IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/hebarc/18437.html

Guaranteed Tender Beef: Opportunities And Challenges For A Differentiated Agricultural Product

Author

Listed:
  • Carriquiry, Miguel A.

Abstract

Participants in the beef supply chain have, at best, imperfect information about some quality attributes of the product (e.g., live animals, carcasses, or cuts) they are buying, handling, and/or processing and selling to their downstream customers. In many cases, the quality of the final product, destination, and/or appropriate handling or processing of the input is contingent on these unobservable quality attributes. Assessing the quality of an input is particularly important for firms that want to move into niche markets by differentiating their products with some attribute that consumers can only assess imperfectly prior to consumption (e.g., beef tenderness or breed). The success or failure of these ventures is often dependent on whether the selling firm is seen as dependable and trustworthy by its customers. This paper provides a summary and analysis of the literature on beef tenderness assessment and its use for classifying beef according to quality in order to cash in on the premiums consumers are willing to pay for guaranteed tender beef. Opportunities afforded by product quality differentiation are explored, and insights on the challenges of designing a classification system are provided. These challenges have led to the proposal of different thresholds by different authors. However, before any economically meaningful optimal threshold is proposed, two questions need to be clearly answered: What is the objective pursued by the system? and What are the relative consequences of rejecting a product that would have been considered tender by consumers versus certifying a product that will be considered noncompliant.

Suggested Citation

  • Carriquiry, Miguel A., 2004. "Guaranteed Tender Beef: Opportunities And Challenges For A Differentiated Agricultural Product," Hebrew University of Jerusalem Archive 18437, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:hebarc:18437
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.18437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/18437/files/wp040371.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.18437?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. Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
    2. Miguel Carriquiry & Bruce A. Babcock & Roxana Carbone, 2003. "Optimal Quality Assurance Systems for Agricultural Outputs," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 03-wp328, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    3. Levin, Irwin P & Gaeth, Gary J, 1988. "How Consumers Are Affected by the Framing of Attribute Information before and after Consuming the Product," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(3), pages 374-378, December.
    4. Julie A. Caswell & Eliza M. Mojduszka, 1996. "Using Informational Labeling to Influence the Market for Quality in Food Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1248-1253.
    5. Lusk, Jayson & Fox, John & Schroeder, Ted & Mintert, James & Koohmaraie, Mohammad, 1999. "Will Consumers Pay for Guaranteed Tender Steak?," Staff Papers 232530, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    6. Julie A. Caswell & Mary E. Bredahl & Neal H. Hooker, 1998. "How Quality Management Metasystems Are Affecting the Food Industry," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(2), pages 547-557.
    7. Schroeder, Ted C. & Ward, Clement E. & Mintert, James & Peel, Derrell S., 1998. "Beef Industry Price Discovery: A Look Ahead," Staff Papers 232524, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    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. Miguel Carriquiry & Bruce A. Babcock, 2007. "Reputations, Market Structure, and the Choice of Quality Assurance Systems in the Food Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(1), pages 12-23.
    2. Tankam, Chloe & Vollet, Dominique & Aznar, Olivier, 2019. "Entre asymétrie d’information et incertitude partagée. Analyse des systèmes de certification biologique pour le marché domestique kenyan," Économie rurale, French Society of Rural Economics (SFER Société Française d'Economie Rurale), vol. 369(July-Sept).
    3. Gabriele Jahn & Matthias Schramm & Achim Spiller, 2005. "The Reliability of Certification: Quality Labels as a Consumer Policy Tool," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 53-73, December.
    4. Miguel Carriquiry & Bruce A. Babcock, 2004. "Reputation, Quality Observability, and the Choice of Quality Assurance Systems," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 04-wp373, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    5. Caswell, Julie A., 1998. "How Labeling of Safety and Process Attributes Affects Markets for Food," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 151-158, October.
    6. 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.
    7. Pearson, David, 2003. "Australia Fresh fruits and vegetables: Why do so many of them remain unbranded?," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 11.
    8. Steve Holland, 2016. "Lending credence: motivation, trust, and organic certification," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 4(1), pages 1-18, December.
    9. Helmut Bester & Matthias Dahm, 2018. "Credence Goods, Costly Diagnosis and Subjective Evaluation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(611), pages 1367-1394, June.
    10. Crespi, John M. & Marette, Stephan, 2003. "Some Economic Implications Of Public Labeling," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(3), pages 1-12, November.
    11. Schulze, Holger & Albersmeier, Friederike & Spiller, Achim & Jahn, Gabriele, 2006. "Audit risk factors in certification: How can risk-oriented audits improve the quality of certification standards?," 98th Seminar, June 29-July 2, 2006, Chania, Crete, Greece 10108, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Anders, Sven M. & Souza Monteiro, Diogo M. & Rouviere, Elodie, 2007. "Objectiveness in the Market for Third-Party Certification: Does market structure matter?," 105th Seminar, March 8-10, 2007, Bologna, Italy 7894, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Jayasinghe-Mudalige, Udith K. & Henson, Spencer J., 2004. "Quantifying The Impact Of Economic Incentives On Firms' Food Safety Responsiveness: The Case Of Red Meat And Poultry Processing Sector In Canada," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20419, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    14. Kathleen Segerson, 1999. "Mandatory versus voluntary approaches to food safety," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(1), pages 53-70.
    15. Kirchhoff, Stefanie & Zago, Angelo M., 2001. "A Simple Model Of Voluntary Vs Mandatory Labelling Of Gmos," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20540, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Stachtiaris, Spiros & Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Klonaris, Stathis, "undated". "The "more is less" phenomenon in Contingent and Inferred valuation," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 116013, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Ibrahima BARRY & Olivier BONROY & Paolo G. GARELLA, 2014. "Labelling by a for-Profit Certifier," Departmental Working Papers 2014-07, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano, revised 27 Feb 2016.
    18. Reardon, Thomas & Codron, Jean-Marie & Busch, Lawrence & Bingen, R. James & Harris, Craig, 1999. "Global Change In Agrifood Grades And Standards: Agribusiness Strategic Responses In Developing Countries," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 2(3-4), pages 1-15.
    19. Clare D’Souza & Emmanuel K. Yiridoe, 2019. "Producer’s Self-Declared Wind Energy ECO-Labeling Consequences on the Market: A Canadian Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, February.
    20. Anastasio J. Villanueva & Melania Salazar‐Ordóñez & Rubén Granado‐Díaz, 2025. "Consumer preferences toward new circular bioeconomy agri‐food products," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(2), pages 2614-2633, April.

    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:hebarc:18437. 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: .

    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.