IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/agrerw/v38y2009i03p371-383_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuations of ‘Sustainably Produced’ Labels on Beef, Tomato, and Apple Products

Author

Listed:
  • Tonsor, Glynn T.
  • Shupp, Robert

Abstract

This study evaluates consumer perceptions of what “sustainably produced” food labels imply and estimates corresponding demand for products carrying these labels. Results suggest that the typical U.S. consumer is not willing to pay a positive premium for beef, tomatoes, or apple products labeled as “sustainably produced.” Demand is particularly sensitive to inferences consumers make regarding what a “sustainably produced” food label implies. Suggestions for future work and implications of standardizing the definition of sustainability are provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Tonsor, Glynn T. & Shupp, Robert, 2009. "Valuations of ‘Sustainably Produced’ Labels on Beef, Tomato, and Apple Products," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(3), pages 371-383, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:agrerw:v:38:y:2009:i:03:p:371-383_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S106828050000962X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kaiser, Harry M. & Scherer, Clifford W. & Barbano, David M., 1992. "Consumer Perceptions And Attitudes Towards Bovine Somatotropin," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 21(1), pages 1-11, April.
    2. Marta-Pedroso, Cristina & Freitas, Helena & Domingos, Tiago, 2007. "Testing for the survey mode effect on contingent valuation data quality: A case study of web based versus in-person interviews," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 388-398, May.
    3. Johnson, Richard D & Levin, Irwin P, 1985. "More than Meets the Eye: The Effect of Missing Information on Purchase Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 12(2), pages 169-177, September.
    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. Sackett, Hillary & Shupp, Robert & Tonsor, Glynn, 2016. "Differentiating “Sustainable” From “Organic” And “Local” Food Choices: Does Information About Certification Criteria Help Consumers?," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 4(3), pages 1-15, July.
    2. Aluisio Goulart Silva & Maurizio Canavari & Alcido Elenor Wander, 2018. "Consumer preferences and willingness-to-pay for integrated production label on common beans," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 20(1), pages 11-28.
    3. White, Robin R. & Brady, Michael, 2014. "Can consumers’ willingness to pay incentivize adoption of environmental impact reducing technologies in meat animal production?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 41-49.
    4. Chengyan Yue & Ben Campbell & Charles Hall & Bridget Behe & Jennifer Dennis & Hayk Khachatryan, 2016. "Consumer Preference for Sustainable Attributes in Plants: Evidence from Experimental Auctions," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 222-235, April.
    5. Deely, John & Hynes, Stephen & Barquín, José & Burgess, Diane & Álvarez-Martínez, Jose Manuel & Silió, Ana & Finney, Graham, 2022. "Are consumers willing to pay for beef that has been produced without the use of uncontrolled burning methods? A contingent valuation study in North-West Spain," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 577-590.
    6. Sackett, Hillary M., 2011. "Consumer Perceptions of Sustainable Farming Practices: A Best-Worst Scenario," Graduate Research Master's Degree Plan B Papers 115966, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    7. De Salvo, Maria & Scarpa, Riccardo & Capitello, Roberta & Begalli, Diego, 2020. "Multi-country stated preferences choice analysis for fresh tomatoes," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 9(3), December.
    8. White, Robin R. & Brady, Michael & Capper, Judith L. & Johnson, Kristen A., 2014. "Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 1-12.
    9. Tonsor, Glynn T. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2011. "On mandatory labeling of animal welfare attributes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 430-437, June.
    10. Sackett, Hillary M. & Shupp, Robert S. & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2012. "Discrete Choice Modeling of Consumer Preferences for Sustainably Produced Steak and Apples," 2012 AAEA/EAAE Food Environment Symposium 123517, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Wen Lin, 2023. "The effect of product quantity on willingness to pay: A meta‐regression analysis of beef valuation studies," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(3), pages 646-663, July.
    12. Tait, Dr Peter & Saunders, Prof Caroline & Guenther, Meike & Rutherford, Paul, 2013. "Valuing environmental sustainability attributes of food products in India and China: decomposing the value of New Zealand’s ‘Clean-Green’ brand," 2013 Conference, August 28-30, 2013, Christchurch, New Zealand 187036, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    13. Leach, Allison M. & Emery, Kyle A. & Gephart, Jessica & Davis, Kyle F. & Erisman, Jan Willem & Leip, Adrian & Pace, Michael L. & D’Odorico, Paolo & Carr, Joel & Noll, Laura Cattell & Castner, Elizabet, 2016. "Environmental impact food labels combining carbon, nitrogen, and water footprints," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 213-223.

    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. Zawojska, Ewa & Czajkowski, Mikotaj, 2017. "Are preferences stated in web vs. personal interviews different? A comparison of willingness to pay results for a large multi-country study of the Baltic Sea eutrophication reduction," Annual Meeting, 2017, June 18-21, Montreal, Canada 258604, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society.
    2. Ting Li & Robert J. Kauffman & Eric van Heck & Peter Vervest & Benedict G. C. Dellaert, 2014. "Consumer Informedness and Firm Information Strategy," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 345-363, June.
    3. Kevin J. Boyle & Mark Morrison & Darla Hatton MacDonald & Roderick Duncan & John Rose, 2016. "Investigating Internet and Mail Implementation of Stated-Preference Surveys While Controlling for Differences in Sample Frames," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(3), pages 401-419, July.
    4. Kaiser, Harry M., 1992. "Market Impacts Of Bovine Somatropin: A Supply And Demand Analysis," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 1-12, July.
    5. Mozumder, Pallab & Vásquez, William F. & Marathe, Achla, 2011. "Consumers' preference for renewable energy in the southwest USA," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1119-1126.
    6. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2011. "Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Comparison of Survey Modes," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(4), pages 309-351, September.
    7. Wang, Fude & Boisvert, Richard N. & Kaiser, Harry, 1992. "U.S. Dairy Policy Alternatives Under Bovine Somatotropin," Staff Papers 197594, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    8. 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.
    9. Olivier Beaumais & Anne Briand & Katrin Millock & Céline Nauges, 2010. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Better Tap Water Quality? A Cross-Country Valuation Study," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 10051, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    10. Wu, Fang & Swait, Joffre & Chen, Yuxin, 2019. "Feature-based attributes and the roles of consumers' perception bias and inference in choice," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 325-340.
    11. Davies, Antony & Cline, Thomas W., 2005. "A consumer behavior approach to modeling monopolistic competition," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 797-826, December.
    12. Marc Jekel & Andreas Glockner & Arndt Broder & Viktoriya Maydych, 2014. "Approximating rationality under incomplete information: Adaptive inferences for missing cue values based on cue-discrimination," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(2), pages 129-147, March.
    13. van Herpen, H.W.I. & Pieters, R., 2000. "Assortment Variety : Attribute versus Product-Based," Other publications TiSEM 5743e33b-4f0b-4149-8d20-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. McKendree, Melissa G.S. & Olynk Widmar, Nicole & Ortega, David L. & Foster, Kenneth A., 2013. "Consumer Preferences for Verified Pork-Rearing Practices in the Production of Ham Products," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-21.
    15. Ravenswaay, Eileen O. van, 1993. "Research Needs in the Valuation of Food Safety and Nutrition," Staff Paper Series 201172, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    16. Guimarães, Maria Helena & Nunes, Luís Catela & Madureira, Lívia & Santos, José Lima & Boski, Tomasz & Dentinho, Tomaz, 2015. "Measuring birdwatchers preferences: A case for using online networks and mixed-mode surveys," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 102-113.
    17. Olynk Widmar, Nicole J. & Ortega, David L., 2014. "Comparing Consumer Preferences for Livestock Production Process Attributes Across Products, Species, and Modeling Methods," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 46(3), pages 1-17, August.
    18. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2008. "Internet CV surveys – a cheap, fast way to get large samples of biased values?," MPRA Paper 11471, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Glynn T. Tonsor & Ted C. Schroeder & Joost M. E. Pennings, 2009. "Factors Impacting Food Safety Risk Perceptions," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 625-644, September.
    20. Punel, Aymeric & Stathopoulos, Amanda, 2017. "Modeling the acceptability of crowdsourced goods deliveries: Role of context and experience effects," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 18-38.

    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:cup:agrerw:v:38:y:2009:i:03:p:371-383_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/age .

    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.