IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v168y2024ics1389934124001564.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are consumers “green” enthusiasts or skeptics? Evidence from nontimber forest products

Author

Listed:
  • Paudel, Bindu
  • Zhou, Mo

Abstract

In recent years, in response to consumers' increasing demand for “greener” products due to growing environmental awareness, more and more businesses have turned to eco-labels to assert the environmental benefits of their products or services. However, it remains unclear how consumers' willingness to pay (WTP) varies with different types of eco-labeling, especially concerning food products harvested from forests. In this study, we employ discrete choice modeling to uncover consumers' preferences for “green” maple syrup—syrup made with sap tapped from sustainably managed forests—under four eco-labels: self-claimed, bird-friendly, verified by a voluntary conservation program, and certified by a third-party. Our findings reveal that the WTPs for “green” maple syrup under eco-labels are higher than that for organic maple syrup, except for the third-party certified label. One plausible explanation is that some consumers may perceive sustainability certification as greenwashing, leading them to be skeptical of the claimed benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Paudel, Bindu & Zhou, Mo, 2024. "Are consumers “green” enthusiasts or skeptics? Evidence from nontimber forest products," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:168:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124001564
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001564
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103302?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. Daniele Asioli & Jessica Aschemann-Witzel & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2020. "Sustainability-Related Food Labels," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 171-185, October.
    2. Merritt, Meagan G. & Delong, Karen Lewis & Griffith, Andrew P. & Jensen, Kimberly L., 2018. "Consumer Willingness To Pay For Tennessee Certified Beef," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(2), pages 233-254, May.
    3. repec:ags:afjare:225657 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Rainer Harms & Jonathan D. Linton, 2016. "Willingness to Pay for Eco-Certified Refurbished Products: The Effects of Environmental Attitudes and Knowledge," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 20(4), pages 893-904, August.
    5. Laura O. Taylor & Ronald G. Cummings, 1999. "Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 649-665, June.
    6. Adalja, Aaron & Hanson, James & Towe, Charles & Tselepidakis, Elina, 2015. "An Examination of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Local Products," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 253-274, December.
    7. Siano, Alfonso & Vollero, Agostino & Conte, Francesca & Amabile, Sara, 2017. "“More than words”: Expanding the taxonomy of greenwashing after the Volkswagen scandal," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 27-37.
    8. Wuyang Hu & Marvin T. Batte & Timothy Woods & Stan Ernst, 2012. "Consumer preferences for local production and other value-added label claims for a processed food product," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 39(3), pages 489-510, July.
    9. Paletto, Alessandro & Notaro, Sandra, 2018. "Secondary wood manufactures' willingness-to-pay for certified wood products in Italy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 65-72.
    10. Shuai CHUANMIN & Yang XIAOMIN & Zhang YUKUN & Shuai CHUANXI & Ding PENGHUI, 2014. "Consumer behavior on low-carbon agri-food purchase: a carbon labeling experimental study in China," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 60(3), pages 133-146.
    11. repec:oup:apecpp:v:40:y:2018:i:3:p:445-460. is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Jeffrey R. Blend & Eileen O. van Ravenswaay, 1999. "Measuring Consumer Demand for Ecolabeled Apples," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1072-1077.
    13. Brach, Simon & Walsh, Gianfranco & Shaw, Deirdre, 2018. "Sustainable consumption and third-party certification labels: Consumers’ perceptions and reactions," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 254-265.
    14. Saphores, Jean-Daniel M. & Ogunseitan, Oladele A. & Shapiro, Andrew A., 2012. "Willingness to engage in a pro-environmental behavior: An analysis of e-waste recycling based on a national survey of U.S. households," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 49-63.
    15. Grunert, Klaus G. & Hieke, Sophie & Wills, Josephine, 2014. "Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 177-189.
    16. Nicole Darnall & Hyunjung Ji & Diego A. Vázquez-Brust, 2018. "Third-Party Certification, Sponsorship, and Consumers’ Ecolabel Use," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(4), pages 953-969, July.
    17. Champ, Patricia A. & Moore, Rebecca & Bishop, Richard C., 2009. "A Comparison of Approaches to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(2), pages 166-180, October.
    18. Durham Catherine A. & Roheim Cathy A. & Pardoe Iain, 2012. "Picking Apples: Can Multi-Attribute Ecolabels Compete?," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-28, October.
    19. Vermeulen, Bart & Goos, Peter & Vandebroek, Martina, 2010. "Obtaining more information from conjoint experiments by best-worst choices," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 1426-1433, June.
    20. Hensher,David A. & Rose,John M. & Greene,William H., 2015. "Applied Choice Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107465923, November.
    21. Carlos E. Carpio & Olga Isengildina-Massa, 2009. "Consumer willingness to pay for locally grown products: the case of South Carolina," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(3), pages 412-426.
    22. Aguilar, Francisco X. & Vlosky, Richard P., 2007. "Consumer willingness to pay price premiums for environmentally certified wood products in the U.S," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 1100-1112, May.
    23. Petr Mariel & David Hoyos & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Mikolaj Czajkowski & Thijs Dekker & Klaus Glenk & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen & Ulf Liebe & Søren Bøye Olsen & Julian Sagebiel & Mara Thiene, 2021. "Environmental Valuation with Discrete Choice Experiments," SpringerBriefs in Economics, Springer, number 978-3-030-62669-3, June.
    24. Rui Guo & Lan Tao & Caroline Bingxin Li & Tao Wang, 2017. "A Path Analysis of Greenwashing in a Trust Crisis Among Chinese Energy Companies: The Role of Brand Legitimacy and Brand Loyalty," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 523-536, February.
    25. Li, Shanshan & Kallas, Zein, 2021. "Meta-Analysis of Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Sustainable Food Products," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 314970, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    26. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    27. Champ, Patricia A. & Moore, Rebecca & Bishop, Richard C., 2009. "A Comparison of Approaches to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-15, October.
    28. 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.
    29. Cho, Yoon-Na & Taylor, Charles R., 2020. "The role of ambiguity and skepticism in the effectiveness of sustainability labeling," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 379-388.
    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. Precious Chikezie Ezeh & Kaitano Dube, 2024. "Willingness to Pay in Tourism and Its Influence on Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-16, December.

    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. Gschwandtner, Adelina & Jang, Cheul & McManus, Richard, 2018. "Improving Drinking Water Quality in South Korea: A Choice Experiment," 92nd Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2018, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 273472, Agricultural Economics Society.
    2. DeLong, Karen L. & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Upendram, Sreedhar & Eckelkamp, Elizabeth, . "Consumer Preferences for Tennessee Milk," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 51(2).
    3. Hermann Donfouet & P. Jeanty & P.-A. Mahieu, 2014. "Dealing with internal inconsistency in double-bounded dichotomous choice: an application to community-based health insurance," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 317-328, February.
    4. Yuan, Rao & Asioli, Daniele & Jin, Shaosheng & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2021. "Consumers’ Valuation for Cultured Chicken Meat: A Multi-city Choice Experiment in China," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313957, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Tonsor, Glynn T. & Olynk, Nicole J. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2009. "Consumer Preferences for Animal Welfare Attributes: The Case of Gestation Crates," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-17, December.
    6. Ellis, Jade & Delong, Karen L. & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Griffith, Andrew P., 2021. "The Impact of a Visual Cheap Talk Script in an Online Choice Experiment," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 12(01), January.
    7. Iryna Printezis & Carola Grebitus & Stefan Hirsch, 2019. "The price is right!? A meta-regression analysis on willingness to pay for local food," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, May.
    8. Liu, Ruifeng & ,, 2021. "What We Can Learn from the Interactions of Food Traceable Attributes? a Case Study of Fuji Apple in China," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315916, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Zhai, Qianqian & Kassas, Bachir & Zhao, Shuoli & Chen, Lijun & Chen, Chao, 2020. "Investigating Preference Inconsistencies in Incentive Structures that Account for House Money Effects," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304584, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Feucht, Yvonne & Zander, Katrin, 2017. "Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Climate-Friendly Food in European Countries," 2018 International European Forum (163rd EAAE Seminar), February 5-9, 2018, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 276930, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    11. Britwum, Kofi & Yiannaka, Amalia, 2019. "Consumer willingness to pay for food safety interventions: The role of message framing and issue involvement," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Fabio Boncinelli & Francesca Gerini & Benedetta Neri & Leonardo Casini, 2018. "Consumer willingness to pay for non‐mandatory indication of the fish catch zone," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(4), pages 728-741, October.
    13. Catherine M. H. Keske & Adam Mayer, 2014. "Visitor Willingness to Pay U.S. Forest Service Recreation Fees in New West Rural Mountain Economies," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 28(1), pages 87-100, February.
    14. Zhu, Zhanguo & Zhang, Tong & Hu, Wuyang, 2023. "The accumulation and substitution effects of multi-nation certified organic and protected eco-origin food labels in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    15. Lin, Wen & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2022. "Green identity labeling, environmental information, and pro-environmental food choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    16. Feucht, Yvonne & Zander, Katrin, 2017. "Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Climate-Friendly Food in European Countries," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 2017(1), June.
    17. Wensing, Joana & Caputo, Vincenzina & Carraresi, Laura & Bröring, Stefanie, 2020. "The effects of green nudges on consumer valuation of bio-based plastic packaging," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    18. Kemper, Nathan & Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr. & Popp, Jennie & Bazzani, Claudia, 2016. "The Effects of Honesty Oath and Consequentiality in Choice Experiments," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235381, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Franceschi, Dina & Vásquez, William F., 2011. "Do Supervisors Affect the Valuation of Public Goods?," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 1-17, August.
    20. Cordula Hinkes & Inken Christoph-Schulz, 2020. "No Palm Oil or Certified Sustainable Palm Oil? Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences and the Role of Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-26, September.

    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:eee:forpol:v:168:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124001564. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.