IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fan/ecaqec/vhtml10.3280-ecag2018-001005.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Substitutability between organic and conventional poultry products and organic price premiums

Author

Listed:
  • Sohae Eve Oh
  • Tomislav Vukina

Abstract

The organic food sector is one of the most rapidly growing sectors in the food market. Organic price premiums and patterns of substitution between related organic and conventional products are important for organic products certification and market entry and expansion decisions of organic producers. In this project we analyzed price differentials (premiums) between organic and conventional eggs and between three categories of organic and conventional chicken products: whole birds, boneless breasts and whole legs. Farm level prices for delivery to first receivers for the period January 2004 and December 2013 show that, in absolute terms, the highest average organic premium is commanded by boneless skinless breast meat followed by organic eggs. We also estimated the demand functions for conventional eggs and chickens where the presence of organic prices as the right-hand-side variables enable us to obtain cross-price elasticities of conventional demands with respect to organic prices. In line with the extant literature, our results show highly inelastic and statistically significant own price effects for both conventional chickens (elasticity equals -0.13) and conventional eggs (elasticity equals -0.139). The cross-price elasticities of conventional chicken meat demand with respect to the price of organic chickens and the cross-price elasticity of conventional eggs demand with respect to organic egg price, which are rarely found in the literature, confirm the intuitively expected result that the conventional and organic varieties of the same product are substitutes. The estimated cross-price elasticity of conventional chicken meat demand with respect to organic chicken price equals 0.153 and the cross-price elasticity of conventional eggs demand with respect to organic eggs price equals 0.679.

Suggested Citation

  • Sohae Eve Oh & Tomislav Vukina, 2018. "Substitutability between organic and conventional poultry products and organic price premiums," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 20(1), pages 75-92.
    • Handle: RePEc:fan:ecaqec:v:html10.3280/ecag2018-001005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.francoangeli.it/riviste/Scheda_Rivista.aspx?IDArticolo=61645&Tipo=ArticoloPDF
    Download Restriction: Single articles can be downloaded buying download credits, for info: https://www.francoangeli.it/DownloadCredit
    ---><---

    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. Carlson, Andrea & Jaenicke, Edward, 2016. "Changes in Retail Organic Price Premiums from 2004 to 2010," Economic Research Report 242448, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Glaser, Lewrene K. & Thompson, Gary D., 1999. "Demand For Organic And Conventional Frozen Vegetables," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21583, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Conner Mullally & Jayson L Lusk, 2018. "The Impact of Farm Animal Housing Restrictions on Egg Prices, Consumer Welfare, and Production in California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(3), pages 649-669.
    4. Gary D. Thompson, 1998. "Consumer Demand for Organic Foods: What We Know and What We Need to Know," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1113-1118.
    5. Malone, Trey & Lusk, Jayson L., 2016. "Putting the Chicken Before the Egg Price: An Ex Post Analysis of California's Battery Cage Ban," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-15, September.
    6. Dimitri, Carolyn & Oberholtzer, Lydia, 2008. "The U.S. Organic Handling Sector in 2004: Baseline Findings of the Nationwide Survey of Organic Manufacturers, Processors, and Distributors," Economic Information Bulletin 58638, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    7. Chang, Jae Bong & Lusk, Jayson L. & Norwood, F. Bailey, 2010. "The Price of Happy Hens: A Hedonic Analysis of Retail Egg Prices," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 35(3), pages 1-18, December.
    8. Glaser, Lewrene K. & Thompson, Gary D., 2000. "Demand For Organic And Conventional Beverage Milk," 2000 Annual Meeting, June 29-July 1, 2000, Vancouver, British Columbia 36346, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    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. Christine Mauracher & Isabella Procidano & Marco Valentini, 2019. "How Product Attributes and Consumer Characteristics Influence the WTP, Resulting in a Higher Price Premium for Organic Wine," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, March.

    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. Sohae Eve Oh & Tomislav Vukina, 2022. "The price of cage‐free eggs: Social cost of Proposition 12 in California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(4), pages 1293-1326, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Schrock, Rebecca, 2010. "Determinants Of The Demand For Organic And Conventional Fresh Milk In Germany– An Econometric Analysis," 115th Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, September 15-17, 2010, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany 116387, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Lars Gårn Hansen & Laura Mørch Andersen, 2013. "Does Organic Crowding Out Influence Organic Food Demand? – evidence from a Danish micro panel," IFRO Working Paper 2013/2, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    5. Ufer, Danielle, 2022. "State Policies for Farm Animal Welfare in Production Practices of U.S. Livestock and Poultry Industries: An Overview," USDA Miscellaneous 333544, United States Department of Agriculture.
    6. Katrin, Millock & Hansen, Lars Gårn, 2002. "Willingness to Pay for Organic Foods: A Comparison between Survey Data and Panel Data from Denmark," MPRA Paper 47588, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Adam Pawlewicz, 2020. "Change of Price Premiums Trend for Organic Food Products: The Example of the Polish Egg Market," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, February.
    8. Schroeck, Rebecca, 2011. "Wie sensibel reagieren deutsche Verbraucher auf Preisänderungen bei Bio-Eiern? Eine Nachfrageanalyse mit Haushaltspanel-Daten," 51st Annual Conference, Halle, Germany, September 28-30, 2011 114492, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    9. Wier, Mette & Hansen, Lars Gaarn & Andersen, Laura Mørch, 2003. "Consumer preferences for organic foods," MPRA Paper 60539, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Paul, Andrew S. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Norwood, F. Bailey & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2019. "An experiment on the vote-buy gap with application to cage-free eggs," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 102-109.
    11. Syed Badruddoza & Andrea C. Carlson & Jill J. McCluskey, 2022. "Long‐term dynamics of US organic milk, eggs, and yogurt premiums," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(1), pages 45-72, January.
    12. Vercammen, James, 2004. "Economic Features of Canadian Organic Food at the Mass-market Retail Level," CAFRI: Current Agriculture, Food and Resource Issues, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society, issue 5, pages 1-11, May.
    13. Dettmann, Rachael L. & Dimitri, Carolyn, 2007. "Organic Consumers: A Demographic Portrayal of Organic Vegetable Consumption within the United States," 105th Seminar, March 8-10, 2007, Bologna, Italy 7899, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Glaser, Lewrene K. & Thompson, Gary D., 2000. "Demand For Organic And Conventional Beverage Milk," 2000 Annual Meeting, June 29-July 1, 2000, Vancouver, British Columbia 36346, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    15. Matthias Staudigel & Aleksej Trubnikov, 2022. "High price premiums as barriers to organic meat demand? A hedonic analysis considering species, cut and retail outlet," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(2), pages 309-334, April.
    16. Shon M. Ferguson, 2023. "Unconstrained trade: The impact of EU cage bans on exports of poultry‐keeping equipment," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 435-449, June.
    17. repec:ags:aaea22:335949 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Tomislav Vukina & Danijel Nestic, 2020. "Paying for animal welfare? A hedonic analysis of egg prices," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(4), pages 613-630, October.
    19. Colin A. Carter & K. Aleks Schaefer & Daniel Scheitrum, 2021. "Piecemeal Farm Regulation and the U.S. Commerce Clause," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(3), pages 1141-1163, May.
    20. Steven C. Blank & Gary D. Thompson, 2004. "Can/Should/Will A Niche Become the Norm? Organic Agriculture's Short Past and Long Future," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 22(4), pages 483-503, October.
    21. Pedro A. Alviola & Oral Capps, 2010. "Household demand analysis of organic and conventional fluid milk in the United States based on the 2004 Nielsen Homescan panel," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 369-388.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • Q11 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Aggregate Supply and Demand Analysis; Prices
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness

    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:fan:ecaqec:v:html10.3280/ecag2018-001005. 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: Stefania Rosato (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.francoangeli.it/riviste/sommario.aspx?IDRivista=214 .

    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.