IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i9p1509-d109650.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beer and Organic Labels: Do Belgian Consumers Care?

Author

Listed:
  • Eline Poelmans

    (Faculty of Economics and Business, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Campus Brussels, Warmoesberg 26, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
    LICOS Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Campus Leuven, Waaistraat 6/bus 3511, 3000 Leuven, Belgium)

  • Sandra Rousseau

    (Faculty of Economics and Business, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Campus Brussels, Warmoesberg 26, 1000 Brussels, Belgium)

Abstract

We investigate whether beer drinkers are willing to pay a price premium for organic beer compared to conventional beer. Moreover, we identify subgroups of consumers with different preference patterns by investigating whether specific personal characteristics of the purchasers have an influence on this willingness-to-pay. Specifically, results are reported from a survey including a stated choice experiment of consumer decisions concerning beer purchases in Flanders (Belgium), focusing on organic labels. A non-probabilistic sampling method was used over the Internet and 334 responses were useable for the empirical analysis. Each respondent was asked to choose their preferred beer from a series of nine choice cards describing three different beer varieties. In this respect, we created a two-block design, each consisting of nine choice cards. Each respondent was randomly presented with one of the two blocks, so that an equal distribution of the blocks could be obtained. Overall, we find that our sample is statistically indifferent between a beer with an organic label and a similar beer without an organic label. This is in line with previous research that stated that consumers are unwilling to pay high price premiums for organic vice products, such as beer. We find no statistically different preferences for male or female respondents, or for members or non-members of nature protection organizations. However, we find a significant difference ( p -value = 0.029) between primary beer shoppers who have a zero willingness-to-pay (WTP) for organic beer compared to similar non-organic beer and the reference group that has a negative WTP of 14 Euro per 1.5 L for organic beer. In addition, the WTP for beer drinkers older than 40 (negative WTP of 22 Euro per 1.5 L) and the WTP for frequent beer drinkers (zero WTP) are statistically different from the reference group ( p -value = 0.019 and 0.000 respectively).

Suggested Citation

  • Eline Poelmans & Sandra Rousseau, 2017. "Beer and Organic Labels: Do Belgian Consumers Care?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-15, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:9:p:1509-:d:109650
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/9/1509/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/9/1509/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Durham, Catherine A., 2007. "The Impact of Environmental and Health Motivations on the Organic Share of Produce Purchases," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-17, October.
    2. Hanley, Nick & Shogren, Jason & White, Ben, 2013. "Introduction to Environmental Economics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199568734.
    3. Christian A. Vossler & Maurice Doyon & Daniel Rondeau, 2012. "Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 145-171, November.
    4. Gil, Jose Maria & Gracia, Azucena & Sanchez Garcia, Mercedes, 2000. "Market Segmentation And Willingness To Pay For Organic Products In Spain," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 3(2), pages 1-20.
    5. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    6. Zepeda, Lydia & Li, Jinghan, 2007. "Characteristics of Organic Food Shoppers," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 39(1), pages 1-12, April.
    7. Ignazio Cabras & Charles Bamforth, 2016. "From reviving tradition to fostering innovation and changing marketing: the evolution of micro-brewing in the UK and US, 1980–2012," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(5), pages 625-646, July.
    8. Ranjit S. Dighe, 2016. "A taste for temperance: how American beer got to be so bland," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(5), pages 752-784, July.
    9. Swinnen, Johan F.M. (ed.), 2011. "The Economics of Beer," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199693801.
    10. Johan F.M. Swinnen & Liesbeth Colen, 2011. "Beer Drinking Nations: The Determinants of Global Beer Consumption," Working Papers id:4324, eSocialSciences.
    11. Christopher G. Leggett & Naomi S. Kleckner & Kevin J. Boyle & John W. Dufield & Robert Cameron Mitchell, 2003. "Social Desirability Bias in Contingent Valuation Surveys Administered Through In-Person Interviews," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(4), pages 561-575.
    12. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Johan Lagerkvist, Carl, 2005. "Using cheap talk as a test of validity in choice experiments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 147-152, November.
    13. van Doorn, Jenny & Verhoef, Peter C., 2011. "Willingness to pay for organic products: Differences between virtue and vice foods," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 167-180.
    14. Zepeda, Lydia & Li, Jinghan, 2007. "Characteristics of Organic Food Shoppers," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 17-28, April.
    15. Ignazio Cabras & David Higgins & David Preece (ed.), 2016. "Brewing, Beer and Pubs," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-137-46618-1, March.
    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. Leonard Maaya & Michel Meulders & Nick Surmont & Martina Vandebroek, 2018. "Effect of Environmental and Altruistic Attitudes on Willingness-to-Pay for Organic and Fair Trade Coffee in Flanders," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, November.
    2. Jianhua Wang & Jiaye Ge & Yuting Ma, 2018. "Urban Chinese Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Pork with Certified Labels: A Discrete Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, February.
    3. Marco Lerro & Giuseppe Marotta & Concetta Nazzaro, 2020. "Measuring consumers’ preferences for craft beer attributes through Best-Worst Scaling," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 8(1), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Sandra Rousseau & Machteld Joly & Eline Poelmans, 2024. "Search characteristics, online consumer ratings, and beer prices," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(4), pages 804-824, October.
    5. Cerjak, Marija & Bazzani, Claudia & Drichoutis, Andreas, 2024. "Consumer preferences for craft beer: The interplay of localness and advertising language," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 343728, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Magdiel Pablo-Cano & Anastacio Espejel-García & Arturo Hernández-Montes & Landy Hernández-Rodríguez, 2024. "Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Attributes of Sustainability, Origin and Production Process in Raicilla," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-13, October.
    7. András István Kun & Marietta Kiss, 2021. "On the Mechanics of the Organic Label Effect: How Does Organic Labeling Change Consumer Evaluation of Food Products?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-25, January.
    8. Jan Zavodny Pospisil & Lucie Sara Zavodna & Matej Jiranek, 2020. "Does the Packaging Change the Perceived Taste of Beer? Results from a Beer Experiment," Tržište/Market, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, vol. 32(1), pages 65-78.
    9. Biancamaria Torquati & Tiziano Tempesta & Daniel Vecchiato & Sonia Venanzi, 2018. "Tasty or Sustainable? The Effect of Product Sensory Experience on a Sustainable New Food Product: An Application of Discrete Choice Experiments on Chianina Tinned Beef," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    10. Carla Rodriguez-Sanchez & Ricardo Sellers-Rubio, 2020. "Sustainability in the Beverage Industry: A Research Agenda from the Demand Side," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    11. Niklas, Britta, 2024. "The effect of South African wine certifications on price premiums and marginal costs: A two-stage hedonic approach," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).

    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. Jessica Aschemann-Witzel & Stephan Zielke, 2017. "Can't Buy Me Green? A Review of Consumer Perceptions of and Behavior Toward the Price of Organic Food," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 211-251, March.
    2. Rana, Jyoti & Paul, Justin, 2017. "Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food: A review and research agenda," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 157-165.
    3. Tavárez, Héctor & Álamo, Carmen & Cortés,Mildred, 2020. "Differentiated coffees and their potential markets in Puerto Rico: An economic valuation approach," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 20(02), December.
    4. Johnston, Andrew C., 2021. "Preferences, Selection, and the Structure of Teacher Pay," IZA Discussion Papers 14831, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Le Van Huy & Mai Thi Thao Chi & Antonio Lobo & Ninh Nguyen & Phan Hoang Long, 2019. "Effective Segmentation of Organic Food Consumers in Vietnam Using Food-Related Lifestyles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-16, February.
    6. John A. List & Michael K. Price, 2016. "Editor's Choice The Use of Field Experiments in Environmental and Resource Economics," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 206-225.
    7. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    8. Chen, Xuqi & Gao, Yujuan & Gao, Zhifeng, 2022. "Impacts of color-coded nutrition facts panel and consumer responses," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322206, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Kinga Nagy-Pércsi & Csaba Fogarassy, 2019. "Important Influencing and Decision Factors in Organic Food Purchasing in Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-21, November.
    10. Lopez-Becerra, E.I. & Alcon, F., 2021. "Social desirability bias in the environmental economic valuation: An inferred valuation approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    11. Govindasamy, R & Arumugam, S & Vellangany, I & Ozkan, B, 2018. "Willingness to pay a high-premium for fresh organic produce: an econometric analysis," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 31(1).
    12. Sergio Colombo & Wiktor Budziński & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Klaus Glenk, 2020. "Ex-ante and ex-post measures to mitigate hypothetical bias. Are they alternative or complementary tools to increase the reliability and validity of DCE estimates?," Working Papers 2020-20, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    13. Sergio Colombo & Wiktor Budziński & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Klaus Glenk, 2022. "The relative performance of ex‐ante and ex‐post measures to mitigate hypothetical and strategic bias in a stated preference study," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 845-873, September.
    14. Tatiana Drugova & Kynda R. Curtis & Sherzod B. Akhundjanov, 2020. "Are multiple labels on food products beneficial or simply ignored?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(4), pages 411-427, December.
    15. Mausam Budhathoki & Sujita Pandey, 2021. "Intake of Animal-Based Foods and Consumer Behaviour towards Organic Food: The Case of Nepal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-18, November.
    16. Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Aanesen, Margrethe & Navrud, Ståle, 2016. "Valuing unfamiliar and complex environmental goods: A comparison of valuation workshops and internet panel surveys with videos," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 50-61.
    17. Karthik Sridhar & Ram Bezawada & Minakshi Trivedi, 2012. "Investigating the Drivers of Consumer Cross-Category Learning for New Products Using Multiple Data Sets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 668-688, July.
    18. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    19. Haoying Wang & Guohui Wu, 2022. "Modeling discrete choices with large fine-scale spatial data: opportunities and challenges," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 325-351, July.
    20. Dugstad, Anders & Grimsrud, Kristine & Kipperberg, Gorm & Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2020. "Acceptance of wind power development and exposure – Not-in-anybody's-backyard," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:9:p:1509-:d:109650. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.