IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v29y2012i2p151-159.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Growing Chinese medicinal herbs in the United States: understanding practitioner preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Jay Lillywhite
  • Jennifer Simonsen
  • Vera Wilson

Abstract

The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) by US consumers has grown in recent years. CAM therapies often utilize medicinal herbs as part of the treatment process; however, research on US practitioner preferences for medicinal herbs is limited, despite growing concern surrounding the sustainability of wild-harvested medicinal herbs. In order better to understand consumer preferences for this emerging market, a mail survey of US practitioners (licensed acupuncturists) was conducted to examine the importance of five herb attributes in practitioners’ herb selection decisions: (1) country of origin, (2) freshness, (3) production method (organic versus conventional), (4) price, and (5) traceability. The significance of these five traits is investigated using discrete choice analysis, and the implications for US medicinal herb growers are discussed. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Jay Lillywhite & Jennifer Simonsen & Vera Wilson, 2012. "Growing Chinese medicinal herbs in the United States: understanding practitioner preferences," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 29(2), pages 151-159, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:29:y:2012:i:2:p:151-159
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-011-9332-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10460-011-9332-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-011-9332-z?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. Jean Philippe Perrouty & François d'Hauteville & Larry Lockshin, 2006. "The influence of wine attributes on region of origin equity: An analysis of the moderating effect of consumer's perceived expertise," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(3), pages 323-341.
    2. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, September.
    3. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, September.
    4. Magali Aubert & Philippe Perrier‐Cornet, 2009. "Is there a future for small farms in developed countries? Evidence from the French case," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(s1), pages 797-806, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Tempesta, Tiziano & Vecchiato, Daniel & Djumboung, Danièle Aurelie & Chinazzi, Gianluca, 2013. "An analysis of the potential effects of the modification of the Prosecco Protected Designation of Origin: a choice experiment," Politica Agricola Internazionale - International Agricultural Policy, Edizioni L'Informatore Agrario, vol. 2013(2), April.
    2. Zhifeng Gao & Ted C. Schroeder, 2009. "Consumer responses to new food quality information: are some consumers more sensitive than others?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 339-346, May.
    3. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    4. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny, 2011. "Demand for improved food safety and quality: a cross-regional comparison," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108791, Agricultural Economics Society.
    5. Kesternich, Iris & Heiss, Florian & McFadden, Daniel & Winter, Joachim, 2013. "Suit the action to the word, the word to the action: Hypothetical choices and real decisions in Medicare Part D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1313-1324.
    6. David Hensher & John Rose & Zheng Li, 2012. "Does the choice model method and/or the data matter?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 351-385, March.
    7. Qin, Pin & Carlsson, Fredrik & Xu, Jintao, 2009. "Forestland Reform in China: What do the Farmers Want? A Choice Experiment on Farmers’ Property Rights Preferences," Working Papers in Economics 370, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    8. Ping Qin & Fredrik Carlsson & Jintao Xu, 2011. "Forest Tenure Reform in China: A Choice Experiment on Farmers’ Property Rights Preferences," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(3), pages 473-487.
    9. Joachim Marti, 2012. "Assessing preferences for improved smoking cessation medications: a discrete choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(5), pages 533-548, October.
    10. 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).
    11. Ting Li & Robert J. Kauffman & Eric van Heck & Peter Vervest & Benedict G. C. Dellaert, 2014. "Consumer Informedness and Firm Information Strategy," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 345-363, June.
    12. Deenihan, Gerard & Caulfield, Brian, 2015. "Do tourists value different levels of cycling infrastructure?," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 92-101.
    13. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    14. Ateesha Mohamed & A. Hauber & Maureen Neary, 2011. "Patient Benefit-Risk Preferences for Targeted Agents in the Treatment of Renal Cell Carcinoma," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 29(11), pages 977-988, November.
    15. Lipovetsky, Stan, 2018. "Quantum paradigm of probability amplitude and complex utility in entangled discrete choice modeling," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 62-73.
    16. Basu, Debasis & Hunt, John Douglas, 2012. "Valuing of attributes influencing the attractiveness of suburban train service in Mumbai city: A stated preference approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1465-1476.
    17. Gevrek, Z.Eylem & Uyduranoglu, Ayse, 2015. "Public preferences for carbon tax attributes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 186-197.
    18. Martine Audibert & Yong He & Jacky Mathonnat, 2013. "Two-Period Comparison of Healthcare Demand with Income Growth and Population Aging in Rural China: Implications for Adjustment of the Healthcare Supply and Development," Working Papers halshs-00846088, HAL.
    19. Broberg, Thomas & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Persson, Lars, 2021. "Household preferences for load restrictions: Is there an effect of pro-environmental framing?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    20. Lancsar, Emily & Louviere, Jordan & Flynn, Terry, 2007. "Several methods to investigate relative attribute impact in stated preference experiments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(8), pages 1738-1753, April.

    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:spr:agrhuv:v:29:y:2012:i:2:p:151-159. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.