IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v34y2009i2p185-197.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fish: Friend or foe? Food policy and subpopulation warnings for consumers

Author

Listed:
  • Hughner, Rene Shaw
  • Maher, Jill Kurp
  • Childs, Nancy M.
  • Nganje, William E.

Abstract

Fish is a healthy food that provides valuable nutrients for heart health and cognitive development. However, for some subpopulations, consuming fish containing higher levels of methylmercury may pose a health risk. This research seeks to identify the impact of including a seafood warning disclosure in the advertisement of a can of tuna fish on consumers' purchasing behaviors. An experimental survey is employed to examine the resulting impact for two segments of the population - those considered at risk for methylmercury overexposure and all others. Findings indicate the use of warning disclosures increases respondents' negative product perceptions without significantly altering positive product perceptions. Attention to the warning is short-lived and does not significantly impact perceived healthful levels of consumption. Modeling purchase behavior using a random utility choice framework indicates that the inclusion of a warning in an advertisement of a can of tuna fish has no adverse affect on purchase behaviors for the population not at-risk and may, in certain cases, serve to decrease tuna purchase likelihood for "at-risk" respondents. Communicating advisory statements on healthy products, such as fish, creates a public health challenge; message pre-testing is imperative.

Suggested Citation

  • Hughner, Rene Shaw & Maher, Jill Kurp & Childs, Nancy M. & Nganje, William E., 2009. "Fish: Friend or foe? Food policy and subpopulation warnings for consumers," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 185-197, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:34:y:2009:i:2:p:185-197
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306-9192(08)00071-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. K. K. Lancaster, 2010. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Levine's Working Paper Archive 1385, David K. Levine.
    2. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    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. Bostic, Stephanie M. & Sobal, Jeffery & Bisogni, Carole A., 2018. "Social representations of fish and seafood among midlife rural adults: Benefits, risks, and involvement," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 99-108.
    2. Uberta Ganucci Cancellieri & Giulia Amicone & Lavinia Cicero & Alessandro Milani & Oriana Mosca & Marialetizia Palomba & Simonetta Mattiucci & Marino Bonaiuto, 2023. "Can Food Safety Practices and Knowledge of Raw Fish Promote Perception of Infection Risk and Safe Consumption Behavior Intentions Related to the Zoonotic Parasite Anisakis ?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-16, April.

    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. Anderson, Simon P. & Foros, Øystein & Kind, Hans Jarle, 2012. "Product quality, competition, and multi-purchasing," Discussion Papers 2012/9, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    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. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Olynk, Nicole J., 2011. "Modeling heterogeneity in consumer preferences for select food safety attributes in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 318-324, April.
    4. Katrak, Homi, 1998. "Economic analyses of Industrial Research Institutes in developing countries: the Indian experience," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 337-347, August.
    5. Ondřej Vojáček, 2011. "K pojetí preferencí v ekonomickém myšlení [Preference Dilemma in Economics]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2011(3), pages 345-358.
    6. Amir, Shmuel, 1995. "Welfare maximization in economic theory: Another viewpoint," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 359-376, August.
    7. Timothy K.M. Beatty, 2007. "Recovering the Shadow Value of Nutrients," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(1), pages 52-62.
    8. Knittel Christopher R. & Stango Victor, 2008. "Incompatibility, Product Attributes and Consumer Welfare: Evidence from ATMs," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-42, January.
    9. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    10. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    11. Tisdell, Clement A., 2012. "Ecotourism Experiences Promoting Conservation and Changing Economic Values: The Case of Mon Repos Turtles," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 125209, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    12. Zhang, Xiaohui & Zhao, Xueyan & Harris, Anthony, 2009. "Chronic diseases and labour force participation in Australia," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 91-108, January.
    13. Guggenberger, Patrik & Kaul, Ashok & Kolmar, Martin, 2002. "Efficiency properties of labor taxation in a spatial model of restricted labor mobility," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 447-473, July.
    14. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    15. Aguilar, Francisco X., 2009. "Spatial econometric analysis of location drivers in a renewable resource-based industry: The U.S. South Lumber Industry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 184-193, May.
    16. Marva Stithou & Yiannis Kountouris & Phoebe Koundouri, 2011. "A Choice Experiments Application in Transport Infrastructure: A case study on travel time savings, accidents and pollution reduction," DEOS Working Papers 1116, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    17. Akpalu, Wisdom & Dasmani, Isaac & Aglobitse, Peter B., 2011. "Demand for cooking fuels in a developing country: To what extent do taste and preferences matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 6525-6531, October.
    18. Witte, Kristof De & Geys, Benny, 2011. "Evaluating efficient public good provision: Theory and evidence from a generalised conditional efficiency model for public libraries," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 319-327, May.
    19. Frenken, Koen & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "Scaling trajectories in civil aircraft (1913-1997)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 331-348, March.
    20. Anastassiadis, Friederike & Liebe, Ulf & Musshoff, Oliver, 2012. "Finanzielle Flexibilität In Landwirtschaftlichen Investitionsentscheidungen: Ein Discrete Choice Experiment," 52nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 26-28, 2012 137142, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).

    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:jfpoli:v:34:y:2009:i:2:p:185-197. 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/foodpol .

    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.