IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/canjag/v57y2009i3p325-341.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer Response to Information about a Functional Food Product: Apples Enriched with Antioxidants

Author

Listed:
  • Armenak Markosyan
  • Jill J. McCluskey
  • Thomas I. Wahl

Abstract

Interest in functional foods has been growing as consumers become increasingly concerned with diet and nutrition. This article measures consumers' responses to apples enriched with an antioxidant coating. Antioxidant‐enriched apples are believed to provide additional health benefits reducing the risk of cancer and heart diseases. We discuss the consumer's benefit‐risk trade‐offs. Although functional food products provide health benefits beyond basic nutrition, some consumers may reject them because they utilize new technology. Face‐to‐face consumer surveys with contingent valuation questions were conducted in Seattle and Spokane, Washington in 2006. Consumers who choose where to shop based on organic availability are less likely to pay a premium for apples enriched with antioxidants. Also, there is evidence that consumers in Spokane are more likely to pay a premium for the product than consumers in supermarkets in Seattle. Information regarding the potential health benefits of antioxidants has a positive significant effect on consumers' willingness to pay (WTP). The estimated mean WTP suggests that there is a small premium associated with this product in the mind of an average consumer. L'intérêt pour les aliments fonctionnels ne cesse de croître étant donné que les consommateurs s'intéressent de plus en plus au régime alimentaire et à la nutrition. Le présent article évalue la réaction des consommateurs à la vente de pommes enrobées d'antioxydants. On croit que les pommes enrichies d'antioxydants procureraient des bienfaits supplémentaires pour la santé en diminuant le risque de cancer et de cardiopathies. Nous avons examiné les avantages et les risques pour le consommateur. Bien que les aliments fonctionnels apportent des bienfaits pour la santé en plus d'une nutrition de base, certains consommateurs peuvent les refuser parce qu'ils ont nécessité l'utilisation de nouvelles technologies. En 2006, nous avons effectué, à Seattle et à Spokane dans l'État de Washington, des sondages en personne à l'aide de l'approche des préférences exprimées. Les consommateurs qui choisissaient un magasin d'alimentation en fonction de la disponibilité de produits biologiques étaient moins enclins à payer une prime pour obtenir des pommes enrichies d'antioxydants. Les consommateurs de Spokane ont semblé plus enclins à payer une prime pour ce produit que les consommateurs qui fréquentaient les supermarchés de Seattle. L'information sur les bienfaits potentiels des antioxydants sur la santé a des répercussions positives considérables sur la volonté de payer des consommateurs. La volonté de payer moyenne estimative laisse supposer que, dans l'esprit du consommateur moyen, ce produit procure un certain avantage.

Suggested Citation

  • Armenak Markosyan & Jill J. McCluskey & Thomas I. Wahl, 2009. "Consumer Response to Information about a Functional Food Product: Apples Enriched with Antioxidants," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 57(3), pages 325-341, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:57:y:2009:i:3:p:325-341
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7976.2009.01154.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7976.2009.01154.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1744-7976.2009.01154.x?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. Emmanuel Flachaire & Guillaume Hollard, 2006. "Controlling Starting-Point Bias in Double-Bounded Contingent Valuation Surveys," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(1), pages 103-111.
    2. Leigh J. Maynard & Sharon T. Franklin, 2003. "Functional Foods as a Value-Added Strategy: The Commercial Potential of “Cancer-Fighting” Dairy Products," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 316-331.
    3. Barbara J. Kanninen & M. Sami Khawaja, 1995. "Measuring Goodness of Fit for the Double-Bounded Logit Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(4), pages 885-890.
    4. Michele Veeman, 2002. "Policy Development for Novel Foods: Issues and Challenges for Functional Food," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 50(4), pages 527-539, December.
    5. Anand Alok & Mittelhammer Ron C & McCluskey Jill J, 2007. "Consumer Response to Information and Second-Generation Genetically Modified Food in India," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-20, October.
    6. McCluskey, Jill J. & Grimsrud, Kristine M. & Ouchi, Hiromi & Wahl, Thomas I., 2003. "Consumer Response to Genetically Modified Food Products in Japan," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 222-231, October.
    7. JoAnne Labrecque & Maurice Doyon & François Bellavance & Jane Kolodinsky, 2006. "Acceptance of Functional Foods: A Comparison of French, American, and French Canadian Consumers," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 54(4), pages 647-661, December.
    8. Maria L. Loureiro & Azucena Gracia & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2006. "Do consumers value nutritional labels?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 33(2), pages 249-268, June.
    9. Gale E. West & Carole Gendron & Bruno Larue & Rémy Lambert, 2002. "Consumers’ Valuation of Functional Properties of Foods: Results from a Canada-wide Survey," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 50(4), pages 541-558, December.
    10. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    11. Jill J. McCluskey & Johan F.M. Swinnen, 2004. "Political Economy of the Media and Consumer Perceptions of Biotechnology," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1230-1237.
    12. Jill E. Hobbs, 2002. "Evolving Supply Chains in the Nutraceuticals and Functional Foods Industry," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 50(4), pages 559-568, December.
    13. S. Kambua Chema & Leonie A. Marks & Joseph L. Parcell & Maury Bredahl, 2006. "Marketing Biotech Soybeans with Functional Health Attributes," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 54(4), pages 685-703, December.
    14. Yanning Peng & Gale E. West & Cindy Wang, 2006. "Consumer Attitudes and Acceptance of CLA‐Enriched Dairy Products," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 54(4), pages 663-684, December.
    15. Bateman, Ian J. & Langford, Ian H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Kerr, Geoffrey N., 2001. "Bound and path effects in double and triple bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 191-213, July.
    16. Joseph C. Cooper & Michael Hanemann & Giovanni Signorello, 2002. "One-and-One-Half-Bound Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(4), pages 742-750, November.
    17. Jill E. Hobbs & DeeVon Bailey & David L. Dickinson & Morteza Haghiri, 2005. "Traceability in the Canadian Red Meat Sector: Do Consumers Care?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(1), pages 47-65, March.
    18. Michael Hanemann & John Loomis & Barbara Kanninen, 1991. "Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1255-1263.
    19. Li Quan & McCluskey Jill J & Wahl Thomas I., 2004. "Effects of Information on Consumers' Willingness to Pay for GM-Corn-Fed Beef," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 1-18, May.
    20. Tegene, Abebayehu & Huffman, Wallace E. & Rousu, Matthew C. & Shogren, Jason F., 2003. "The Effects Of Information On Consumer Demand For Biotech Foods: Evidence From Experimental Auctions," Technical Bulletins 33577, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    21. John A. List, 2003. "Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 41-71.
    22. Barbara J. Kanninen, 1993. "Optimal Experimental Design for Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 69(2), pages 138-146.
    23. Barbara J. Kanninen & M. Sami Khawaja, 1999. "Measuring Goodness of Fit for the Double-Bounded Logit Model: Reply," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(1), pages 238-240.
    24. John C. Whitehead, 2002. "Incentive Incompatibility and Starting-Point Bias in Iterative Valuation Questions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(2), pages 285-297.
    25. Tegene, Abebayehu & Huffman, Wallace E. & Rousu, Matthew C. & Shogren, Jason F., 2003. "The Effects Of Information On Consumer Demand For Biotech Foods: Evidence From Experimental Auctions," Technical Bulletins 33577, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    26. Stavroula Malla & Jill E. Hobbs & Orsolya Perger, 2007. "Valuing the Health Benefits of a Novel Functional Food," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 55(1), pages 115-136, March.
    27. Leigh J. Maynard & Sharon T. Franklin, 2003. "Functional Foods as a Value-Added Strategy: The Commercial Potential of "Cancer-Fighting" Dairy Products," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 316-331.
    28. Riccardo Scarpa & Ian Bateman, 2000. "Efficiency Gains Afforded by Improved Bid Design versus Follow-up Valuation Questions in Discrete-Choice CV Studies," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(2), pages 299-311.
    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. Stavroula Malla & K. K. Klein & Taryn Presseau, 2022. "Has the Demand for Fats and Meats in the United States been Affected by the Health Claim on Risk of Coronary Heart Disease Issued by the Food and Drug Administration?," Athens Journal of Business & Economics, Athens Institute for Education and Research (ATINER), vol. 8(2), pages 97-118, April.
    2. Veneziani, Mario & Sckokai, Paolo & Moro, Daniele, 2012. "Consumers’ willingness to pay for a functional food," 2012 First Congress, June 4-5, 2012, Trento, Italy 124101, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    3. Lawless, Lydia J.R. & Drichoutis, Andreas & Nayga, Rodolfo & Threlfall, Renee T. & Meullenet, Jean-François, 2012. "Identifying product attributes and consumer attitudes that impact willingness-to-pay for a nutraceutical-rich juice product," MPRA Paper 53023, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Jan 2014.
    4. Jill E. Hobbs & Stavroula Malla & Eric K. Sogah & May T. Yeung, 2014. "Regulating Health Foods," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15768.
    5. Farida, Badu-Gyan & Victor, Owusu, 2017. "Consumer Willingness To Pay A Premium For A Functional Food In Ghana," APSTRACT: Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, AGRIMBA, vol. 11(1-2), September.
    6. Bimbo, Francesco & Bonanno, Alessandro & Viscecchia, Rosaria & Nardone, Gianluca, 2014. "Market valuation of health claims’ types and strength: the Italian yogurt market," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182738, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Doris Läpple & Osayanmon Wellington Osawe, 2023. "Concern for animals, other farmers, or oneself? Assessing farmers' support for a policy to improve animal welfare," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(3), pages 836-860, May.
    8. Satoko Kubota & Hirotsugu Sawano & Hiroichi Kono, 2017. "Japanese consumer preferences for additive-free wine labeling," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 5(1), pages 1-15, December.
    9. Yang Yang & Jill E. Hobbs, 2020. "Food values and heterogeneous consumer responses to nanotechnology," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 289-313, September.
    10. Costanigro, Marco & Kroll, Stephan & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Bunning, Marisa, 2010. "Do Taste Buds Trump Labels and Information? A Sensory Test and Economic Experiment on Organic and Local Apples," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 61668, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Lu, Yiqing & Cranfield, John & Widowski, Tina, 2013. "Consumer Preference for Eggs from Enhanced Animal Welfare Production System: A Stated Choice Analysis," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150276, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Daniele Moro & Mario Veneziani & Paolo Sckokai & Elena Castellari, 2015. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Catechin‐enriched Yogurt: Evidence from a Stated Choice Experiment," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 243-258, April.
    13. Kinga Topolska & Adam Florkiewicz & Agnieszka Filipiak-Florkiewicz, 2021. "Functional Food—Consumer Motivations and Expectations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-14, May.
    14. Mirzobobo Yormirzoev & Ramona Teuber & Daniil Baranov, 2018. "Is Tajikistan a Potential Market for Genetically Modified Potatoes?," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(1), pages 216-226.
    15. Stavroula Malla & Jill E. Hobbs & Eric K. Sogah, 2016. "Estimating the Potential Benefits of New Health Claims in Canada: The Case of Soluble Fiber and Soy Protein," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(2), pages 173-197, June.
    16. Yang Yang & Jill E. Hobbs, 2020. "How Do Cultural Worldviews Shape Food Technology Perceptions? Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 465-492, June.
    17. 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.
    18. Mathew T. Baker & Peng Lu & Jean A. Parrella & Holli R. Leggette, 2022. "Consumer Acceptance toward Functional Foods: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-40, January.
    19. Delmond, Anthony R. & McCluskey, Jill J. & Yormirzoev, Mirzobobo & Rogova, Maria A., 2018. "Russian consumer willingness to pay for genetically modified food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 91-100.
    20. Bechtold, Kai-Brit & Abdulai, Awudu, 2013. "Combining Likert scale attitudinal statements with choice experiments to analyze pref-erence heterogeneity for functional dairy products," 87th Annual Conference, April 8-10, 2013, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 158851, Agricultural Economics Society.
    21. Stavroula Malla & K. K. Klein & Taryn Presseau, 2020. "Have health claims affected demand for fats and meats in Canada?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 271-287, September.
    22. Johannes Kahl & Aneta Załęcka & Angelika Ploeger & Susanne Bügel & Machteld Huber, 2012. "Functional Food and Organic Food are Competing Rather than Supporting Concepts in Europe," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-9, October.
    23. Alessandro Bonanno, 2016. "A Hedonic Valuation of Health and Nonhealth Attributes in the U.S. Yogurt Market," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 299-313, July.

    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. Delmond, Anthony R. & McCluskey, Jill J. & Yormirzoev, Mirzobobo & Rogova, Maria A., 2018. "Russian consumer willingness to pay for genetically modified food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 91-100.
    2. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2008. "Do emotions matter? Coherent preferences under anchoring and emotional effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(4), pages 700-711, July.
    3. Jorge Araña & Carmelo León, 2007. "Repeated Dichotomous Choice Formats for Elicitation of Willingness to Pay: Simultaneous Estimation and Anchoring Effect," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(4), pages 475-497, April.
    4. Aravena, Claudia & Hutchinson, W. George & Longo, Alberto, 2012. "Environmental pricing of externalities from different sources of electricity generation in Chile," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 1214-1225.
    5. Gelo, Dambala & Koch, Steven F., 2015. "Contingent valuation of community forestry programs in Ethiopia: Controlling for preference anomalies in double-bounded CVM," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 79-89.
    6. Stavroula Malla & Jill E. Hobbs & Eric K. Sogah, 2016. "Estimating the Potential Benefits of New Health Claims in Canada: The Case of Soluble Fiber and Soy Protein," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(2), pages 173-197, June.
    7. Aravena, Claudia & Hutchinson, W. George & Carlsson, Fredrik & Matthews, David I, 2015. "Testing preference formation in learning design contingent valuation (LDCV) using advanced information and repetitivetreatments," Working Papers in Economics 619, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    8. Wan-Jiun Chen & Jihn-Fa Jan & Chih-Hsin Chung & Shyue-Cherng Liaw, 2022. "Resident Willingness to Pay for Ecosystem Services in Hillside Forests," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-17, May.
    9. Frédéric Salladarré & Dorothée Brécard & Sterenn Lucas & Pierrick Ollivier, 2016. "Are French consumers ready to pay a premium for eco-labeled seafood products? A contingent valuation estimation with heterogeneous anchoring," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(2), pages 247-258, March.
    10. Kang, Heechan & Haab, Timothy C. & Interis, Matthew G., 2013. "Identifying inconsistent responses in dichotomous choice contingent valuation with follow-up questions," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 396-411.
    11. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    12. Vossler, Christian A., 2003. "Multiple bounded discrete choice contingent valuation: parametric and nonparametric welfare estimation and a comparison to the payment card," MPRA Paper 38867, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Lim, Seul-Ye & Kim, Hyo-Jin & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2017. "Public's willingness to pay a premium for bioethanol in Korea: A contingent valuation study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 20-27.
    14. Watson, Verity & Ryan, Mandy, 2007. "Exploring preference anomalies in double bounded contingent valuation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 463-482, May.
    15. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    16. Ju-Hee Kim & Ga-Eun Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2018. "A Valuation of the Restoration of Hwangnyongsa Temple in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-7, January.
    17. W. George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa & Susan M. Chilton & T. McCallion, 2001. "Parametric and Non‐Parametric Estimates of Willingness to Pay for Forest Recreation in Northern Ireland: A Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Study with Follow‐Ups," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 104-122, January.
    18. Koo, A Mi & Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2022. "Household willingness to pay for a smart water metering and monitoring system: The case of South Korea," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    19. Bimbo, Francesco & Bonanno, Alessandro & Viscecchia, Rosaria & Nardone, Gianluca, 2014. "Market valuation of health claims’ types and strength: the Italian yogurt market," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182738, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clem, 2004. "The net benefit of saving the Asian elephant: a policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 93-107, January.

    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:canjag:v:57:y:2009:i:3:p:325-341. 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/caefmea.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.