IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rae/jouraf/v98y2017i1-2p25-54.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mandatory integrated pest management in the EuropeanUnion: experimental insights on consumers’reactions

Author

Listed:
  • M. Lefebvre

    (European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for Prospective TechnologicalStudies (IPTS), Edificio Expo. c/ Inca Garcilaso, 3, 41092 Seville, Spain et Université d’Angers, UMR Granem, 49400 Angers, France)

  • C. Biguzzi

    (Laboratory for Experimentation in Social Sciences and Behavioral Analysis (LESSAC), Burgundy School of Business, 21000 Dijon, France)

  • E. Ginon

    (Laboratory for Experimentation in Social Sciences and Behavioral Analysis (LESSAC), Burgundy School of Business, 21000 Dijon, France)

  • S. Gomez-y-Paloma
  • S. R. H. Langrell

    (Plant Health, Food of Plant Origin and Food Quality Unit, European Commission, DirectorateGeneral for Health and Consumer Protection, Food and Veterinary Office, Grange, Dunsany,Co. Meath, Ireland)

  • S. Marette

    (INRA, UMR Economie Publique, 78850 Thiverval-Grignon, France)

  • G. Mateu

    (Laboratory for Experimentation in Social Sciences and Behavioral Analysis (LESSAC), Burgundy School of Business, 21000 Dijon, France)

  • A. Sutan

    (Laboratory for Experimentation in Social Sciences and Behavioral Analysis (LESSAC), Burgundy School of Business, 21000 Dijon, France)

Abstract

A realistic experiment with 189 French consumers was conducted to analyseconsumers’reaction to the transition towards integrated pest management (IPM) as thestandard in European farming. Results indicate high substitutability between IPM andorganic tomatoes. It suggests that IPM sales will benefit from the withdrawal ofconventional products from the market only if there is a significant reduction in theprice of IPM products as compared to organic ones and/or an important increase in theshelf space dedicated to IPM products. While information on IPM guidelines increasesIPM products purchases, providing extra information on residue levels in IPM tomatoeshas no further impact on consumers’choices in this experiment

Suggested Citation

  • M. Lefebvre & C. Biguzzi & E. Ginon & S. Gomez-y-Paloma & S. R. H. Langrell & S. Marette & G. Mateu & A. Sutan, 2017. "Mandatory integrated pest management in the EuropeanUnion: experimental insights on consumers’reactions," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 98(1-2), pages 25-54.
    • Handle: RePEc:rae:jouraf:v:98:y:2017:i:1-2:p:25-54
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs41130-017-0041-x.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yue, Chengyan & Alfnes, Frode & Jensen, Helen H., 2009. "Discounting Spotted Apples: Investigating Consumers' Willingness to Accept Cosmetic Damage in an Organic Product," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(1), pages 29-46, April.
    2. Raymond J. G. M. Florax & Chiara M. Travisi & Peter Nijkamp, 2005. "A meta-analysis of the willingness to pay for reductions in pesticide risk exposure," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(4), pages 441-467, December.
    3. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Moon, Amanda, 2009. "Complexity in choice experiments: choice of the status quo alternative and implications for welfare measurement," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(4), pages 1-17.
    4. Hensher, David A., 2010. "Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 735-752, July.
    5. Mark Chatfield & Adrian Mander, 2009. "The Skillings–Mack test (Friedman test when there are missing data)," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 9(2), pages 299-305, June.
    6. Maynard, Leigh J. & Hartell, Jason G. & Meyer, A. Lee & Hao, Jianqiang, 2004. "An experimental approach to valuing new differentiated products," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 31(2-3), pages 317-325, December.
    7. Alpizar, Francisco & Carlsson, Fredrik & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2008. "Anonymity, reciprocity, and conformity: Evidence from voluntary contributions to a national park in Costa Rica," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1047-1060, June.
    8. Pascale Bazoche & Pierre Combris & Eric Giraud-Héraud & Alexandra Seabra Pinto & Frank Bunte & Efthimia Tsakiridou, 2014. "Willingness to pay for pesticide reduction in the EU: nothing but organic?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 41(1), pages 87-109, February.
    9. repec:ken:wpaper:0901 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Celine Michaud & Daniel Llerena & Iragael Joly, 2013. "Willingness to pay for environmental attributes of non-food agricultural products: a real choice experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 40(2), pages 313-329, March.
    11. Yue, Chengyan & Alfnes, Frode & Jensen, Helen H., 2009. "Discounting Spotted Apples: Investigating Consumersï¾’ Willingness to Accept Cosmetic Damage in an Organic Product," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12693, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Andreoni, James & Petrie, Ragan, 2004. "Public goods experiments without confidentiality: a glimpse into fund-raising," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(7-8), pages 1605-1623, July.
    13. Knut Per Hasund & Mitesh Kataria & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2011. "Valuing public goods of the agricultural landscape: a choice experiment using reference points to capture observable heterogeneity," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(1), pages 31-53.
    14. Vasileiadis, V.P. & Sattin, M. & Otto, S. & Veres, A. & Pálinkás, Z. & Ban, R. & Pons, X. & Kudsk, P. & van der Weide, R. & Czembor, E. & Moonen, A.C. & Kiss, J., 2011. "Crop protection in European maize-based cropping systems: Current practices and recommendations for innovative Integrated Pest Management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(7), pages 533-540, September.
    15. Jumbe, Charles B.L. & Angelsen, Arild, 2011. "Modeling choice of fuelwood source among rural households in Malawi: A multinomial probit analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 732-738, September.
    16. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Frykblom & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2007. "Consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare: mobile abattoirs versus transportation to slaughter," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 34(3), pages 321-344, September.
    17. Alphonce, Roselyne & Alfnes, Frode, 2015. "Eliciting Consumer WTP for Food Characteristics in a Developing Context: Comparison of four methods in a field experiment," Working Paper Series 01-2015, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, School of Economics and Business.
    18. Robert D. Weaver & David J. Evans & A. E. Luloff, 1992. "Pesticide use in tomato production: Consumer concerns and willingness-to-pay," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(2), pages 131-142.
    19. Grolleau, Gilles & Sutan, Angela & Vranceanu, Radu, 2016. "Do people contribute more to intra-temporal or inter-temporal public goods?," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 186-195.
    20. Gro Steine & Kari Kolstad, 2006. "Consumers' Willingness to Pay for the Color of Salmon: A Choice Experiment with Real Economic Incentives," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1050-1061.
    21. Dan Rigby & Francisco Alcon & Michael Burton, 2010. "Supply uncertainty and the economic value of irrigation water," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 37(1), pages 97-117, March.
    22. Jayson L. Lusk & Ted C. Schroeder, 2004. "Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 467-482.
    23. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, September.
    24. Gilles Grolleau & Angela Sutan & Radu Vranceanu, 2013. "Taking the well-being of future generations seriously: do people contribute more to intra-temporal or inter-temporal public goods?," Working Papers hal-01594105, HAL.
    25. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    26. Marette, Stéphan & Messéan, Antoine & Millet, Guy, 2012. "Consumers’ willingness to pay for eco-friendly apples under different labels: Evidences from a lab experiment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 151-161.
    27. Wuyang Hu & Michele Veeman & Wiktor Adamowicz & Ge Gao, 2006. "Consumers' Food Choices with Voluntary Access to Genetic Modification Information," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 54(4), pages 585-604, December.
    28. Alvarez, R. Michael & Nagler, Jonathan & Bowler, Shaun, 2000. "Issues, Economics, and the Dynamics of Multiparty Elections: The British 1987 General Election," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(1), pages 131-149, March.
    29. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    30. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    31. Rege, Mari & Telle, Kjetil, 2004. "The impact of social approval and framing on cooperation in public good situations," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(7-8), pages 1625-1644, July.
    32. Mouron, Patrik & Heijne, Bart & Naef, Andreas & Strassemeyer, Jörn & Hayer, Frank & Avilla, Jesus & Alaphilippe, Aude & Höhn, Heinrich & Hernandez, José & Mack, Gabriele & Gaillard, Gérard & Solé, Joa, 2012. "Sustainability assessment of crop protection systems: SustainOS methodology and its application for apple orchards," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-15.
    33. Alfnes, Frode & Guttormsen, Atle G. & Steine, Gro & Kolstad, Kari, 2005. "Consumers' Willingness To Pay For The Color Of Salmon:A Choice Experiment With Real Economic Incentives," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19126, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    34. repec:hal:journl:hal-00866970 is not listed on IDEAS
    35. Alfnes, Frode & Guttormsen, Atle G. & Steine, Gro & Kolstad, Kari, 2006. "Ajae Appendix: Consumers’ Willingness To Pay For The Color Of Salmon: A Choice Experiment With Real Economic Incentives," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1-8, November.
    36. Glasgow, Garrett, 2001. "Mixed Logit Models for Multiparty Elections," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 116-136, January.
    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. Anna Birgitte Milford & Nina Trandem & Armando José Garcia Pires, 2021. "Fear of pesticide residues and preference for domestically produced strawberries," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(4), pages 369-391, 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. Biguzzi, Coralie & Ginon, Emilie & Gomez-y-Paloma, Sergio & Langrell, Sergio & Lefebvre, Marianne & Marette, Stephan & Mateu, Guillermo & Sutan, Angela, 2014. "Consumers' preferences for Integrated Pest Management: Experimental insights," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183081, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    3. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren B. Olsen, 2017. "Can a Repeated Opt-Out Reminder remove hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments? An application to consumer valuation of novel food products," IFRO Working Paper 2017/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    4. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren Bøye Olsen & Suzanne E. Vedel & John Kinyuru & Kennedy O. Pambo, 2016. "Integrating sensory evaluations in incentivized discrete choice experiments to assess consumer demand for cricket flour buns in Kenya," IFRO Working Paper 2016/02, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    5. Frode Alfnes & Chengyan Yue & Helen H. Jensen, 2010. "Cognitive dissonance as a means of reducing hypothetical bias," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 37(2), pages 147-163, June.
    6. Ana I. Sanjuán‐López & Helena Resano‐Ezcaray, 2020. "Labels for a Local Food Speciality Product: The Case of Saffron," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 778-797, September.
    7. Abdelradi, Fadi & Abdu, Khaled, 2015. "Evaluation of consumers' lifestyles and willingness to pay for dates: A hybrid choice model approach," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202720, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Ozge Dinc‐Cavlak & Ozlem Ozdemir, 2021. "Comparing the willingness to pay through three elicitation mechanisms: An experimental evidence for organic egg product," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(4), pages 782-803, October.
    9. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren B. Olsen & Suzanne E. Vedel & John N. Kinyuru & Kennedy O. Pambo, 2017. "Can insects increase food security in developing countries? An analysis of Kenyan consumer preferences and demand for cricket flour buns," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(3), pages 471-484, June.
    10. Veettil, Prakashan Chellattan & Speelman, Stijn & Frija, Aymen & Buysse, Jeroen & van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2011. "Complementarity between water pricing, water rights and local water governance: A Bayesian analysis of choice behaviour of farmers in the Krishna river basin, India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(10), pages 1756-1766, August.
    11. Onozaka, Yuko & Saue, Vegar Veseth & Costanigro, Marco, 2018. "The Moderating Effect of Heterogeneous Beliefs on Consumer Preferences for a New Food Technology: The Case of Modified Atmospheric Packaging," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274068, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Ballco, Petjon & Gracia, Azucena, 2020. "Do market prices correspond with consumer demands? Combining market valuation and consumer utility for extra virgin olive oil quality attributes in a traditional producing country," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    13. Ladenburg, Jacob & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2014. "Augmenting short Cheap Talk scripts with a repeated Opt-Out Reminder in Choice Experiment surveys," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 39-63.
    14. Ponce Oliva, Roberto D. & Vasquez-Lavín, Felipe & San Martin, Valeska A. & Hernández, José Ignacio & Vargas, Cristian A. & Gonzalez, Pablo S. & Gelcich, Stefan, 2019. "Ocean Acidification, Consumers' Preferences, and Market Adaptation Strategies in the Mussel Aquaculture Industry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 42-50.
    15. Papoutsi, Georgia S. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Lazaridis, Panagiotis & Drichoutis, Andreas C., 2015. "Fat tax, subsidy or both? The role of information and children's pester power in food choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 196-208.
    16. Papoutsi, Georgia & Nayga, Rodolfo & Lazaridis, Panagiotis & Drichoutis, Andreas, 2013. "Nudging parental health behavior with and without children's pestering power: Fat tax, subsidy or both?," MPRA Paper 52324, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Li, Hao & Elbakidze, Levan, 2016. "Application of Regression Discontinuity Approach in Experimental Auctions: A Case Study of Gaining Participants’ Trust and Their Willingness to Pay," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236149, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Cavallo, Carla & Del Giudice, Teresa & Cicia, Gianni & Di Monaco, Rossella & Caracciolo, Francesco, 2014. "Revealed preference approach for analysing consumer preferences: a choice experiment with a real-life setting," Politica Agricola Internazionale - International Agricultural Policy, Edizioni L'Informatore Agrario, vol. 2014(2).
    19. Mohammed Hussen Alemu & Søren Bøye Olsen, 2020. "An analysis of the impacts of tasting experience and peer effects on consumers’ willingness to pay for novel foods," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(4), pages 653-674, October.
    20. Grolleau, Gilles & Sutan, Angela & Vranceanu, Radu, 2016. "Do people contribute more to intra-temporal or inter-temporal public goods?," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 186-195.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Integrated pest management.Organic.Tomatoes.Sustainable use ofpesticides directive.Multinomial probit.Open-ended choice experiment;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy

    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:rae:jouraf:v:98:y:2017:i:1-2:p:25-54. 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: Nathalie Saux-Nogues (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inrapfr.html .

    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.