IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/midasp/201028.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consumer Demand for Innovation in Food Safety

Author

Listed:
  • Hoehn, John P.

Abstract

Procedures are identified detecting and estimating consumer willingness to pay for food safety. Case histories demonstrate the significant behavioral response of consumers to changes in food safety. Concepts and methods for estimating willingness to pay for food safety are reviewed. A framework is developed for estimating the impact of food safety on market prices, market quantities, and consumer and producer welfare. Contrary to theoretical models based on zero transactions costs and fully differentiated markets, the empirical results indicate that the welfare losses of a laissez-faire policy to food safety may exceed the losses of direct regulation.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Hoehn, John P., 1989. "Consumer Demand for Innovation in Food Safety," Staff Paper Series 201028, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:midasp:201028
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.201028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/201028/files/agecon-msu-89-74.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.201028?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nancy E. Bockstael, 1984. "The Welfare Implications of Minimum Quality Standards," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(4), pages 466-471.
    2. Mark E. Smith & Eileen O. van Ravenswaay & Stanley R. Thompson, 1988. "Sales Loss Determination in Food Contamination Incidents: An Application to Milk Bans in Hawaii," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(3), pages 513-520.
    3. Paul Slovic & Baruch Fischhoff & Sarah Lichtenstein, 1982. "Why Study Risk Perception?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 83-93, June.
    4. Ann Fisher & Lauraine G. Chestnut & Daniel M. Violette, 1989. "The value of reducing risks of death: A note on new evidence," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 88-100.
    5. F. Reed Johnson, 1988. "Economic Costs of Misinforming About Risk: The EDB Scare and the Media," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 261-269, June.
    6. Rosen, Sherwin, 1974. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 34-55, Jan.-Feb..
    7. Joseph D. Brown, 1969. "Effect of a Health Hazard "Scare" on Consumer Demand," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 51(3), pages 676-678.
    8. Viscusi, W Kip & O'Connor, Charles J, 1984. "Adaptive Responses to Chemical Labeling: Are Workers Bayesian Decision Makers?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 942-956, December.
    9. Ravenswaay, Eileen O. van, 1987. "How Much Food Safety Do Consumers Want? An Analysis of Current Studies and Strategies for Future Research," Staff Paper Series 200936, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    10. Erik Lichtenberg & Douglas D. Parker & David Zilberman, 1988. "Marginal Analysis of Welfare Costs of Environmental Policies: The Case of Pesticide Regulation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(4), pages 867-874.
    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. Ravenswaay, Eileen O. van, 1993. "Research Needs in the Valuation of Food Safety and Nutrition," Staff Paper Series 201172, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    2. van Ravenswaay, Eileen O., 0. "Consumer Perception Of Health Risks In Food," Increasing Understanding of Public Problems and Policies, Farm Foundation.
    3. Ted Gayer & James T. Hamilton & W. Kip Viscusi, 2002. "The Market Value of Reducing Cancer Risk: Hedonic Housing Prices with Changing Information," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 69(2), pages 266-289, October.
    4. Ravenswaay, Eileen O. van, 1992. "Public Perceptions of Food Saftey: Implications for Emerging Agricultural Technologies," Staff Paper Series 201159, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    5. Caswell, Julie A., 1988. "Federal and State Regulations of Food Product Safety and Quality: A Selected, Partially Annotated Bibliography," Miscellaneous Publications 320010, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Ravenswaay, Eileen O. van & McGuirk, Anya, 1992. "Consumer Perspectives on Crop Protection Technology Choice," Staff Paper Series 201158, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    7. G. Arabsheibani & A. Marin, 2000. "Stability of Estimates of the Compensation for Danger," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 247-269, May.
    8. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    9. Roberts, Tanya & van Ravenswaay, Eileen, 1989. "The Economics of Food Safety," Food Review/ National Food Review, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 12(3), September.
    10. Youn, Hyungho & Lim, Byung In & Jin, Hyun Joung, 2012. "Differential effects of negative publicity on beef consumption according to household characteristics in South Korea," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 138-148.
    11. Andersen, Laura M. & Smed, Sinne, 2010. "What Is It Consumers Really Want And Why? The Case Of Fat In Milk," 115th Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, September 15-17, 2010, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany 116455, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Hyun No Kim & Ik-Chang Choi, 2018. "The Economic Impact of Government Policy on Market Prices of Low-Fat Pork in South Korea: A Quasi-Experimental Hedonic Price Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
    13. Laura Andersen & Sinne Smed, 2013. "What is it consumers really want, and how can their preferences be influenced? The case of fat in milk," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 323-347, August.
    14. Roger A. Dahlgran & Dean G. Fairchild, 2002. "The demand impacts of chicken contamination publicity-a case study," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(4), pages 459-474.
    15. Teisl, Mario F. & Roe, Brian, 1998. "The Economics of Labeling: An Overview of Issues for Health and Environmental Disclosure," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 140-150, October.
    16. Capps, Oral, Jr., 1992. "The Food Distribution Industry: Untapped Clientele For Agricultural Economists," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 1-10, July.
    17. Aye Chan Myae & Ellen Goddard, 2020. "Household behavior with respect to meat consumption in the presence of BSE and CWD," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 315-341, September.
    18. Viscusi, W Kip & Aldy, Joseph E, 2003. "The Value of a Statistical Life: A Critical Review of Market Estimates throughout the World," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 5-76, August.
    19. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    20. Chantal Toledo & Sofia Berto Villas-Boas, 2019. "Safe or Not? Consumer Responses to Recalls with Traceability," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 519-541, September.

    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:midasp:201028. 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/damsuus.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.