IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ijfaec/316274.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer Responses Towards Non-GM Food: Evidence From Experimental Auctions In Vietnam

Author

Listed:
  • Tong, Yen Dan
  • Khuu, Dong
  • Toan, Truong Duc
  • Nguyen, Phuong Duy
  • Pham, Nhai

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the point of view of consumers in developing and emerging market about the genetically modified and non-genetically modified food based on the evidence from soymilk non- genetically modified product. The experimental auction method was employed to explicit the willingness-to-pay of Vietnamese consumers for a non-genetically modified soymilk products. Regression analysis was applied to determine factors influencing consumer's WTP for non-genetically modified product. The results indicated that consumers are willing to pay 84% premium for soy milk with non-genetically modified attribute information in comparison with the conventional one. The level of WTP derived from the auction is not much different from the market price of the product being auctioned. Notably, consumers with high level of risk aversion were likely to purchase non-genetically modified food. This was a predominant factor that determines who would accept or deny the consumption of non-genetically modified food.

Suggested Citation

  • Tong, Yen Dan & Khuu, Dong & Toan, Truong Duc & Nguyen, Phuong Duy & Pham, Nhai, 2021. "Consumer Responses Towards Non-GM Food: Evidence From Experimental Auctions In Vietnam," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 9(4), October.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ijfaec:316274
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.316274
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/316274/files/vol9.no4.pp297.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.316274?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. Lusk, Jayson L., 2003. "Using Experimental Auctions for Marketing Applications: A Discussion," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 349-360, August.
    2. Shogren, Jason F. & Cho, Sungwon & Koo, Cannon & List, John & Park, Changwon & Polo, Pablo & Wilhelmi, Robert, 2001. "Auction mechanisms and the measurement of WTP and WTA," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 97-109, April.
    3. Nan Chen & Zhi-Hai Zhang & Simin Huang & Li Zheng, 2018. "Chinese consumer responses to carbon labeling: evidence from experimental auctions," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(13), pages 2319-2337, November.
    4. My, Nguyen H.D. & Demont, Matty & Van Loo, Ellen J. & de Guia, Annalyn & Rutsaert, Pieter & Tuan, Tran Huu & Verbeke, Wim, 2018. "What is the value of sustainably-produced rice? Consumer evidence from experimental auctions in Vietnam," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 283-296.
    5. Qing Liu & Zhen Yan & Jiehong Zhou, 2017. "Consumer Choices and Motives for Eco-Labeled Products in China: An Empirical Analysis Based on the Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-12, February.
    6. R. Karina Gallardo & Ines Hanrahan & Chengyan Yue & Vicki A. McCracken & James Luby & James R. McFerson & Carolyn Ross & Lilian Carrillo†Rodriguez, 2018. "Combining sensory evaluations and experimental auctions to assess consumers’ preferences for fresh fruit quality characteristics," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 407-425, 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. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Panagiotis Lazaridis & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2009. "Would consumers value food-away-from-home products with nutritional labels?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 550-575.
    2. Sabrina Teyssier & Fabrice Etilé & Pierre Combris, 2012. "Social- and Self-Image Concerns in Fair-Trade Consumption: Evidence from Experimental Auctions for Chocolate," PSE Working Papers halshs-00722592, HAL.
    3. repec:ken:wpaper:0602 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Elijah Wolfe & Michael Popp & Claudia Bazzani & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Diana Danforth & Jennie Popp & Pengyin Chen & Han†Seok Seo, 2018. "Consumers’ willingness to pay for edamame with a genetically modified label," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 283-299, March.
    5. Xia, Senmao & Ling, Yantao & de Main, Leanne & Lim, Ming K. & Li, Gendao & Zhang, Peter & Cao, Mengqiu, 2022. "Creating a low carbon economy through green supply chain management: investigation of willingness-to-pay for green products from a consumer’s perspective," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 116895, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Kyriaki Remoundou & Drichoutis Andreas & Phoebe Koundouri, 2010. "Warm glow in charitable auctions: Are the WEIRDos driving the results?," DEOS Working Papers 1028, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    7. Jianhua Wang & Jiaye Ge & Yuting Ma, 2018. "Urban Chinese Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Pork with Certified Labels: A Discrete Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, February.
    8. Rosenboim, Mosi & Shavit, Tal & Cohen, Chen, 2013. "Do bidders require a monetary premium for cognitive effort in an auction?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 99-105.
    9. John List, 2022. "2021 Summary Data of Natural Field Experiments Published on Fieldexperiments.com," Natural Field Experiments 00747, The Field Experiments Website.
    10. Meyer, Andrew G., 2015. "The impacts of elicitation mechanism and reward size on estimated rates of time preference," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 132-148.
    11. Shogren, Jason F & Hayes, Dermot J, 1997. "Resolving Differences in Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(1), pages 241-244, March.
    12. Ballesteros, Josefina F. & Schouteten, Joachim J. & Otilla, Angelyn & Ramirez, Ramona Isabel & Gellynck, Xavier & Casaul, Julieta & De Steur, Hans, 2023. "Does award and origin labeling influence consumers’ willingness-to-pay beyond sensory cues? An experimental auction on improved Philippine tablea (cocoa liquor)," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    13. Buller, Virginia & Hudson, Darren & Parkhurst, Gregory M. & Whittington, Andrew, 2006. "The Impact of Hunting Package Attributes on Hunting Package Prices in Mississippi," Research Reports 15798, Mississippi State University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    14. Yohanes E. Riyanto & Jianlin Zhang, 2016. "Putting a price tag on others’ perceptions of us," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(2), pages 480-499, June.
    15. Ulrich Schmidt & Stefan Traub, 2009. "An Experimental Investigation of the Disparity Between WTA and WTP for Lotteries," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 229-262, March.
    16. Anna Kremel, 2024. "Consumer Behaviour in a Circular System – How Values Promote and Hinder the Participation of Young Adults in the Swedish Deposit-Refund System for Beverage Packaging," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 1427-1446, June.
    17. Dragicevic, Arnaud Z. & Ettinger, David, 2011. "Private Valuation of a Public Good in Three Auction Mechanisms," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 1-29, April.
    18. Jason Delaney & Sarah Jacobson & Thorsten Moenig, 2020. "Preference discovery," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(3), pages 694-715, September.
    19. Li, Yingzi & Gallardo, R. Karina & McCracken, Vicki A. & Yue, Chengyan & Luby, James & McFerson, James R., 2014. "How does the revelation of previous bid affect new bid?," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170439, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Emmanuel Flachaire & Guillaume Hollard & Jason Shogren, 2013. "On the origin of the WTA–WTP divergence in public good valuation," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 431-437, March.
    21. Laura Enthoven & Goedele Van den Broeck, 2021. "Promoting Food Safety in Local Value Chains: The Case of Vegetables in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-17, June.

    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:ijfaec:316274. 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/iiaaktr.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.