IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uersrr/242448.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Changes in Retail Organic Price Premiums from 2004 to 2010

Author

Listed:
  • Carlson, Andrea
  • Jaenicke, Edward

Abstract

Organic foods are one of the most rapidly growing sectors of the retail food market. This study applies a hedonic model to 2004-10 Nielsen Homescan data to estimate the organic price premiums for 17 products. Eggs and dairy products generally have the highest premiums, while fresh produce has the widest spread of premiums (ranging from 7 percent of the nonorganic price for spinach to 60 percent for salad mix). Processed food premiums range from 22 percent for granola to 54 percent for canned beans. The strong organic premiums, combined with increased sales, suggest that there is continued room for growth in the organic supply.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlson, Andrea & Jaenicke, Edward, 2016. "Changes in Retail Organic Price Premiums from 2004 to 2010," Economic Research Report 242448, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:uersrr:242448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/242448
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Judith A. Chevalier & Anil K. Kashyap & Peter E. Rossi, 2003. "Why Don't Prices Rise During Periods of Peak Demand? Evidence from Scanner Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 15-37, March.
    2. Greene, Catherine & McBride, William D., 2015. "Consumer Demand for Organiz Milk Continues to Expand-Can the U.S. Dairy Sector Catch Up?," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 30(1).
    3. Kiesel Kristin & Villas-Boas Sofia B, 2007. "Got Organic Milk? Consumer Valuations of Milk Labels after the Implementation of the USDA Organic Seal," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-40, April.
    4. Stevens-Garmon, John & Huang, Chung L. & Lin, Biing-Hwan, 2007. "Organic Demand: A Profile of Consumers in the Fresh Produce Market," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 22(2).
    5. 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..
    6. Chang, Jae Bong & Lusk, Jayson L. & Norwood, F. Bailey, 2010. "The Price of Happy Hens: A Hedonic Analysis of Retail Egg Prices," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 35(3), December.
    7. Zhang, Feng & Epperson, James E. & Huang, Chung L. & Houston, Jack E., 2009. "Organic Price Premiums Paid for Fresh Tomatoes and Apples by U.S. Households: Evidence from Nielsen Homescan Data," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 40(3), November.
    8. A. Colin Cameron & Pravin K. Trivedi, 2010. "Microeconometrics Using Stata, Revised Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, number musr, April.
    9. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    10. Kiesel Kristin & Villas-Boas Sofia B, 2007. "Got Organic Milk? Consumer Valuations of Milk Labels after the Implementation of the USDA Organic Seal," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-40, April.
    11. Feng Zhang & Chung L. Huang & Biing-Hwan Lin & James E. Epperson, 2008. "Modeling fresh organic produce consumption with scanner data: a generalized double hurdle model approach," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 510-522.
    12. repec:oup:revage:v:31:y:2009:i:3:p:470-492. is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Chen Zhen & Justin L. Taylor & Mary K. Muth & Ephraim Leibtag, 2009. "Understanding Differences in Self-Reported Expenditures between Household Scanner Data and Diary Survey Data: A Comparison of Homescan and Consumer Expenditure Survey," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(3), pages 470-492.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Seufert, Verena & Ramankutty, Navin & Mayerhofer, Tabea, 2017. "What is this thing called organic? – How organic farming is codified in regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 10-20.

    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:uersrr:242448. 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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ersgvus.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.