IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ias/cpaper/06-wp436.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Discounting Spotted Apples: Investigating Consumers' Willingness to Accept Cosmetic Damage in an Organic Product

Author

Listed:
  • Chengyan Yue
  • Frode Alfnes
  • Helen H. Jensen

Abstract

Organic producers have limited methods of avoiding plant diseases that result in cosmetic damage to produce. Therefore, the appearance of organic produce is often less than perfect. We use an experimental auction to investigate how cosmetic damage affects consumers' willingness to pay for organic apples. We find that 75% of the participants are willing to pay more for organic than for conventional apples given identical appearance. However, at the first sight of any imperfection in the appearance of the organic apples, this segment is significantly reduced. Furthermore, we find that there is a significant effect of interaction between cosmetic damage and product methods. Even though most consumers say they buy organic products to avoid pesticides, we find that cosmetic damage has a larger impact on the willingness to pay for organic apples than for conventional apples.

Suggested Citation

  • Chengyan Yue & Frode Alfnes & Helen H. Jensen, 2006. "Discounting Spotted Apples: Investigating Consumers' Willingness to Accept Cosmetic Damage in an Organic Product," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 06-wp436, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    • Handle: RePEc:ias:cpaper:06-wp436
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.card.iastate.edu/products/publications/pdf/06wp436.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.card.iastate.edu/products/publications/synopsis/?p=1030
    File Function: Online Synopsis
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jill E. Hobbs & DeeVon Bailey & David L. Dickinson & Morteza Haghiri, 2005. "Traceability in the Canadian Red Meat Sector: Do Consumers Care?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(1), pages 47-65, March.
    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. Bulut, Harun & Lawrence, John D., 2007. "Meat Slaughter and Processing Plants’ Traceability Levels Evidence From Iowa," 2007 Conference, April 16-17, 2007, Chicago, Illinois 37576, NCCC-134 Conference on Applied Commodity Price Analysis, Forecasting, and Market Risk Management.
    2. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities, China," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212609, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Giraud, Georges & Halawany, Rafia, 2006. "Consumers' perception of food traceability in Europe," 98th Seminar, June 29-July 2, 2006, Chania, Crete, Greece 10047, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Pendell, Dustin L. & Tonsor, Glynn T. & Dhuyvetter, Kevin C. & Brester, Gary W. & Schroeder, Ted C., 2013. "Evolving beef export market access requirements for age and source verification," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 332-340.
    5. Shengnan Sun & Xinping Wang & Yan Zhang, 2017. "Sustainable Traceability in the Food Supply Chain: The Impact of Consumer Willingness to Pay," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-19, June.
    6. Sébastien Pouliot & Daniel A. Sumner, 2008. "Traceability, Liability, and Incentives for Food Safety and Quality," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(1), pages 15-27.
    7. Cosmina Bradu & Jacob Orquin & John Thøgersen, 2014. "The Mediated Influence of a Traceability Label on Consumer’s Willingness to Buy the Labelled Product," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(2), pages 283-295, October.
    8. Shihu Zhong & Jie Chen, 2019. "How Environmental Beliefs Affect Consumer Willingness to Pay for the Greenness Premium of Low-Carbon Agricultural Products in China: Theoretical Model and Survey-based Evidence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, January.
    9. Bo Hou & Linhai Wu & Xiujuan Chen & Dian Zhu & Ruiyao Ying & Fu-Sheng Tsai, 2019. "Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Foods with Traceability Information: Ex-Ante Quality Assurance or Ex-Post Traceability?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-14, March.
    10. Lingling Xu & Xixi Yang & Linhai Wu & Xiujuan Chen & Lu Chen & Fu-Sheng Tsai, 2019. "Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Food with Information on Animal Welfare, Lean Meat Essence Detection, and Traceability," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-22, September.
    11. Shijiu Yin & Shanshan Lv & Yusheng Chen & Linhai Wu & Mo Chen & Jiang Yan, 2018. "Consumer preference for infant milk‐based formula with select food safety information attributes: Evidence from a choice experiment in China," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 66(4), pages 557-569, December.
    12. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities, China," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211884, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Fabien Santini & Fatmir Guri & Audrey Aubard & Demetrios Psaltopoulos & Robert Read & Sergio Gomez y Paloma, 2014. "EU Island Farming and the Labelling of its Products," JRC Research Reports JRC84949, Joint Research Centre.
    14. Caswell, Julie A. & Joseph, Siny, 2007. "Consumer Demand for Quality: Major Determinant for Agricultural and Food Trade in the Future?," Working Paper Series 7390, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
    15. Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene & Francesco Marangon, 2008. "Using Flexible Taste Distributions to Value Collective Reputation for Environmentally Friendly Production Methods," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(2), pages 145-162, June.
    16. Steiner, Bodo E. & Srivastava, Lorie & Gao, Fei, 2007. "Assessing the Consumer Acceptance and Market Potential of Alternative Meats," Project Report Series 7708, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    17. Abidoye, Babatunde O. & Bulut, Harun & Lawrence, John D. & Mennecke, Brian & Townsend, Anthony M., 2011. "U.S. Consumers’ Valuation of Quality Attributes in Beef Products," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(1), pages 1-12, February.
    18. Alba J. Collart & Elizabeth Canales, 2022. "How might broad adoption of blockchain‐based traceability impact the U.S. fresh produce supply chain?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(1), pages 219-236, March.
    19. Wang, Erpeng & Gao, Zhifeng & Heng, Yan & Shi, Lijia, 2019. "Chinese consumers’ preferences for food quality test/measurement indicators and cues of milk powder: A case of Zhengzhou, China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    20. Hou, Bo & Wu, Linhai & Chen, Xiujuan, 2019. "Market simulation of traceable food in China based on conjoint-value analysis: a traceable case of pork," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 23(5), December.

    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:ias:cpaper:06-wp436. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caiasus.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.