IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Food Quality Verifications and Consumer Trust


  • Hobbs, Jill E.
  • Innes, Brian G.
  • Uzea, Adrian D.
  • Zhang, Jing


Food markets are increasingly characterized by an array of quality assurances with respect to credence attributes, reflecting a growing interest in where food comes from and how it is produced. The provision and signalling of these credence quality attributes includes both public and private sector initiatives. How effective are quality signals in addressing the information asymmetry inherent in credence attributes? To what extent do consumers trust quality assurances from different sources, and does this trust differs across food products or across credence attributes? The paper presents a simple economic welfare analysis of the market for a credence attribute under different assumptions with respect to the strength of consumer preferences, the existence of voluntary versus mandatory standards, and the credibility of third party certification. This is followed by an empirical analysis drawing from two consumer surveys in Canada using discrete choice experiments. Food quality claims related to farm animal welfare in a meat product and to environmental sustainability in a bread product are examined. Latent Class models reveal significant heterogeneity in consumer preferences, both in terms of the value consumers place on farm animal welfare and environmentally sustainable quality assurances, and the extent to which it matters who is verifying these assurances.

Suggested Citation

  • Hobbs, Jill E. & Innes, Brian G. & Uzea, Adrian D. & Zhang, Jing, 2012. "Food Quality Verifications and Consumer Trust," 86th Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2012, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 135069, Agricultural Economics Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aesc12:135069

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Henson, Spencer & Reardon, Thomas, 2005. "Private agri-food standards: Implications for food policy and the agri-food system," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 241-253, June.
    2. Giannakas, Konstantinos & Fulton, Murray, 2002. "Consumption effects of genetic modification: what if consumers are right?," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 27(2), August.
    3. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, April.
    4. William A. Kerr & Jill E. Hobbs, 2002. "The North American-European Union Dispute Over Beef Produced Using Growth Hormones: A Major Test for the New International Trade Regime," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 283-296, February.
    5. Giannakas, Konstantinos & Fulton, Murray, 2002. "Consumption effects of genetic modification: what if consumers are right?," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 97-109, August.
    6. Bruce A. Babcock & John Miranowski & Roxana Carbone, 2002. "Initial Analysis of Adoption of Animal Welfare Guidelines on the U.S. Egg Industry, An," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 02-bp37, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    7. Giovanni Anania & Rosanna Nistic├▓, 2004. "Public Regulation as a Substitute for Trust in Quality Food Markets: What if the Trust Substitute cannot be Fully Trusted?," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, T├╝bingen, vol. 160(4), pages 681-681, December.
    8. Richard Bennett, 1995. "The Value Of Farm Animal Welfare," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 46-60.
    9. Rolfe, John, 1999. "Ethical Rules and the Demand for Free Range Eggs," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 187-206, September.
    10. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    11. Brian Roe & Ian Sheldon, 2007. "Credence Good Labeling: The Efficiency and Distributional Implications of Several Policy Approaches," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(4), pages 1020-1033.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    credence attribute; animal welfare; environmental sustainability; quality verification; discrete choice experiment; Agricultural and Food Policy; Risk and Uncertainty; Q13; Q18;

    JEL classification:

    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:aesc12:135069. 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: .

    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 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.

    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.