IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ajarec/v63y2019i4p726-741.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

International honey laundering and consumer willingness to pay a premium for local honey: an experimental study

Author

Listed:
  • Chian Jones Ritten
  • Linda Thunström
  • Mariah Ehmke
  • Jenny Beiermann
  • Donald McLeod

Abstract

Fraudulent activities in the international honey market affect 10% of food, and cost the global food market $50 billion per annum. Although many developed countries have created regulations to combat food fraud, illegally imported honey, especially originating from China, still enters through transshipments and relabelling to mask its true origin. This honey laundering poses a health risk to consumers, as Chinese honey potentially contains illegal and unsafe antibiotics and high levels of herbicides and pesticides. We analyse whether information about the negative health impacts of laundered honey increases the proportion of consumers willing to pay a premium for local fraud‐free honey. Using a laboratory experiment, we find when consumers are given honey laundering information, their willingness to pay a premium for local fraud‐free honey increases by as much as 27 percentage points. Our findings suggest that by conveying honey laundering information and guaranteeing their honey is fraud‐free, producers can potentially increase revenues and reduce the prevalence of food fraud. Our results further show that consumers' preference for various honey characteristics and age also influence the probability of paying a premium for local honey.

Suggested Citation

  • Chian Jones Ritten & Linda Thunström & Mariah Ehmke & Jenny Beiermann & Donald McLeod, 2019. "International honey laundering and consumer willingness to pay a premium for local honey: an experimental study," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(4), pages 726-741, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:ajarec:v:63:y:2019:i:4:p:726-741
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-8489.12325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8489.12325
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-8489.12325?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. Azucena Gracia & Tiziana de Magistris & Rodolfo M. Nayga Jr., 2012. "Importance of Social Influence in Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Local Food: Are There Gender Differences?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(3), pages 361-371, June.
    2. Davis, Douglas D. & Holt, Charles a., 1993. "Experimental economics: Methods, problems and promise," Estudios Económicos, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos, vol. 8(2), pages 179-212.
    3. Diana C. Mutz & Robin Pemantle & Philip Pham, 2019. "The Perils of Balance Testing in Experimental Design: Messy Analyses of Clean Data," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(1), pages 32-42, January.
    4. Shang Wu & Jacob R. Fooks & Kent D. Messer & Deborah Delaney, 2015. "Consumer demand for local honey," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(41), pages 4377-4394, September.
    5. Laurian J. Unnevehr & Fatoumata C. Gouzou, 1998. "Retail premiums for honey characteristics," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 49-54.
    6. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881, October.
    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. Onur Sapci & Ayse Sapci, 0. "Consumer Perception of Food Expiration Labels: “Sell By” Versus “Expires On”," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 0, pages 1-17.
    2. Onur Sapci & Ayse Sapci, 2020. "Consumer Perception of Food Expiration Labels: “Sell By” Versus “Expires On”," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 46(4), pages 673-689, October.
    3. Liam Pippinato & Simone Blanc & Teresina Mancuso & Filippo Brun, 2020. "A Sustainable Niche Market: How Does Honey Behave?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-14, December.
    4. Petjon Ballco & Fatma Jaafer & Tiziana de Magistris, 2022. "Investigating the price effects of honey quality attributes in a European country: Evidence from a hedonic price approach," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(4), pages 885-904, October.
    5. Bir, Courtney L. & Lambert, Lixia H. & Schaefer, K. Aleks, 2024. "Mutual Recognition and Regulatory Disharmony in Organic Honey Certification," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 343896, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Ehmke, Mariah Dolsen & Bonanno, Alessandro & Boys, Kathryn & Smith, Trenton G., 2019. "Food fraud: economic insights into the dark side of incentives," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(4), October.

    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. Petjon Ballco & Fatma Jaafer & Tiziana de Magistris, 2022. "Investigating the price effects of honey quality attributes in a European country: Evidence from a hedonic price approach," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(4), pages 885-904, October.
    2. Hema Yoganarasimhan & Ebrahim Barzegary & Abhishek Pani, 2020. "Design and Evaluation of Personalized Free Trials," Papers 2006.13420, arXiv.org.
    3. Jelena Vapa-Tankosić & Svetlana Ignjatijević & Jelena Kiurski & Jovana Milenković & Irena Milojević, 2020. "Analysis of Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Organic and Local Honey in Serbia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-23, June.
    4. Hema Yoganarasimhan & Ebrahim Barzegary & Abhishek Pani, 2023. "Design and Evaluation of Optimal Free Trials," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3220-3240, June.
    5. Kerwin, Jason & Rostom, Nada & Sterck, Olivier, 2024. "Striking the Right Balance: Why Standard Balance Tests Over-Reject the Null, and How to Fix It," IZA Discussion Papers 17217, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Claudia M. Landeo & Kathryn E. Spier, 2016. "Stipulated Damages as a Rent-Extraction Mechanism: Experimental Evidence," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 172(2), pages 235-273, June.
    7. Sven Resnjanskij & Jens Ruhose & Simon Wiederhold & Ludger Wößmann, 2021. "Mentoring verbessert die Arbeitsmarktchancen von stark benachteiligten Jugendlichen," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 74(02), pages 31-38, February.
    8. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Christian Hansen & Kengo Kato, 2018. "High-dimensional econometrics and regularized GMM," CeMMAP working papers CWP35/18, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    9. Dimitris Bertsimas & Agni Orfanoudaki & Rory B. Weiner, 2020. "Personalized treatment for coronary artery disease patients: a machine learning approach," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 482-506, December.
    10. Markus C. Arnold & Eva Ponick, 2006. "Kommunikation im Groves-Mechanismus — Ergebnisse eines Laborexperiments," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 89-120, February.
    11. Clément de Chaisemartin & Jaime Ramirez-Cuellar, 2024. "At What Level Should One Cluster Standard Errors in Paired and Small-Strata Experiments?," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 193-212, January.
    12. Clément de Chaisemartin & Luc Behaghel, 2020. "Estimating the Effect of Treatments Allocated by Randomized Waiting Lists," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(4), pages 1453-1477, July.
    13. Bruno Ferman & Cristine Pinto & Vitor Possebom, 2020. "Cherry Picking with Synthetic Controls," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 510-532, March.
    14. Bonesrønning, Hans & Finseraas, Henning & Hardoy, Ines & Iversen, Jon Marius Vaag & Nyhus, Ole Henning & Opheim, Vibeke & Salvanes, Kari Vea & Sandsør, Astrid Marie Jorde & Schøne, Pål, 2022. "Small-group instruction to improve student performance in mathematics in early grades: Results from a randomized field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    15. Peydró, José-Luis & Jiménez, Gabriel & Kenan, Huremovic & Moral-Benito, Enrique & Vega-Redondo, Fernando, 2020. "Production and financial networks in interplay: Crisis evidence from supplier-customer and credit registers," CEPR Discussion Papers 15277, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Ruoxuan Xiong & Allison Koenecke & Michael Powell & Zhu Shen & Joshua T. Vogelstein & Susan Athey, 2021. "Federated Causal Inference in Heterogeneous Observational Data," Papers 2107.11732, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    17. Marie Bjørneby & Annette Alstadsæter & Kjetil Telle, 2018. "Collusive tax evasion by employers and employees. Evidence from a randomized fi eld experiment in Norway," Discussion Papers 891, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    18. Bradley J. Ruffle, 2005. "Buyer Countervailing Power: A Survey of Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 0512, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    19. Konrad Menzel, 2021. "Structural Sieves," Papers 2112.01377, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    20. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Approximate residual balancing: debiased inference of average treatment effects in high dimensions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(4), pages 597-623, September.

    More about this item

    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:bla:ajarec:v:63:y:2019:i:4:p:726-741. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.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.