IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea25/360838.html

Understanding U.S. Consumer Perceptions Regarding Beef Harvested from Cattle with Non-Zoonotic Diseases

Author

Listed:
  • Adabrah-Danquah, Vera
  • Britton, Logan L.
  • Tonsor, Glynn T.
  • Coffey, Brian K.
  • Pendell, Dustin L.

Abstract

This study examines U.S. consumer acceptance of meat from animals affected by foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), a non-zoonotic yet economically significant disease. A January 2025 survey of U.S. residents assessed demographic factors, disease knowledge, neophobia, and trust. Experimental approaches, including discrete choice and best-worst scaling, evaluated willingness to pay for attributes like vaccination status and geographic origin, and acceptance of alternative uses for recovered meat. Results highlight key consumer acceptance barriers, emphasizing strategies for integrating recovered meat into supply chains to reduce waste, mitigate market disruptions, and enhance sustainability. The study provides insights to balance economic recovery, food security, and sustainability in food systems following disruptive animal disease events.

Suggested Citation

  • Adabrah-Danquah, Vera & Britton, Logan L. & Tonsor, Glynn T. & Coffey, Brian K. & Pendell, Dustin L., 2025. "Understanding U.S. Consumer Perceptions Regarding Beef Harvested from Cattle with Non-Zoonotic Diseases," 2025 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2025, Denver, CO 360838, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea25:360838
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.360838
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/360838/files/75217_94897_105300_AAEA-WAEA_2025_Paper_Submission_VAD_LLB.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.360838?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. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1990. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities: A Correction," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 72(1), pages 189-190, February.
    2. Simone Cerroni & Rodolfo M Nayga & Gioacchino Pappalardo & Wei Yang, 2022. "Malleability of food values amid the COVID-19 pandemic," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(2), pages 472-498.
    3. Schroeder, Ted C. & Pendell, Dustin L. & Sanderson, Michael W. & McReynolds, Sara, 2025. "Economic Impact of Alternative FMD Emergency Vaccination Strategies in the Midwestern United States," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 47(01), January.
    4. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    5. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, January.
    6. repec:plo:pone00:0239829 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Adabrah-Danquah, Vera & Britton, Logan L. & Tonsor, Glynn T. & Coffey, Brian K. & Pendell, Dustin L., 2025. "Understanding U.S. Consumer Perceptions Regarding Beef Harvested from Cattle with Non-Zoonotic Diseases," 2025 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2025, Denver, CO 361174, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Choi, Andy S., 2013. "Nonmarket values of major resources in the Korean DMZ areas: A test of distance decay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 97-107.
    3. Jianhua Wang & Jiaye Ge & Yuting Ma, 2018. "Urban Chinese Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Pork with Certified Labels: A Discrete Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, February.
    4. West, Grant H. & Snell, Heather & Kovacs, Kent & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2020. "Estimation of the preferences for the intertemporal services from groundwater," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304220, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Oyakhilomen Oyinbo & Jordan Chamberlin & Miet Maertens, 2020. "Design of Digital Agricultural Extension Tools: Perspectives from Extension Agents in Nigeria," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 798-815, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Tavárez, Héctor & Álamo, Carmen & Cortés,Mildred, . "Differentiated coffees and their potential markets in Puerto Rico: An economic valuation approach," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 20(02).
    8. Liu, Ruifeng & ,, 2021. "What We Can Learn from the Interactions of Food Traceable Attributes? a Case Study of Fuji Apple in China," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315916, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Vassalos, Michael & Lim, Kar Ho, . "Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Various Features of Electronic Food Marketing Platforms," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 19(2), pages 1-19.
    10. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Olynk, Nicole J., 2011. "Modeling heterogeneity in consumer preferences for select food safety attributes in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 318-324, April.
    11. Ousmane Z. Traoré & Lota D. Tamini & Bernard Korai, 2023. "Willingness to pay for credence attributes associated with agri‐food products—Evidence from Canada," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 71(3-4), pages 303-327, September.
    12. H. Holly Wang & Lu Liu & David L. Ortega & Yu Jiang & Qiujie Zheng, 2020. "Are smallholder farmers willing to pay for different types of crop insurance? An application of labelled choice experiments to Chinese corn growers," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 45(1), pages 86-110, January.
    13. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    14. De Bauw, Michiel & Franssens, Samuel & Vranken, Liesbet, 2022. "Trading off environmental attributes in food consumption choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    15. Heng, Yan & Lu, Chao-Lin & Yu, Luqing & Gao, Zhifeng, 2020. "The heterogeneous preferences for solar energy policies among US households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    16. Liesivaara, Petri & Myyrä, Sami, 2014. "Government policies in changing climate and the demand for crop insurance," 88th Annual Conference, April 9-11, 2014, AgroParisTech, Paris, France 170520, Agricultural Economics Society.
    17. Varela, Elsa & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Soliño, Mario, 2014. "Understanding the heterogeneity of social preferences for fire prevention management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 91-104.
    18. Sobolewski, Maciej & Kopczewski, Tomasz, 2017. "Estimating demand for fixed-line telecommunication bundles," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 227-241.
    19. Paulo Chahuara, 2018. "Preferencias y Valorizacion por Atributos del Servicio de Internet Fijo en el Peru: un primer acercamiento via experimento de eleccion discreta," Documentos de Trabajo 39, OSIPTEL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:aaea25:360838. 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.