IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/jpjjre/338646.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Consumer Acceptability of Vaccine Rice

Author

Listed:
  • Saito, Yoko
  • Aizaki, Hideo
  • Saito, Hisamitsu

Abstract

A feature of much recent medical research has been to offer a range of treatment choices for a given condition. It is important therefore to understand patient preferences among the non-medical as well as medical features of these options. An instructive example is a variety of rice currently under development with recombinant DNA technology as an alternative to the vaccine injection conventionally used against cedar pollen allergy as immunotherapy treatment. We use a survey-based discrete choice experiment to examine and decompose the attitudes to this medical food, along with their likely net effects on final demand. Restricting the survey to allergy sufferers allows focus on the rice’s maximum perceived welfare benefits, in contrast to the ambiguous conclusions of previous studies. Patient characteristics, such as allergy severity, GM technology familiarity, and opportunity costs of hospital visits necessary for the injection treatment strongly influence the vaccine rice’s appeal. A successful marketing program for the new rice will require appealing to these direct benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Saito, Yoko & Aizaki, Hideo & Saito, Hisamitsu, 2022. "Assessing the Consumer Acceptability of Vaccine Rice," Japanese Journal of Agricultural Economics (formerly Japanese Journal of Rural Economics), Agricultural Economics Society of Japan (AESJ), vol. 24.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:jpjjre:338646
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.338646
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/338646/files/24_1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.338646?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. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-719, November.
    2. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, January.
    3. Grossman, Michael, 1972. "On the Concept of Health Capital and the Demand for Health," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(2), pages 223-255, March-Apr.
    4. Kondo, Masahide & Hoshi, Shu-ling & Okubo, Ichiro, 2009. "Does subsidy work? Price elasticity of demand for influenza vaccination among the elderly in Japan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 269-276, August.
    5. Jayson L. Lusk, 2003. "Effects of Cheap Talk on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Golden Rice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 840-856.
    6. Costa-Font, Montserrat & Gil, José M. & Traill, W. Bruce, 2008. "Consumer acceptance, valuation of and attitudes towards genetically modified food: Review and implications for food policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 99-111, April.
    7. Acton, Jan Paul, 1975. "Nonmonetary Factors in the Demand for Medical Services: Some Empirical Evidence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 83(3), pages 595-614, June.
    8. Yasushi Ohkusa, 2001. "Empirical Research on the Demand for Influenza Vaccination Among the Elderly," ISER Discussion Paper 0554, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    9. Aizaki, Hideo, 2012. "Basic Functions for Supporting an Implementation of Choice Experiments in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 50(c02).
    10. repec:ken:wpaper:0901 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Hynes, Stephen & Chen, Wenting & Vondolia, Kofi & Armstrong, Claire & O'Connor, Eamonn, 2021. "Valuing the ecosystem service benefits from kelp forest restoration: A choice experiment from Norway," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    12. Athanasios Krystallis & Polymeros Chrysochou, 2012. "Do Health Claims and Prior Awareness Influence Consumers' Preferences for Unhealthy Foods? The Case of Functional Children's Snacks," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(1), pages 86-102, January.
    13. Johnson, Jane & Howard, Kirsten & Wilson, Andrew & Ward, Michael & Gilbert, Gwendolyn L. & Degeling, Chris, 2019. "Public preferences for One Health approaches to emerging infectious diseases: A discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 164-171.
    14. Lucia Savadori & Stefania Savio & Eraldo Nicotra & Rino Rumiati & Melissa Finucane & Paul Slovic, 2004. "Expert and Public Perception of Risk from Biotechnology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5), pages 1289-1299, October.
    15. Mark Jit & Raymond Hutubessy, 2016. "Methodological Challenges to Economic Evaluations of Vaccines: Is a Common Approach Still Possible?," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 245-252, June.
    16. Yuwen, Feng & Hsiaoping, Chien, 2020. "Consumers’ Preferences towards Nutrition-modified Milk in Urban Areas of China with Rating-based Conjoint Analysis," Japanese Journal of Agricultural Economics (formerly Japanese Journal of Rural Economics), Agricultural Economics Society of Japan (AESJ), vol. 22.
    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. Saito, Yoko & Saito, Hisamitsu, 2015. "Demand for a Transgenic Food with a Medical Benefit," MPRA Paper 67945, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    3. Ochs, Dan & Wolf, Christopher A. & Widmar, Nicole Olynk & Bir, Courtney & Lai, John, 2019. "Hen housing system information effects on U.S. egg demand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Jensen, Jørgen Dejgaard & Mørkbak, Morten Raun & Nordström, Jonas, 2012. "Economic Costs and Benefits of Promoting Healthy Takeaway Meals at Workplace Canteens," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(4), pages 1-27, December.
    5. Tonsor, Glynn T. & Olynk, Nicole & Wolf, Christopher, 2009. "Consumer Preferences for Animal Welfare Attributes: The Case of Gestation Crates," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 713-730, December.
    6. Tavárez, Héctor & Álamo, Carmen & Cortés,Mildred, 2020. "Differentiated coffees and their potential markets in Puerto Rico: An economic valuation approach," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 20(02), December.
    7. Saito, Yoko & Aizaki, Hideo & Saito, Hisamitsu & Kondo, Takumi & Yamamoto, Yasutaka, 2015. "Demand for a Transgenic Good with Nutritional, Medical, and Environmental Qualities," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205455, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Yang Yang & Jill E. Hobbs, 2020. "The Power of Stories: Narratives and Information Framing Effects in Science Communication," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(4), pages 1271-1296, August.
    9. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren B. Olsen, 2017. "Can a Repeated Opt-Out Reminder remove hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments? An application to consumer valuation of novel food products," IFRO Working Paper 2017/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    10. Zhifeng Gao & Ted C. Schroeder, 2009. "Consumer responses to new food quality information: are some consumers more sensitive than others?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 339-346, May.
    11. Gallardo, R. Karina & Wang, Qianqian, 2013. "Willingness to Pay for Pesticides' Environmental Features and Social Desirability Bias: The Case of Apple and Pear Growers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(1), pages 1-16, April.
    12. Choi, Andy S., 2013. "Nonmarket values of major resources in the Korean DMZ areas: A test of distance decay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 97-107.
    13. Richard G. Newell & Juha Siikamäki, 2014. "Nudging Energy Efficiency Behavior: The Role of Information Labels," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(4), pages 555-598.
    14. Joachim Marti, 2012. "Assessing preferences for improved smoking cessation medications: a discrete choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(5), pages 533-548, October.
    15. Anikó Bíró, 2016. "Outpatient visits after retirement in Europe and the US," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 363-385, December.
    16. J. Price & D. Dupont & W. Adamowicz, 2017. "As Time Goes By: Examination of Temporal Stability Across Stated Preference Question Formats," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 643-662, November.
    17. Aizaki, Hideo, 2012. "Basic Functions for Supporting an Implementation of Choice Experiments in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 50(c02).
    18. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    19. Kallas, Z. & Gómez-Limón, J.A., 2007. "Valoración De La Multifuncionalidad Agraria: Una Aplicación A Través Del Método De Los Experimentos De Elección/Agricultural Multifunctionality Valuation: A Case Study Using The Choice Experiment," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 25, pages 107-144, Abril.
    20. Rongting Zhou & Dong Wang & Ahmad Nabeel Siddiquei & Muhammad Azfar Anwar & Ali Hammad & Fahad Asmi & Qing Ye & Muhammad Asim Nawaz, 2019. "GMO/GMF on Social Media in China: Jagged Landscape of Information Seeking and Sharing Behavior through a Valence View," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-19, 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:ags:jpjjre:338646. 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/aesjjea.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.