IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/iptwpa/jrc120297.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic analyses of differences in composition of seemingly identical branded food products in the Single Market

Author

Listed:
  • Pavel Ciaian

    (European Commission - JRC)

  • Federica Di Marcantonio

    (European Commission - JRC)

  • Liesbeth Colen

    (European Commission - JRC)

  • Kjersti Nes

    (European Commission - JRC)

  • Jesus Barreiro-Hurle

    (European Commission - JRC)

  • François J. Dessart

    (European Commission - JRC)

  • Luisa Menapace

    (Technical University of Munich – Tum)

  • Carlo Russo

    (University of Cassino and Lazio Meridionale)

  • Annarita Colamatteo

    (University of Cassino and Lazio Meridionale)

  • Negin Fathinejad

    (University of Cassino and Lazio Meridionale)

  • Maria Anna Pagnanelli

    (University of Cassino and Lazio Meridionale)

  • Marcello Sansone

    (University of Cassino and Lazio Meridionale)

  • Edward Kyei Twum

    (University of Cassino and Lazio Meridionale)

  • George Chryssochoidis

    (University of Kent)

Abstract

Differences in composition of seemingly identical, branded food products (DC-SIP) occur when a good is marketed in one country as being identical (labelling, and appearance on packaging) to goods marketed in other countries, while that good has significantly different composition. The DC-SIP issue was brought to policymakers’ attention in 2017 by tests conducted in several Eastern EU Member States, which showed that some brand owners sell products across the EU Single Market, which are of different composition, despite having the same or similar packaging. The European Parliament and the European Council stressed the importance of tackling the issue of dual quality products, and requested that the European Commission investigate these practices, and find a solution at the European level. As a response to this request, the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC), in collaboration with experts from Member States’ competent authorities and stakeholders in the food chain, developed and applied a harmonised methodology in 2018/2019, with the objective of bringing further evidence on whether the composition of various branded food products differed across Member States. In April 2018, the European Commission tabled a proposal for the amendment of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive 2005/29/EC, aimed at introducing more specific rules on the DC-SIP issue. The European Parliament and the Council adopted these amendments on 27 November 2019. At the request of the European Parliament, the JRC carried out an economic analysis of DC-SIP in collaboration with DG GROW, to develop a better understanding of the drivers, and of the impact of this phenomenon. This report summarises the main finding of this pilot project. The specific objectives of this project were to: (1) Explain the rationale for brand owners to offer different versions of identically or similarly branded food products in different markets; (2) Analyse the impact of DC-SIP on consumers’ choices and welfare and (3) Identify the main determinants of the occurrence of DC-SIP across Member States.

Suggested Citation

  • Pavel Ciaian & Federica Di Marcantonio & Liesbeth Colen & Kjersti Nes & Jesus Barreiro-Hurle & François J. Dessart & Luisa Menapace & Carlo Russo & Annarita Colamatteo & Negin Fathinejad & Maria Anna , 2020. "Economic analyses of differences in composition of seemingly identical branded food products in the Single Market," JRC Research Reports JRC120297, Joint Research Centre.
    • Handle: RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc120297
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC120297
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tommaso M. Valletti & Stefan Szymanski, 2006. "Parallel Trade, International Exhaustion And Intellectual Property Rights: A Welfare Analysis," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 499-526, December.
    2. Motta, Massimo, 1993. "Endogenous Quality Choice: Price vs. Quantity Competition," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 113-131, June.
    3. Tina L. Saitone & Richard J. Sexton, 2010. "Product Differentiation and Quality in Food Markets: Industrial Organization Implications," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 341-368, October.
    4. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    5. Baltas, George & Doyle, Peter, 2001. "Random utility models in marketing research: a survey," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 115-125, February.
    6. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard, 1986. "Fairness as a Constraint on Profit Seeking: Entitlements in the Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 728-741, September.
    7. Smith, N. Craig & Palazzo, Guido & Bhattacharya, C. B., 2010. "Marketing’s Consequences: Stakeholder Marketing and Supply Chain Corporate Social Responsibility Issues," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 617-641, October.
    8. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, December.
    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. Liesbeth Colen & Sergio Gomez y Paloma & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Marianne Lefebvre & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2016. "Economic Experiments as a Tool for Agricultural Policy Evaluation: Insights from the European CAP," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(4), pages 667-694, December.
    11. Alessandro Bonanno & Carlo Russo & Luisa Menapace, 2018. "Market power and bargaining in agrifood markets: A review of emerging topics and tools," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(1), pages 6-23, December.
    12. Sarkar Sengupta, Aditi & Balaji, M.S. & Krishnan, Balaji C., 2015. "How customers cope with service failure? A study of brand reputation and customer satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 665-674.
    13. Federica Di Marcantonio & Luisa Menapace & Jesus Barreiro-Hurle & Pavel Ciaian & François J. Dessart & Liesbeth Colen, 2020. "Empirical testing of the impact on consumer choice resulting from differences in the composition of seemingly identical branded products," JRC Research Reports JRC119484, Joint Research Centre.
    14. Liesbeth Colen & George Chryssochoidis & Pavel Ciaian & Federica Di Marcantonio, 2020. "Differences in composition of seemingly identical branded products: Impact on consumer purchase decisions and welfare," JRC Research Reports JRC118149, Joint Research Centre.
    15. Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E. M., 1990. "Conceptual model of the quality perception process," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 309-333, December.
    16. Kyle Margaret, 2011. "Strategic Responses to Parallel Trade," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 1-34, January.
    17. Brian E. Roe & David R. Just, 2009. "Internal and External Validity in Economics Research: Tradeoffs between Experiments, Field Experiments, Natural Experiments, and Field Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1266-1271.
    18. Liesbeth Colen & Sergio Gomez y Paloma & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Marianne Lefebvre & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2016. "Economic Experiments as a Tool for Agricultural Policy Evaluation: Insights from the European CAP," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(4), pages 667-694, December.
    19. Schmid, Stefan & Kotulla, Thomas, 2011. "50 years of research on international standardization and adaptation--From a systematic literature analysis to a theoretical framework," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 491-507, October.
    20. Verlegh, Peeter W. J. & Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E. M., 1999. "A review and meta-analysis of country-of-origin research," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 521-546, October.
    21. Klaus G. Grunert, 2005. "Food quality and safety: consumer perception and demand," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(3), pages 369-391, September.
    22. Lusk, Jayson L. & Roosen, Jutta & Shogren, Jason (ed.), 2011. "The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Food Consumption and Policy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199569441.
    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. Liesbeth Colen & George Chryssochoidis & Pavel Ciaian & Federica Di Marcantonio, 2020. "Differences in composition of seemingly identical branded products: Impact on consumer purchase decisions and welfare," JRC Research Reports JRC118149, Joint Research Centre.
    2. Nes, Kjersti & Ciaian, Pavel & Di Marcantonio, Federica, 2021. "Economic determinants of differences in the composition of seemingly identical branded food products in the EU," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    3. Marco Costanigro & Yuko Onozaka, 2020. "A Belief‐Preference Model of Choice for Experience and Credence Goods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 70-95, February.
    4. Mariana Cunha & António Osório & Ricardo Ribeiro, 2016. "Endogenous product design and quality with rationally inattentive consumers," Working Papers de Economia (Economics Working Papers) 03, Católica Porto Business School, Universidade Católica Portuguesa.
    5. Ya‐chin Wang & Leonard F.s. Wang, 2009. "Equivalence Of Competition Mode In A Vertically Differentiated Duopoly With Delegation," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 77(4), pages 577-590, December.
    6. Tiziano Tempesta & Daniel Vecchiato, 2019. "Analysis of the Factors that Influence Olive Oil Demand in the Veneto Region (Italy)," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-17, July.
    7. Nabin, Munirul H. & Nguyen, Xuan & Sgro, Pasquale M. & Chao, Chi-Chur, 2014. "Strategic quality competition, mixed oligopoly and privatization," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 142-150.
    8. Jen-Te Yao, 2005. "Counterfeiting and an Optimal Monitoring Policy," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 95-114, January.
    9. Mario Pezzino, 2010. "Hospital competition when patients have different willingness to pay for quality," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1014, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    10. Aravindakshan, Sreejith & Krupnik, Timothy J. & Amjath-Babu, T.S. & Speelman, Stijn & Tur-Cardona, Juan & Tittonell, Pablo & Groot, Jeroen C.J., 2021. "Quantifying farmers' preferences for cropping systems intensification: A choice experiment approach applied in coastal Bangladesh's risk prone farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    11. Auer, Raphael A. & Sauré, Philip, 2017. "Dynamic entry in vertically differentiated markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 177-205.
    12. Luc Behaghel & Karen Macours & Julie Subervie, 2019. "How can randomised controlled trials help improve the design of the common agricultural policy?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 473-493.
    13. Joaquín Andaluz & Gloria Jarne, 2016. "Stability of vertically differentiated Cournot and Bertrand-type models when firms are boundedly rational," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 238(1), pages 1-25, March.
    14. Engelman, Marc & Lagerkvist, Carl-Johan & Gren, Ing-Marie, 2018. "Hunters' trade-off in valuation of different game animals in Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 73-81.
    15. Gaviglio, Anna & Demartini, Eugenio & Pirani, Alberto & Marescotti, Maria Elena & Bertocchi, Mattia, 2015. "National Brands versus Private Labels versus Niche Products: a graphical representation of consumers' perception," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202731, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Chia-Ling Hsu & Rafael Matta & Sergey V. Popov & Takeharu Sogo, 2017. "Optimal Product Placement," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 51(1), pages 127-145, August.
    17. Leufkens, D., 2015. "Der Wert geschützter Herkunftsangaben in einer industrieökonomischen und hedonischen Preisanalyse," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 50, March.
    18. Yong-Hwan Noh & Giancarlo Moschini, 2006. "Vertical Product Differentiation, Entry-Deterrence Strategies, and Entry Qualities," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 29(3), pages 227-252, November.
    19. Olivier Bonroy & Christos Constantatos, 2015. "On the Economics of Labels: How Their Introduction Affects the Functioning of Markets and the Welfare of All Participants," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(1), pages 239-259.
    20. Jørgen Hansen & Jørgen Nielsen, 2009. "Dumping and Injury Margins in Markets with Horizontal as well as Vertical Product Differentiation," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 233-250, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    dual food quality; food chain; branded food products; differences in composition; consumers; EU;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality
    • L66 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Food; Beverages; Cosmetics; Tobacco

    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:ipt:iptwpa:jrc120297. 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: Publication Officer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipjrces.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.