IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/agrebk/qt58j648mk.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consumer and Strategic Firm Response to Nutrition Shelf Labels

Author

Listed:
  • Villas-Boas, Sofia B
  • Kiesel, Kristin
  • Berning, Joshua
  • Chouinard, Hayley
  • McCluskey, Jill

Abstract

The display of nutrition facts is mandatory on virtually all packaged foods sold in the United States. Yet manufacturers and retailers add their own claims to differentiate their products and capture consumers' attention at point of sale. We implement experimental nutrition claims on shelf labels in a retail setting and test how consumers react to the display of these labels that express information reported on the Nutrition Facts Panel in a different format. We hypothesize that our labels either shift demand for the highlighted healthier products uniformly or trigger more complex demand rotations. Our estimated heterogeneous labeling effects suggest that consumers process nutrition information differently depending on which and how many claims are displayed and prefer products labeled with a single claim overall. When we simultaneously consider demand and supply responses under three price setting behaviors (competitive pricing, Bertrand‐Nash pricing, and monopoly pricing), we find that consumer surplus and overall welfare is highest when our labels display multiple nutrient claims and retailers are able to adjust prices across the entire product category. Firms' profits are highest when single nutrient claims are displayed, however. We conclude that firms with market power have little incentive to voluntarily display nutrition claims that maximize welfare.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Villas-Boas, Sofia B & Kiesel, Kristin & Berning, Joshua & Chouinard, Hayley & McCluskey, Jill, 2019. "Consumer and Strategic Firm Response to Nutrition Shelf Labels," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt58j648mk, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:agrebk:qt58j648mk
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/58j648mk.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Laurent Muller & M. Prevost, 2016. "What cognitive sciences have to say about the impacts of nutritional labelling formats," Post-Print hal-01349185, HAL.
    3. Small, Kenneth A & Rosen, Harvey S, 1981. "Applied Welfare Economics with Discrete Choice Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(1), pages 105-130, January.
    4. Hyeyoung Kim & Lisa A. House & Gail Rampersaud & Zhifeng Gao, 2012. "Front-of-Package Nutritional Labels and Consumer Beverage Perceptions," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 34(4), pages 599-614.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:6:p:520-530 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Greg Allenby & Jeff Brazell & John Howell & Peter Rossi, 2014. "Economic valuation of product features," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 421-456, December.
    7. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    8. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    9. Richard J. Sexton, 2013. "Market Power, Misconceptions, and Modern Agricultural Markets," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(2), pages 209-219.
    10. Bradley J. Rickard & Jura Liaukonyte & Harry M. Kaiser & Timothy J. Richards, 2011. "Consumer Response to Commodity-Specific and Broad-Based Promotion Programs for Fruits and Vegetables," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1312-1327.
    11. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, January.
    12. Kiesel, Kristin & Villas-Boas, Sofia B., 2013. "Can information costs affect consumer choice? Nutritional labels in a supermarket experiment," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 153-163.
    13. Daniel A. Ackerberg, 2003. "Advertising, learning, and consumer choice in experience good markets: an empirical examination," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 44(3), pages 1007-1040, August.
    14. Aviv Nevo, 2003. "New Products, Quality Changes, and Welfare Measures Computed from Estimated Demand Systems," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 266-275, May.
    15. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2006. "On the Simple Economics of Advertising, Marketing, and Product Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 756-784, June.
    16. Ackerberg, Daniel A, 2001. "Empirically Distinguishing Informative and Prestige Effects of Advertising," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(2), pages 316-333, Summer.
    17. Chen Zhu & Rigoberto A. Lopez & Xiaoou Liu, 2016. "Information Cost and Consumer Choices of Healthy Foods," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(1), pages 41-53.
    18. Christine Moorman & Rosellina Ferraro & Joel Huber, 2012. "Unintended Nutrition Consequences: Firm Responses to the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(5), pages 717-737, September.
    19. Muller, L. & Prevost, M., 2016. "What cognitive sciences have to say about the impacts of nutritional labelling formats," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 17-29.
    20. Mathios, Alan D, 2000. "The Impact of Mandatory Disclosure Laws on Product Choices: An Analysis of the Salad Dressing Market," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(2), pages 651-677, October.
    21. Boztuğ, Yasemin & Juhl, Hans Jørn & Elshiewy, Ossama & Jensen, Morten Berg, 2015. "Consumer response to monochrome Guideline Daily Amount nutrition labels," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 1-8.
    22. Hoyer, Wayne D, 1984. "An Examination of Consumer Decision Making for a Common Repeat Purchase Product," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 11(3), pages 822-829, December.
    23. Loureiro, Maria L. & Rahmani, Djamel, 2016. "The incidence of calorie labeling on fast food choices: A comparison between stated preferences and actual choices," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 82-93.
    24. Joshua P. Berning & Hayley H. Chouinard & Jill J. McCluskey, 2010. "Do Positive Nutrition Shelf Labels Affect Consumer Behavior? Findings from a Field Experiment with Scanner Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 364-369.
    25. McFadden, Daniel, 1974. "The measurement of urban travel demand," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 303-328, November.
    26. George Loewenstein & Cass R. Sunstein & Russell Golman, 2014. "Disclosure: Psychology Changes Everything," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 391-419, August.
    27. Stefano DellaVigna & Matthew Gentzkow, 2019. "Uniform Pricing in U.S. Retail Chains," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(4), pages 2011-2084.
    28. Amil Petrin, 2002. "Quantifying the Benefits of New Products: The Case of the Minivan," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(4), pages 705-729, August.
    29. Laurent Muller & Marie Prevost, 2016. "What cognitive sciences have to say about the impacts of nutritional labelling formats," Post-Print hal-01306124, HAL.
    30. Kelvin Balcombe & Iain Fraser & Ben Lowe & Diogo Souza Monteiro, 2016. "Information Customization and Food Choice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(1), pages 54-73.
    31. 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. Wenying Li & Eric Andrew Finkelstein & Chen Zhen, 2022. "Intended and unintended consequences of salient nutrition labels," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 853-872, March.
    2. Katherine Harris‐Lagoudakis, 2022. "Online shopping and the healthfulness of grocery purchases," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(3), pages 1050-1076, May.
    3. Francisco Scott & Juan P. Sesmero, 2022. "Market and welfare effects of quality misperception in food labels," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(5), pages 1747-1769, October.
    4. Nano Barahona & Cristóbal Otero & Sebastián Otero, 2023. "Equilibrium Effects of Food Labeling Policies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(3), pages 839-868, May.
    5. Jorge Alé-Chilet & Sarah Moshary, 2022. "Beyond Consumer Switching: Supply Responses to Food Packaging and Advertising Regulations," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 243-270, March.
    6. Tatiana Drugova & Kynda R. Curtis & Sherzod B. Akhundjanov, 2020. "Are multiple labels on food products beneficial or simply ignored?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(4), pages 411-427, December.
    7. Kristin Kiesel & Mengxin Ji, 2021. "Did state‐mandated restrictions on sugar‐sweetened drinks in California high schools increase soda purchases in school neighborhoods?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(4), pages 1443-1475, December.

    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. Sofia B. Villas‐Boas & Céline Bonnet & James Hilger, 2021. "Random Utility Models, Wine and Experts," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(2), pages 663-681, March.
    2. Allais, Olivier & Etilé, Fabrice & Lecocq, Sébastien, 2015. "Mandatory labels, taxes and market forces: An empirical evaluation of fat policies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 27-44.
    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. James Hilger & Eric Hallstein & Andrew W. Stevens & Sofia B. Villas-Boas, 2019. "Measuring Willingness to Pay for Environmental Attributes in Seafood," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(1), pages 307-332, May.
    5. 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.
    6. Rachel Griffith & Lars Nesheim & Martin O'Connell, 2018. "Income effects and the welfare consequences of tax in differentiated product oligopoly," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), pages 305-341, March.
    7. Federico Ciliberto & GianCarlo Moschini & Edward D. Perry, 2019. "Valuing product innovation: genetically engineered varieties in US corn and soybeans," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 50(3), pages 615-644, September.
    8. Crosetto, P. & Lacroix, A. & Muller, L. & Ruffieux, B., 2018. "Nutritional and economic impact of 5 alternative front-of-pack nutritional labels: experimental evidence," Working Papers 2018-11, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    9. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    10. Yukihiro Kidokoro, 2015. "Discrete choice models for multicategory goods," GRIPS Discussion Papers 15-08, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.
    11. Wenying Li & Eric Andrew Finkelstein & Chen Zhen, 2022. "Intended and unintended consequences of salient nutrition labels," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 853-872, March.
    12. Pereira, Pedro & Ribeiro, Tiago, 2011. "The impact on broadband access to the Internet of the dual ownership of telephone and cable networks," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 283-293, March.
    13. Steven T. Berry & Philip A. Haile, 2021. "Foundations of Demand Estimation," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2301, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    14. Shimokawa, S. & Niiyama, Y. & Kito, Y. & Kudo, H. & Yamaguchi, M., 2018. "No-tolerant Consumers, Information Treatments, and Demand for Stigmatized Foods: the Case of Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident in Japan," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277198, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.
    16. Kidokoro, Yukihiro, 2016. "A micro foundation for discrete choice models with multiple categories of goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 54-72.
    17. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2007. "Discrete Choice Models With Multiple Unobserved Choice Characteristics," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(4), pages 1159-1192, November.
    18. Christopher R. Knittel & Konstantinos Metaxoglou, 2008. "Estimation of Random Coefficient Demand Models: Challenges, Difficulties and Warnings," NBER Working Papers 14080, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Simon P. Anderson & Federico Ciliberto & Jura Liaukonyte & Régis Renault, 2016. "Push-me pull-you: comparative advertising in the OTC analgesics industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(4), pages 1029-1056, November.
    20. Robert Donnelly & Francisco J.R. Ruiz & David Blei & Susan Athey, 2021. "Counterfactual inference for consumer choice across many product categories," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 369-407, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Social and Behavioral Sciences;

    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:cdl:agrebk:qt58j648mk. 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: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dabrkus.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.