Author

Listed:
  • Alphonce, Roselyne
  • Alfnes, Frode
  • Sharma, Amit

Abstract

Consumers sometimes prefer stricter food regulations as voters than as consumers. A prime example is that battery-cage eggs were the most sold types of eggs in California in 2008 when 63% of voters supported the animal welfare proposition forbidding battery-cage eggs starting from from 2015. In this paper, we investigate whether a similar consumer-citizen duality might exist in willingness to pay for food safety standards in restaurants. Using a split sample willingness to pay survey we find that consumers have a higher willingness to pay for improved restaurant food safety standards when voting than when acting as consumers. The results are discussed in the light of the literature on trust, social choice and public choice theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Alphonce, Roselyne & Alfnes, Frode & Sharma, Amit, 2013. "Voting or Buying: Inconsistency in Preferences toward Food Safety in Restaurants," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150296, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea13:150296
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/150296
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hartmann, Monika & Simons, Johannes, 2015. "The Farm Animal Welfare - Dilemma: Can concerted Action of the Value Chain be a solution?," 148th Seminar, November 30-December 1, 2015, The Hague, The Netherlands 229280, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Consumer-Citizen Duality; WTP; Food-Safety in Restaurants; United States; Consumer/Household Economics; Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety; Institutional and Behavioral Economics;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aaea13:150296. 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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.