IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea16/235476.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Value of parsimonious nutritional information in a framed field experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Jo, Jisung
  • Lusk, Jayson
  • Muller, Laurent
  • Ruffieux, Bernard

Abstract

This study investigates consumers’ beliefs about the tastiness and healthiness of 173 food items in a framed field experiment designed to mirror a grocery shopping environment. Using data collected from 129 food shoppers in Grenoble, France, demand models are estimated to determine how product choice is affected by price, taste, and perceived healthiness, and how choices change with the provision of objective health information. Unlike previous studies focusing on relatively complex nutrition labels, we elicit and convey health information using simple nutritional indices meant to lower search and cognitive processing costs. The results indicate that consumers are willing to pay for tastier foods and for healthier foods, particularly if the consumers have objective information (as opposed to perceived, subjective information) on nutrient content. The estimates suggest that the value of the type of nutritional information provided in the experiment is €0.98 per day. The figure refers to the daily welfare benefits that arise from being able to make a set of choices that better reflect people’s preferences by receiving the nutrient index information on all 173 food items versus not having such information.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Jo, Jisung & Lusk, Jayson & Muller, Laurent & Ruffieux, Bernard, 2016. "Value of parsimonious nutritional information in a framed field experiment," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235476, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea16:235476
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.235476
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/235476/files/Value%20of%20parsimonious%20nutritional%20information%20in%20a%20framed%20field%20experiment.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.235476?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Smith, 2004. "Unravelling the SES health connection," IFS Working Papers W04/02, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    2. Kiesel, Kristin & Villas-Boas, Sofia B., 2013. "Can information costs affect consumer choice? Nutritional labels in a supermarket experiment," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 153-163.
    3. Hausman, Jerry & McFadden, Daniel, 1984. "Specification Tests for the Multinomial Logit Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1219-1240, September.
    4. Tyler J. Klain & Jayson L. Lusk & Glynn T. Tonsor & Ted C. Schroeder, 2014. "An experimental approach to valuing information," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(5), pages 635-648, September.
    5. Gracia, Azucena & Loureiro, Maria & Nayga, Rodolfo Jr., 2007. "Do consumers perceive benefits from the implementation of a EU mandatory nutritional labelling program?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 160-174, April.
    6. Kathleen Brooks & Jayson L. Lusk, 2010. "Stated and Revealed Preferences for Organic and Cloned Milk: Combining Choice Experiment and Scanner Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1229-1241.
    7. Balcombe, Kelvin & Fraser, Iain & Falco, Salvatore Di, 2010. "Traffic lights and food choice: A choice experiment examining the relationship between nutritional food labels and price," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 211-220, June.
    8. Simon Cheng & J. Scott Long, 2007. "Testing for IIA in the Multinomial Logit Model," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 35(4), pages 583-600, May.
    9. Brenna Ellison & Jayson L. Lusk & David Davis, 2014. "The Impact Of Restaurant Calorie Labels On Food Choice: Results From A Field Experiment," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(2), pages 666-681, April.
    10. Alastair J. Fischer, 2014. "Some Comments on "Taxes, Subsidies, and Advertising Efficacy in Changing Eating Behavior: An Experimental Study"," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 36(4), pages 717-721.
    11. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Panagiotis Lazaridis & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2005. "Nutrition knowledge and consumer use of nutritional food labels," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(1), pages 93-118, March.
    12. Christopher Leggett, 2002. "Environmental Valuation with Imperfect Information The Case of the Random Utility Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(3), pages 343-355, November.
    13. Trenton G. Smith, 2004. "The McDonald’s Equilibrium. Advertising, empty calories, and the endogenous determination of dietary preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 23(3), pages 383-413, December.
    14. Mario F. Teisl & Nancy E. Bockstael & Alan Levy, 2001. "Measuring the Welfare Effects of Nutrition Information," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(1), pages 133-149.
    15. Wuyang Hu & Michele M. Veeman & Wiktor L. Adamowicz, 2005. "Labelling Genetically Modified Food: Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences and the Value of Information," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(1), pages 83-102, March.
    16. Matthew Rabin & Joel L. Schrag, 1999. "First Impressions Matter: A Model of Confirmatory Bias," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(1), pages 37-82.
    17. Foster, William & Just, Richard E., 1989. "Measuring welfare effects of product contamination with consumer uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 266-283, November.
    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. Young, Jeffrey S., 2021. "Measuring palatability as a linear combination of nutrient levels in food items," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    2. Grebitus, Carola & Davis, George C., 2017. "Change is good!? Analyzing the relationship between attention and nutrition facts panel modifications," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 119-130.
    3. Gustafson, Christopher R., 2023. "Comparing the impact of targeted subsidies and health prompts on choice process variables and food choice: The case of dietary fiber," Staff Papers 330132, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    4. Jayson L Lusk, 2019. "Consumer beliefs about healthy foods and diets," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-15, October.
    5. Jasper Grashuis, 2021. "A price premium for the farmer‐owned label? A choice experiment with milk consumers in the Netherlands," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(4), pages 749-763, October.
    6. Concetta Nazzaro & Marcello Stanco & Giuseppe Marotta, 2020. "The Life Cycle of Corporate Social Responsibility in Agri-Food: Value Creation Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-18, February.
    7. Gustafson, Christopher R., 2023. "Comparing the impact of subsidies and health prompts on choice process variables and food choice: The case of dietary fiber," OSF Preprints u4v5c, Center for Open Science.

    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. Yu Na Lee & Laura Stortz & Mike von Massow & Christopher Kimmerer, 2023. "Impact of ‘‘high in” front‐of‐package nutrition labeling on food choices: Evidence from a grocery shopping experiment," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 71(3-4), pages 277-301, September.
    2. S. Marette & L. Nabec & F. Durieux, 2019. "Improving Nutritional Quality of Consumers’ Food Purchases With Traffic-Lights Labels: An Experimental Analysis," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 377-395, September.
    3. Jayson L Lusk, 2019. "Consumer beliefs about healthy foods and diets," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-15, October.
    4. Bond, Craig A. & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Bond, Jennifer Keeling, 2008. "What to Choose? The Value of Label Claims to Fresh Produce Consumers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-26.
    5. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    6. Savchenko, Olesya M. & Kecinski, Maik & Li, Tongzhe & Messer, Kent D. & Xu, Huidong, 2018. "Fresh foods irrigated with recycled water: A framed field experiment on consumer responses," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 103-112.
    7. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    8. Colson, Gregory & Huffman, Wallace E. & Rousu, Matthew C., 2011. "Improving the Nutrient Content of Food through Genetic Modification: Evidence from Experimental Auctions on Consumer Acceptance," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-22, August.
    9. Zhu, Chen & Huang, Rui, 2014. "Heterogeneity in Consumer Responses to Front-of-Package Nutrition Labels: Evidence from a Natural Experiment?," Working Papers 27, University of Connecticut, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Charles J. Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy.
    10. Colson, Gregory & Rousu, Matthew C. & Huffman, Wallace E., 2008. "Consumers' Willingness to Pay for New Genetically Modified Food Products: Evidence from Experimental Auctions of Intragenic and Transgenic Foods," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6407, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. McFadden, Brandon R. & Lusk, Jayson L., 2013. "Effects of Cost and Campaign Advertising on Support for California’s Proposition 37," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-13, August.
    12. Allais, Olivier & Etilé, Fabrice & Lecocq, Sébastien, 2015. "Mandatory labels, taxes and market forces: An empirical evaluation of fat policies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 27-44.
    13. Lusk Jayson L. & Marette Stéphan, 2012. "Can Labeling and Information Policies Harm Consumers?," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, October.
    14. Erik Stam & Roy Thurik & Peter van der Zwan, 2010. "Entrepreneurial exit in real and imagined markets," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(4), pages 1109-1139, August.
    15. Tao, Hung-Lin, 2014. "Height, weight, and entry earnings of female graduates in Taiwan," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 85-98.
    16. Stéphan Marette & John Beghin & Anne‐Célia Disdier & Eliza Mojduszka, 2023. "Can foods produced with new plant engineering techniques succeed in the marketplace? A case study of apples," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(1), pages 414-435, March.
    17. Xue, Hong & Mainville, Denise Y. & You, Wen & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr., 2009. "Nutrition Knowledge, Sensory Characteristics and Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Pasture-Fed Beef," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49277, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Balcombe, Kelvin & Fraser, Iain & Falco, Salvatore Di, 2010. "Traffic lights and food choice: A choice experiment examining the relationship between nutritional food labels and price," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 211-220, June.
    19. Anne-Célia Disdier & Stéphan Marette, 2012. "Taxes, minimum-quality standards and/or product labeling to improve environmental quality and welfare: Experiments can provide answers," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 337-357, June.
    20. Berning, Joshua P. & Chouinard, Hayley H. & Manning, Kenneth C. & McCluskey, Jill J. & Sprott, David E., 2010. "Identifying consumer preferences for nutrition information on grocery store shelf labels," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 429-436, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety;

    JEL classification:

    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    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:aaea16:235476. 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.