IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Does Consumer Time Preference Affect Label Use?

Listed author(s):
  • Cavaliere, Alessia
  • De Marchi, Elisa
  • Banterle, Alessandro

Diet-related chronic diseases, such as overweight and obesity, are worrisome not only from a medical point of view, but also in terms of monetary expenditures, these health problems are strictly linked to sizeable sanitary costs (Chou et al., 2004; Yaniv et al., 2009; Cawley and Meyerhoefer, 2012; Ruhm, 2012). These costs are mainly due to the purchase of medical care (direct costs), and to the loss of productivity caused by hill-health (indirect costs) (Rosin, 2008). To challenge these problems and improve public health it is of particular importance to study the determinants of food consumption, and understand the best way to effectively address consumers toward healthy eating. To this purpose, one of the most investigated topics in the last decades has been the role of food-related information. Economists have found evidences that food information can exert a positive effect in increasing consumer nutrition knowledge and in promoting healthier consumption. Hence, policy makers have proposed different policy interventions to provide consumers with more, and more detailed, information. These information measures have included the diffusion of dietary guidelines, the promotion of nutritional education programs in the schools, and also specific campaigns to increase public awareness concerning fruit and vegetables consumption or the negative effects of some unhealthy food and drinks. In this context, another and maybe more direct way to provide consumers with food-related information is represented by on-package food labels, which currently constitute the principal tool through which consumers can easily acquire information about food products. The key role of food labels in making individuals able to do more conscious diet choices has been well established by the main findings of the economic literature (Drichoutis et al., 2006; Drichoutis et al., 2008a; Drichoutis et al., 2009; Norgaard and Brunso 2009; Barreiro-Hurlè et al., 2010). Therefore, given the importance of on-packaging information, the EU has recently introduced the EU Regulation No. 1169/2011, published in October 2011, in order to make labels even more effective and boost their utility for consumers. This new low has established some rules concerning mandatory information, nutritional facts and also the graphical standards allowed on food labels in all the EU. Nonetheless, consumers are not always willing to make use of the information reported on labels, and this makes of crucial importance to investigate and understand which factors can be able to discourage consumers in using labels.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by International European Forum on Innovation and System Dynamics in Food Networks in its series 2014 International European Forum, February 17-21, 2014, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria with number 199401.

in new window

Date of creation: Oct 2014
Handle: RePEc:ags:iefi14:199401
Contact details of provider: Web page:

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.:

in new window

  1. Grossman, Michael, 1972. "On the Concept of Health Capital and the Demand for Health," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(2), pages 223-255, March-Apr.
  2. Drichoutis, Andreas & Lazaridis, Panagiotis & Nayga, Rodolfo, 2009. "A model of nutrition information search with an application to food labels," Working Papers 2009-02, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
  3. Cawley, John & Meyerhoefer, Chad, 2012. "The medical care costs of obesity: An instrumental variables approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 219-230.
  4. Mazzocchi, Mario & Traill, W. Bruce & Shogren, Jason F., 2009. "Fat Economics: Nutrition, Health, and Economic Policy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199213863.
  5. Chou, Shin-Yi & Grossman, Michael & Saffer, Henry, 2004. "An economic analysis of adult obesity: results from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 565-587, May.
  6. Yaniv, Gideon & Rosin, Odelia & Tobol, Yossef, 2009. "Junk-food, home cooking, physical activity and obesity: The effect of the fat tax and the thin subsidy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(5-6), pages 823-830, June.
  7. Barreiro-Hurlé, Jesús & Gracia, Azucena & de-Magistris, Tiziana, 2010. "Does nutrition information on food products lead to healthier food choices?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 221-229, June.
  8. Odelia Rosin, 2008. "The Economic Causes Of Obesity: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 617-647, 09.
  9. Grossman, Michael, 2006. "Education and Nonmarket Outcomes," Handbook of the Economics of Education, Elsevier.
  10. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Hartmann, Christina & Leins-Hess, Rebecca & Dohle, Simone & Siegrist, Michael, 2013. "A consumer segmentation of nutrition information use and its relation to food consumption behaviour," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 71-80.
  11. Andreas Drichoutis & Panagiotis Lazaridis & Rodolfo Nayga & Maria Kapsokefalou & George Chryssochoidis, 2008. "A theoretical and empirical investigation of nutritional label use," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(3), pages 293-304, August.
  12. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Panagiotis Lazaridis & Rodolfo M. Nayga Jr, 2009. "On Consumers' Valuation Of Nutrition Information," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 223-247, 07.
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:iefi14:199401. 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.