The Welfare Effects of Pfiesteria-Related Fish Kills in Seafood Markets: A Contingent Behavior Analysis
We use contingent behavior analysis to study the effects of Pfiesteria related fish kills on the demand for seafood in the Mid-Atlantic region. We use a phone-mail-phone survey to look at the effects of various information provision mechanisms used to ameliorate the effects of misinformation regarding fish kills. A set of demand difference models are estimated based on individual responses to multiple questions about seafood consumption with and without fish kills present and with various health risk information treatments. Random effects Tobit models are used to control for the panel nature of responses and natural censoring of the stated responses. We find that 1) Pfiesteria related fish kills have a significant negative effect on the demand for seafood, 2) seafood consumers are nonresponsive to expert risk information designed to reassure consumers that seafood is safe in the presence of a fish kill, and 3) a mandatory seafood inspection program completely eliminates avoidance costs incurred due to misinformation. We estimate that the aggregate avoidance costs incurred in the month immediately following a Pfiesteria related fish kill is $50-$130 million.
|Date of creation:||2005|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Thelma C. Raley Hall, Boone, North Carolina 28608|
Web page: http://economics.appstate.edu/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- David G. Swartz & Ivar E. Strand, Jr., 1981. "Avoidance Costs Associated with Imperfect Information: The Case of Kepone," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 57(2), pages 139-150.
- Robert N. Shulstad & Herbert H. Stoevener, 1978. "The Effects of Mercury Contamination in Pheasants on the Value of Pheasant Hunting in Oregon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 54(1), pages 39-49.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:apl:wpaper:05-01. 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: (O. Ashton Morgan)
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.