IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlage/v55y2009i9id2404-agricecon.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors influencing Chinese consumer behavior when buying innovative food products

Author

Listed:
  • R.B. Kim

    (HanYang University , Seongdong-gu, Seoul)

Abstract

This study conceptualizes a model of Chinese consumers' purchase decision for the GM foods by empirically testing the interrelationship among the GM food purchase decision determinants with a multi-attribute model. The purpose of this study is to explore what underlying factors affect the Chinese consumer choice behavior for the GM food. A clear understanding of the determinants of consumers' GM food choice may enable policy makers and marketers to build effective policies and marketing strategies and to establish market position of the GM food. The results show that consumers' perceived concern toward the subjects such as limited information availability, environmental hazard as well as ethical issues of the GM food are strong indicators of consumers' GM food purchase decision.

Suggested Citation

  • R.B. Kim, 2009. "Factors influencing Chinese consumer behavior when buying innovative food products," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 55(9), pages 436-445.
    • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlage:v:55:y:2009:i:9:id:2404-agricecon
    DOI: 10.17221/2404-AGRICECON
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://agricecon.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/2404-AGRICECON.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://agricecon.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/2404-AGRICECON.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/2404-AGRICECON?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hoban, Thomas J., 1996. "Trends In Consumer Acceptance And Awareness Of Biotechnology," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 27(1), pages 1-10, February.
    2. Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
    3. Louviere, Jordan J., 1992. "Experimental choice analysis: Introduction and overview," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 89-95, March.
    4. Mittal, Banwari, 1988. "The role of affective choice mode in the consumer purchase of expressive products," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 499-524, December.
    5. Nelson, Phillip, 1970. "Information and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(2), pages 311-329, March-Apr.
    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. Tiziana DE MAGISTRIS & Azucena GRACIA & Jesús BARREIRO-HURLÉ, 2010. "Effects of the nutritional labels use on healthy eating habits in Spain," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 56(11), pages 540-551.
    2. Aldona ZAWOJSKA, 2010. "Determinants of farmers' trust in government agricultural agencies in Poland," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 56(6), pages 266-283.

    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. J. K. Pappalardo, 2022. "Economics of Consumer Protection: Contributions and Challenges in Estimating Consumer Injury and Evaluating Consumer Protection Policy," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 201-238, June.
    2. Dhaval M. Dave, 2013. "Effects of Pharmaceutical Promotion: A Review and Assessment," NBER Working Papers 18830, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Gu, Yiquan & Rasch, Alexander & Wenzel, Tobias, 2022. "Consumer salience and quality provision in (un)regulated public service markets," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    4. Cai, Dapeng & Jørgensen, Jan Guldager, 2017. "Mutual Recognition for Sale: International Bargaining over Product Standards," Discussion Papers on Economics 1/2017, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Economics.
    5. Jhunjhunwala, Tanushree, 2021. "Searching to avoid regret: An experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 298-319.
    6. Marco Costanigro & Yuko Onozaka, 2020. "A Belief‐Preference Model of Choice for Experience and Credence Goods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 70-95, February.
    7. Fabienne Chameroy & Jean-Louis Chandon, 2011. "Are All Labels Ethical? [Les labels sont-ils tous éthiques ?]," Post-Print hal-02092068, HAL.
    8. Bester, Helmut & Ouyang, Yaofu, 2018. "Optimal procurement of a credence good under limited liability," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 96-129.
    9. Charity, Nabwire Ephamia Juma, 2016. "Economic Analysis Of Consumers’ Awareness And Willingness To Pay For Geographical Indicators And Other Quality Attributes Of Honey In Kenya," Research Theses 265574, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    10. Haucap, Justus, 2017. "The rule of law and the emergence of market exchange: A new institutional economic perspective," DICE Discussion Papers 276, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    11. Earl, Peter E., 2012. "Experiential analysis of automotive consumption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(7), pages 1067-1072.
    12. Ngobo, Paul-Valentin & Jean, Sylvie, 2012. "Does store image influence demand for organic store brands?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 621-628.
    13. Sharon Horsky, 2006. "The Changing Architecture of Advertising Agencies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 367-383, 07-08.
    14. Langinier Corinne & Babcock Bruce A., 2008. "Agricultural Production Clubs: Viability and Welfare Implications," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-31, December.
    15. David Bardey & Denis Gromb & David Martimort & Jérôme Pouyet, 2020. "Controlling Sellers Who Provide Advice: Regulation and Competition," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 409-444, September.
    16. José Manuel Álvarez Zárate (Editor), 2016. "¿Hacia dónde va América Latina respecto al derecho económico internacional?," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 860, July.
    17. Jan-Peter Kucklick & Jennifer Priefer & Daniel Beverungen & Oliver Müller, 2023. "Elucidating the Predictive Power of Search and Experience Qualities for Pricing of Complex Goods – A Machine Learning-based Study on Real Estate Appraisal," Working Papers Dissertations 112, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    18. Reardon, Thomas & Codron, Jean-Marie & Busch, Lawrence & Bingen, R. James & Harris, Craig, 1999. "Global Change In Agrifood Grades And Standards: Agribusiness Strategic Responses In Developing Countries," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 2(3-4), pages 1-15.
    19. Onozaka, Yuko & Saue, Vegar Veseth & Costanigro, Marco, 2018. "The Moderating Effect of Heterogeneous Beliefs on Consumer Preferences for a New Food Technology: The Case of Modified Atmospheric Packaging," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274068, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Parampreet Christopher Bindra & Rudolf Kerschbamer & Daniel Neururer & Matthias Sutter, 2020. "Reveal it or conceal it: On the value of second opinions in a low-entry-barriers credence goods market," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2020_11, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.

    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:caa:jnlage:v:55:y:2009:i:9:id:2404-agricecon. 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: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    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.