IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/umapmt/162233.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consumer willingness to pay for nano-packaged food products: evidence from experimental auctions and visual processing data

Author

Listed:
  • Katare, Bhagyashree

Abstract

Using eye-tracking technology and experimental auctions, this paper evaluates the impact of information from various sources on consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for nano-packaged food products with varying shelf-lives. Information about the risks and benefits of nanotechnology in food processing from various sources was presented to consumers and consumers’ eyes were tracked and the time they spent on viewing the information was recorded. Double hurdle models estimation results show that the specific information about nanotechnology from various sources has a negative effect on the probability of consumer submitting positive bids for the nano-packaged products. Conditional on participants’ willingness to submit positive bids, general and specific information about nanotechnology had a positive effect on participants’ WTP for nano-packaged salads and apple sauce which are products with a relatively shorter shelf-life. The eye-tracking data in the analysis showed the proportion of the normalized time viewing the information from private industry significantly increased the WTP conditional on participants submitting a positive bid for apple sauce as compared with the proportion of normalized time viewing the information from environmental protection groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Katare, Bhagyashree, 2013. "Consumer willingness to pay for nano-packaged food products: evidence from experimental auctions and visual processing data," Master's Theses and Plan B Papers 162233, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:umapmt:162233
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.162233
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/162233/files/BhagyashreeKatareMS.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.162233?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. Elena Reutskaja & Rosemarie Nagel & Colin F. Camerer & Antonio Rangel, 2011. "Search Dynamics in Consumer Choice under Time Pressure: An Eye-Tracking Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 900-926, April.
    2. Christopher Kanter & Kent D. Messer & Harry M. Kaiser, 2009. "Does Production Labeling Stigmatize Conventional Milk?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1097-1109.
    3. Noussair, Charles & Robin, Stephane & Ruffieux, Bernard, 2004. "Revealing consumers' willingness-to-pay: A comparison of the BDM mechanism and the Vickrey auction," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 725-741, December.
    4. Batte, Marvin T. & Hooker, Neal H. & Haab, Timothy C. & Beaverson, Jeremy, 2007. "Putting their money where their mouths are: Consumer willingness to pay for multi-ingredient, processed organic food products," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 145-159, April.
    5. Roosen, Jutta & Bieberstein, Andrea & Marette, Stephan & Blanchemanche, Sandrine & Vandermoere, Frederic, 2011. "The Effect of Information Choice and Discussion on Consumers' Willingness-to-Pay for Nanotechnologies in Food," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-10, August.
    6. Rik Pieters & Luk Warlop & Michel Wedel, 2002. "Breaking Through the Clutter: Benefits of Advertisement Originality and Familiarity for Brand Attention and Memory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(6), pages 765-781, June.
    7. Faical Akaichi & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr & José M. Gil, 2012. "Assessing Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Different Units of Organic Milk: Evidence from Multiunit Auctions," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 60(4), pages 469-494, December.
    8. Pieters, R. & Warlop, L., 1998. "Visual Attention During Brand Choice : The Impact of Time Pressure and Task Motivation," Discussion Paper 1998-69, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    9. Wendy J. Umberger & Dillon M. Feuz, 2004. "The Usefulness of Experimental Auctions in Determining Consumers' Willingness-to-Pay for Quality-Differentiated Products," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 170-185.
    10. Harrison, Glenn W. & Rutström, E. Elisabet, 2008. "Experimental Evidence on the Existence of Hypothetical Bias in Value Elicitation Methods," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 81, pages 752-767, Elsevier.
    11. Katner, Christopher & Messer, Kent D. & Kaiser, Harry M., 2009. "AJAE Appendix: “Does Production Labeling Stigmatize Conventional Milk?”," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1-10, March.
    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. Lijia Wang & Jianhua Wang & Xuexi Huo, 2019. "Consumer’s Willingness to Pay a Premium for Organic Fruits in China: A Double-Hurdle Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-14, January.
    2. Schroeter, Christiane & Nicholson, Charles F. & Meloy, Margaret G., 2016. "Consumer Valuation of Organic and Conventional Milk: Does Shelf Life Matter?," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 47(3), pages 1-19, November.

    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. Katare, Bhagyashree & Yue, Chengyan & Hurley, Terrance M., 2013. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Nano-packaged Food Products: Evidence from Experimental Auctions," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149676, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Naphtal Habiyaremye & Nadhem Mtimet & Emily A. Ouma & Gideon A. Obare, 2023. "Consumers' willingness to pay for safe and quality milk: Evidence from experimental auctions in Rwanda," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1049-1074, October.
    3. Verteramo Chiu, Leslie J. & Gómez, Miguel I. & Kaiser, Harry M. & Yan, Jubo, 2014. "Socially-Responsible Certification Schemes for Smallholder Coffee Farmers: Economics of Giving and Consumer Utility," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170551, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Peter Stüttgen & Peter Boatwright & Robert T. Monroe, 2012. "A Satisficing Choice Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 878-899, November.
    5. Zhao, Shuoli & Yue, Chengyan & Wang, Yumeng, 2016. "How Information Affects Consumer Acceptance of Nano-packaged Food Products," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235602, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Hayk Khachatryan & Alicia Rihn & Ben Campbell & Bridget Behe & Charles Hall, 2018. "How do consumer perceptions of “local†production benefits influence their visual attention to state marketing programs?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 390-406, March.
    7. Orquin, Jacob L. & Bagger, Martin P. & Lahm, Erik S. & Grunert, Klaus G. & Scholderer, Joachim, 2020. "The visual ecology of product packaging and its effects on consumer attention," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 187-195.
    8. Jonas Schmidt & Tammo H. A. Bijmolt, 2020. "Accurately measuring willingness to pay for consumer goods: a meta-analysis of the hypothetical bias," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 499-518, May.
    9. Jessica Aschemann-Witzel & Stephan Zielke, 2017. "Can't Buy Me Green? A Review of Consumer Perceptions of and Behavior Toward the Price of Organic Food," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 211-251, March.
    10. Na Hao & H. Holly Wang, 2021. "Food consumption and stigmatization under COVID‐19: Evidence from Chinese consumers’ aversion to Wuhan hot instant noodles," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(1), pages 82-90, January.
    11. Ran, Tao & Yue, Chengyan & Rihn, Alicia, 2015. "Are Grocery Shoppers of Households with Weight-Concerned Members Willing to Pay More for Nutritional Information on Food?," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 46(3), pages 1-18, November.
    12. Glimcher, Paul & Tymula, Agnieszka & Woelbert, Eva, 2013. "Flexible valuations for consumer goods as measured by the Becker-DeGroot-Marschak mechanism," Working Papers 2013-20, University of Sydney, School of Economics.
    13. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Alexander Jaudas & Alexander Ritschel, 2021. "Attentional shifts and preference reversals: An eye-tracking study," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(1), pages 57-93, January.
    14. Ozge Dinc‐Cavlak & Ozlem Ozdemir, 2021. "Comparing the willingness to pay through three elicitation mechanisms: An experimental evidence for organic egg product," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(4), pages 782-803, October.
    15. Kofi Britwum & Amalia Yiannaka, 2019. "Labeling food safety attributes: to inform or not to inform?," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 7(1), pages 1-21, December.
    16. Ashura Sadick Muhenga & Roselyne Alphonce, 2023. "Consumer’s Awareness and Willingness to Pay for Aflatoxin-Free Sunflower Oil from Four Selected Regions in Tanzania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-15, August.
    17. Jane Kolodinsky & Sean Morris & Orest Pazuniak, 2019. "How consumers use mandatory genetic engineering (GE) labels: evidence from Vermont," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(1), pages 117-125, March.
    18. Lawless, Lydia J.R. & Drichoutis, Andreas & Nayga, Rodolfo & Threlfall, Renee T. & Meullenet, Jean-François, 2012. "Identifying product attributes and consumer attitudes that impact willingness-to-pay for a nutraceutical-rich juice product," MPRA Paper 53023, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Jan 2014.
    19. Biguzzi, Coralie & Ginon, Emilie & Gomez-y-Paloma, Sergio & Langrell, Sergio & Lefebvre, Marianne & Marette, Stephan & Mateu, Guillermo & Sutan, Angela, 2014. "Consumers' preferences for Integrated Pest Management: Experimental insights," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183081, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. BAGLIONE, Stephen L. & TUCCI, Louis A. & STANTON, John L., 2019. "Organic Food: Identifying Actionable Segments," Holistic Marketing Management Journal, Holistic Marketing Management, vol. 9(1), pages 10-27, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Consumer/Household Economics; Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:umapmt:162233. 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/daumnus.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.