IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uconnr/25215.html

Eco-Labels for Credence Attributes: The Case of Shade-Grown Coffee

Author

Listed:
  • Larson, Bruce A.

Abstract

Using the case of shade-grown coffee, this paper examines the market impacts of "eco-labels" for credence attributes. First, the Mattoo and Singh (1994) test is conducted for the case of shade-grown coffee to investigate the market impacts of a shade label. This analysis in Section II shows that a shade label could "pass" the test, but the market impacts are likely to be minor. Section II also shows how to use estimates of supply, potential demand, and price elasticities of demand and supply to predict eco-label premiums in the post-label equilibrium. And second, given the importance of consumer demands for eco-label impacts, and since the theoretical foundations of demand for eco-labeled items are not well developed in the literature, Section III takes a closer look at the microeconomics of labels and consumer demand. A nested constant-elasticity-of-substitution preference structure is used to derive theoretically consistent Marshallian demands for shade and non-shade coffee. A numerical simulation shows how relative prices and consumer preferences for the credence attribute and variety are both important factors in demand creation of labeled items.

Suggested Citation

  • Larson, Bruce A., 2002. "Eco-Labels for Credence Attributes: The Case of Shade-Grown Coffee," Research Reports 25215, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:uconnr:25215
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.25215
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/25215/files/rr020071.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.25215?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. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Marette, Stephan & Schiavina, Alessandra, 1998. "Non-tariff Trade Barriers and Consumers' Information: The Case of the EU-US Trade Dispute over Beef," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 25(4), pages 437-462.
    2. Golan, Elise H. & Kuchler, Fred & Mitchell, Lorraine, 2000. "Economics Of Food Labeling," Agricultural Economic Reports 34069, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    3. David R. Bell & Jeongwen Chiang & V. Padmanabhan, 1999. "The Decomposition of Promotional Response: An Empirical Generalization," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 504-526.
    4. Roe, Brian E. & Teisl, Mario F., 1998. "The Economics Of Labeling: An Overview Of Issues For Health And Environmental Disclosure," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 1-11, October.
    5. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    6. Wesley Nimon & John C. Beghin, 1999. "Eco-Labels and International Trade in Textiles," Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) Publications (archive only) 99-wp221, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    7. 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.
    8. Feuerstein, Switgard, 2002. "Do coffee roasters benefit from high prices of green coffee?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 89-118, January.
    9. Ramu Govindasamy & John Italia, 1998. "A willingness-to-purchase comparison of integrated pest management and conventional produce," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(5), pages 403-414.
    10. Wickens, M R & Greenfield, J N, 1973. "The Econometrics of Agricultural Supply: An Application to the World Coffee Market," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 55(4), pages 433-440, November.
    11. Wesley Nimon & John Beghin, 2017. "Ecolabels And International Trade In The Textile And Apparel Market," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 18, pages 321-326, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Gobbi, Jose A., 2000. "Is biodiversity-friendly coffee financially viable? An analysis of five different coffee production systems in western El Salvador," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 267-281, May.
    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. 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.
    2. Joseph, Siny & Lavoie, Nathalie, 2008. "Effectiveness of COOL in the U.S. Seafood Industry," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6260, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Yokessa, Maïmouna & Marette, Stéphan, 2019. "A Review of Eco-labels and their Economic Impact," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 13(1-2), pages 119-163, April.
    4. Olivier Bonroy & Christos Constantatos, 2015. "On the Economics of Labels: How Their Introduction Affects the Functioning of Markets and the Welfare of All Participants," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(1), pages 239-259.
    5. Loureiro, Maria L. & Lotade, Justus, 2005. "Do fair trade and eco-labels in coffee wake up the consumer conscience?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 129-138, April.
    6. MacLaren, Donald, 2003. "Consumers’ Preferences, Credence Goods And The Wto Sps Agreement," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57915, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    8. Villas-Boas, Sofia B & Taylor, Rebecca & Krovetz, Hannah, 2016. "Willingness to Pay for Low Water Footprint Food Choices During Drought," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt9vh3x180, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    9. Cuffaro, Nadia & Di Giacinto, Marina, 2015. "Credence goods, consumers’ trust in regulation and high quality exports," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 4(2), pages 1-19, August.
    10. Plastina, Alejandro & Giannakas, Konstantinos, "undated". "Market and Welfare Effects of Mandatory Country-Of-Origin Labeling in the Specialty Crops Sector," Cornhusker Economics 306624, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    11. Jackson, Lee Ann, 2003. "Who Benefits from Quality Labelling? Segregation Costs, International Trade and Producer Outcomes," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57897, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    12. GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Biotechnology and the development of food markets: retrospect and prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 35(3), pages 331-355, September.
    13. Maze, Armelle, 2005. "Integrated Agriculture Labelling and consumer information: retailer's strategies and regulatory issues in the European context," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19175, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    14. Athearn, Kevin R., 2003. "Can Eco-Labeling Do More Harm Than Good? A Comparative Statics Analysis," 2003 Annual Meeting, February 1-5, 2003, Mobile, Alabama 35105, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    15. Li, Yi, 2020. "Competing eco-labels and product market competition," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    16. Nikolov, Bogomil & Vasileva, Elka & Ivanova, Daniela, 2011. "The information asymmetries and consumer policy issues in Bulgaria," MPRA Paper 50041, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. repec:isu:genstf:200901010800001872 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Verbeke, Wim & Ward, Ronald W., 2003. "Importance of EU Label Requirements: An Application of Ordered Probit Models to Belgium Beef Labels," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22077, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. repec:lic:licosd:27611 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Nadia Cuffaro & Marina Di Giacinto, 2011. "High quality exports and consumers’ trust: a development perspective," Working Papers 2011-04, Universita' di Cassino, Dipartimento di Economia e Giurisprudenza.
    21. Hend Ghazzai & R Lahmandi-Ayed, 2018. "Ecolabels: Is More Information Better?," Working Papers hal-01877934, HAL.
    22. McCluskey, Jill J., 2000. "A Game Theoretic Approach to Organic Foods: An Analysis of Asymmetric Information and Policy," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(1), pages 1-9, 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:uconnr:25215. 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/fmuctus.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.