IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/joaaec/137117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Willingness to Pay for Beef Quality Attributes: A Latent Segmentation Analysis of Korean Grocery Shoppers

Author

Listed:
  • Chung, Chanjin
  • Briggeman, Brian C.
  • Han, Sungill

Abstract

A latent segmentation modeling is used in this study to identify the heterogeneity of willingness-to-pay estimates for quality attributes and country-of-origin in the Korean beef market. Three distinctive groups of grocery shoppers are identified based on their level of concern (very, moderately, and not too concerned) about the use of antibiotics and genetically modified organism feed ingredients in beef production. Results indicate that the very concerned group values such attributes as antibiotics-free, genetically modified organism-free, and domestic production the most among the three groups. Results also suggest that the most important factor in determining grocery shoppers’ willingness-to-pay is country-of-origin for all three groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Chung, Chanjin & Briggeman, Brian C. & Han, Sungill, 2012. "Willingness to Pay for Beef Quality Attributes: A Latent Segmentation Analysis of Korean Grocery Shoppers," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 44(4), pages 1-13, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:joaaec:137117
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.137117
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/137117/files/jaae462.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.137117?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen Hynes & Nick Hanley & Riccardo Scarpa, 2008. "Effects on Welfare Measures of Alternative Means of Accounting for Preference Heterogeneity in Recreational Demand Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1011-1027.
    2. Arianto A. Patunru & John B. Braden & Sudip Chattopadhyay, 2007. "Who Cares about Environmental Stigmas and Does It Matter? A Latent Segmentation Analysis of Stated Preferences for Real Estate," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(3), pages 712-726.
    3. Chung, Chanjin & Han, Sungill & Boyer, Tracy A., 2007. "Valuing Quality Attributes and Country Equity in the Korean Beef Market," 2007 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, 2007, Portland, Oregon 9751, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Kinsey, Jean D. & Wolfson, Paul J. & Katsaras, Nikolaos & Senauer, Benjamin, 2001. "Data Mining: A Segmentation Analysis Of U.S. Grocery Shoppers," Working Papers 14335, University of Minnesota, The Food Industry Center.
    5. Lusk, Jayson L. & Parker, Natalie, 2009. "Consumer Preferences for Amount and Type of Fat in Ground Beef," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(1), pages 1-16, April.
    6. Edward Morey & Jennifer Thacher & William Breffle, 2006. "Using Angler Characteristics and Attitudinal Data to Identify Environmental Preference Classes: A Latent-Class Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(1), pages 91-115, May.
    7. Mennecke, Brian & Townsend, Anthony & Hayes, Dermot J. & Lonergan, Steven, 2006. "A Study of the Factors That Influence Consumer Attitudes Toward Beef Products Using the Conjoint Market Analysis Tool," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12650, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    8. Richard T. Carson & Jordan J. Louviere & Nada Wasi, 2009. "A Cautionary Note on Designing Discrete Choice Experiments: A Comment on Lusk and Norwood’s “Effect of Experiment Design on Choice-Based Conjoint Valuation Estimates”," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1056-1063.
    9. Eric Ruto & Guy Garrod & Riccardo Scarpa, 2008. "Valuing animal genetic resources: a choice modeling application to indigenous cattle in Kenya," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 89-98, January.
    10. Dan Rigby & Michael Burton, 2005. "Preference heterogeneity and GM food in the UK," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(2), pages 269-288, June.
    11. Brian C. Briggeman & Jason Henderson, 2009. "The slow road back for the U.S. livestock industry," Main Street Economist, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, issue 4.
    12. Peterson, Hikaru Hanawa & Yoshida, Kentaro, 2004. "Quality Perceptions and Willingness-to-Pay for Imported Rice in Japan," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(1), pages 1-18, April.
    13. Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene, 2005. "Destination Choice Models for Rock Climbing in the Northeastern Alps: A Latent-Class Approach Based on Intensity of Preferences," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(3).
    14. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    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. Shijun Gao & Carola Grebitus & Karen L. DeLong, 2024. "Explaining consumer willingness to pay for country‐of‐origin labeling with ethnocentrism, country image, and product image: Examples from China's beef market," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 72(2), pages 149-166, June.
    2. Lee, Sang Hyeon & Lee, Ji Yong & Han, Doo Bong & Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr., 2014. "Assessing Korean Consumers' Valuation for BSE-Tested and Country of Origin Labeled Beef Products," Journal of Rural Development/Nongchon-Gyeongje, Korea Rural Economic Institute, vol. 37(3), pages 1-21.
    3. Norris, A. & Cranfield, J., 2018. "Consumer Preferences for Country of Origin Labelling on Dairy Products," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275948, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Hyojae Jung & Chanjin Chung, 2024. "Consumers’ WTP for Sustainability Turfgrass Attributes with Consideration of Aesthetic Attributes and Water Conservation Policies," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-16, January.
    5. Heng-Hung KUO & Li-Hsing HO & Wen-Hung LIN, 2015. "Do hog breeds matter? Investigating the price volatility in the Taiwan's auction market," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 61(7), pages 314-325.
    6. Amanda Norris & John Cranfield, 2019. "Consumer Preferences for Country‐of‐Origin Labeling in Protected Markets: Evidence from the Canadian Dairy Market," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 391-403, September.
    7. Caputo, Vincenzina, 2020. "Does information on food safety affect consumers’ acceptance of new food technologies? The case of irradiated beef in South Korea under a new labelling system and across different information regimes," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(04), January.

    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. Angel Bujosa & Antoni Riera & Robert Hicks, 2010. "Combining Discrete and Continuous Representations of Preference Heterogeneity: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(4), pages 477-493, December.
    2. Kloos, Julia & Tsegai, Daniel W., 2009. "Preferences for domestic water services in the Middle Olifants sub-basin of South Africa," Discussion Papers 49970, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    3. Beharry-Borg, Nesha & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2010. "Valuing quality changes in Caribbean coastal waters for heterogeneous beach visitors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1124-1139, March.
    4. Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley & Jordan Louviere, 2009. "Modeling preference heterogeneity in stated choice data: an analysis for public goods generated by agriculture," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 307-322, May.
    5. Beville, Stephen T. & Kerr, Geoffrey N. & Hughey, Kenneth F.D., 2012. "Valuing impacts of the invasive alga Didymosphenia geminata on recreational angling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 1-10.
    6. Petr Mariel & Linda Arata, 2022. "Incorporating attitudes into the evaluation of preferences regarding agri‐environmental practices," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(2), pages 430-451, June.
    7. Novikova, Anastasija & Rocchi, Lucia & Vitunskienė, Vlada, 2017. "Assessing the benefit of the agroecosystem services: Lithuanian preferences using a latent class approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 277-286.
    8. Eric Ruto & Riccardo Scarpa, 2010. "Using Choice Experiments to Investigate Preferences for Cattle Traits in Kenya," Chapters, in: Jeff Bennett & Ekin Birol (ed.), Choice Experiments in Developing Countries, chapter 14, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. William Breffle & Edward Morey & Jennifer Thacher, 2011. "A Joint Latent-Class Model: Combining Likert-Scale Preference Statements With Choice Data to Harvest Preference Heterogeneity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(1), pages 83-110, September.
    10. Meldrum, James R., 2015. "Comparing different attitude statements in latent class models of stated preferences for managing an invasive forest pathogen," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 13-22.
    11. Tabi, Andrea & del Saz-Salazar, Salvador, 2015. "Environmental damage evaluation in a willingness-to-accept scenario: A latent-class approach based on familiarity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 280-288.
    12. Domanski, Adam, 2009. "Estimating Mixed Logit Recreation Demand Models With Large Choice Sets," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49413, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Varela, Elsa & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Soliño, Mario, 2014. "Understanding the heterogeneity of social preferences for fire prevention management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 91-104.
    14. Alegre, Joaquín & Mateo, Sara & Pou, Llorenç, 2011. "A latent class approach to tourists’ length of stay," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 555-563.
    15. Takahiro Tsuge & Yasushi Shoji & Koichi Kuriyama & Ayumi Onuma, 2022. "Using a Choice Experiment to Understand Preferences for Disaster Risk Reduction with Uncertainty: A Case Study in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, April.
    16. Meyerhoff, Jurgen & Bartczak, Anna & Liebe, Ulf, 2012. "Protester or non-protester: a binary state? on the use (and non-use) of latent class models to analyse protesting in economic valuation," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(3), pages 1-17.
    17. Mara Thiene & Riccardo Scarpa & Jordan Louviere, 2015. "Addressing Preference Heterogeneity, Multiple Scales and Attribute Attendance with a Correlated Finite Mixing Model of Tap Water Choice," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(3), pages 637-656, November.
    18. Elsa Varela & Zein Kallas, 2022. "Societal preferences for the conservation of traditional pig breeds and their agroecosystems: Addressing preference heterogeneity and protest responses through deterministic allocation and scale‐exten," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 761-788, September.
    19. Miwa Nakai & Tomonori Honda & Nariaki Nishino & Kenji Takeuchi, 2013. "An Experimental Study on Motivations for Socially Responsible Investment," Discussion Papers 1314, Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University.
    20. Eric Ruto & Guy Garrod & Riccardo Scarpa, 2008. "Valuing animal genetic resources: a choice modeling application to indigenous cattle in Kenya," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 89-98, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Demand and Price Analysis;

    JEL classification:

    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:ags:joaaec:137117. 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/saeaaea.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.