IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Consumer Intentions Of Buying Poultry Meat Under Perceived Biological, Chemical Or Technological Risk In Finland

  • Heikkila, Jaakko
  • Pouta, Eija
  • Forsman-Hugg, Sari
  • Makela, Johanna

The study focuses on various types of food safety risks: biological (zoonoses), chemical (chemical treatment of the meat) and technological (use of genetically modified feed). The emphasis was on how the perceived risks affect the purchase intentions in the case of broiler meat. In the case of each risk products the attitude-level variables had importance in explaining the buying intentions. The heterogeneity of the respondents regarding the purchase intentions of risk products was analysed by latent class logistic regression that included all three risk products. About 60% of the respondents belonged to the group of risk avoiders in which the purchase intention of risk food was significantly lower than in the second group of risk neutrals in which 64% of the respondents had the intention to use the broiler despite the possible increase in risk levels. Especially chemical treatment reduced the willingness to purchase. Among the risk avoiders the impact of zoonoses was smaller than the impact of GM-feed. Risk neutrals felt the risk of zoonoses as more significant than GM feed.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/116403
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by European Association of Agricultural Economists & Agricultural and Applied Economics Association in its series 115th Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, September 15-17, 2010, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany with number 116403.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa115:116403
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.eaae.org
Email:


More information through EDIRC

Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Jayson L. Lusk & Keith H. Coble, 2005. "Risk Perceptions, Risk Preference, and Acceptance of Risky Food," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 393-405.
  2. Jayson L. Lusk & Jutta Roosen & John A. Fox, 2003. "Demand for Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison of Consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 16-29.
  3. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
  4. Goldberg, Isabell & Roosen, Jutta, 2005. "Measuring Consumer Willingness to Pay for a Health Risk Reduction of Salmonellosis and Campylobacteriosis," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24512, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  5. Ulrich Enneking, 2004. "Willingness-to-pay for safety improvements in the German meat sector: the case of the Q&S label," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 31(2), pages 205-223, June.
  6. Jérôme Adda, 2007. "Behavior towards health risks: An empirical study using the “Mad Cow” crisis as an experiment," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 285-305, December.
  7. Mario Mazzocchi & Alexandra Lobb & W. Bruce Traill & Alessio Cavicchi, 2008. "Food Scares and Trust: A European Study," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 2-24, 02.
  8. Latouche, K. & Rainelli, P. & Vermersch, D., 1998. "Food safety issues and the BSE scare: some lessons from the French case," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 347-356, October.
  9. Nicholas E. Piggott & Thomas L. Marsh, 2004. "Does Food Safety Information Impact U.S. Meat Demand?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 154-174.
  10. James K. Hammitt & Kevin Haninger, 2007. "Willingness to Pay for Food Safety: Sensitivity to Duration and Severity of Illness," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1170-1175.
  11. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
  12. Kalogeras, Nikos & Pennings, Joost M.E. & van Ittersum, Koert, 2008. "Consumer Food Safety Risk Attitudes and Perceptions Over Time: The Case of BSE Crisis," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44156, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  13. Frode Alfnes, 2004. "Stated preferences for imported and hormone-treated beef: application of a mixed logit model," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 31(1), pages 19-37, March.
  14. Travisi, Chiara Maria & Nijkamp, Peter, 2008. "Valuing environmental and health risk in agriculture: A choice experiment approach to pesticides in Italy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 598-607, November.
  15. Mario Mazzocchi & Gianluca Stefani & Spencer J. Henson, 2004. "Consumer Welfare and the Loss Induced by Withholding Information: The Case of BSE in Italy," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 41-58.
  16. Cook, A. J. & Kerr, G. N. & Moore, K., 2002. "Attitudes and intentions towards purchasing GM food," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 557-572, October.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:eaa115:116403. 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)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.