IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/agribz/v35y2019i1p53-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chinese consumer preferences for fresh produce: Interaction between food safety labels and brands

Author

Listed:
  • Shijiu Yin
  • Wuyang Hu
  • Yusheng Chen
  • Fei Han
  • Yiqin Wang
  • Mo Chen

Abstract

In this study, 938 consumers in China's Shandong Province were surveyed for their preferences for tomatoes in a real choice experiment varying in three product attributes: food safety label, brand, and price. Using a mixed logit model, results revealed that consumer willingness to pay for organic tomatoes was higher than that for tomatoes labeled as Green or Generally Regarded as Safe (GRS). With regard to brands, consumers prefer brands affiliated with proprietary enterprises over brands held by agricultural cooperatives. The interactions between organic label and brands as well as that between Green label and brands were significantly positive suggesting synergy between these labels and brands. Conversely, the interaction between the GRS label and brands was insignificant. The conclusions should not only aid Chinese policy makers in developing its food safety certification strategies but also provide references for producers and certification bodies for their business decision‐making.

Suggested Citation

  • Shijiu Yin & Wuyang Hu & Yusheng Chen & Fei Han & Yiqin Wang & Mo Chen, 2019. "Chinese consumer preferences for fresh produce: Interaction between food safety labels and brands," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(1), pages 53-68, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:agribz:v:35:y:2019:i:1:p:53-68
    DOI: 10.1002/agr.21585
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.21585
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/agr.21585?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Allenby, Greg M. & Rossi, Peter E., 1998. "Marketing models of consumer heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 57-78, November.
    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. Zhanguo Zhu & Qinyuan Shen & Zhifeng Gao, 2022. "Consumer choices in agricultural markets with multitier collective labels and private brands," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(4), pages 905-922, October.
    2. Oluwagbenga Akinwehinmi & Kolawole Ogundari & Taye Timothy Amos, 2022. "Consumers’ food control risk perception and preference for food safety certification in emerging food markets," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 690-708, September.
    3. Akinwehinmi, Oluwagbenga & Ogundari, Kolawole & Amos, Taiwo, 2021. "Consumers' Food Control Risk Perception and Preference for Government-Controlled Safety Certification in Emerging Food Markets," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315312, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Tian, Gang & Wang, Yumeng & Gong, Yu & Tian, Yi & Piao, Xuexu & Zhang, Tianyu, 2024. "The contagion mechanism and governance strategy of corporate social irresponsibility of Chinese food companies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    5. Nie, Wenjing & Abler, David & Li, Taiping, 2021. "Grading attribute selection of China's grading system for agricultural products: What attributes benefit consumers more?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    6. Erpeng Wang & Zhenzhen Liu & Zhifeng Gao & Qin Wen & Xianhui Geng, 2022. "Consumer preferences for agricultural product brands in an E‐commerce environment," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 312-327, April.
    7. Yu, Aizhi & Cao, Jingsheng & She, Huiling & Li, Jian, 2023. "Unveiling the impact of E-commerce on smallholder livestock marketing: Insights on egg price premiums and mechanisms," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1582-1596.
    8. Qianqian Zhai & Ali Sher & Qian Li, 2022. "The Impact of Health Risk Perception on Blockchain Traceable Fresh Fruits Purchase Intention in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-14, June.
    9. Daniele Asioli & Adriana Mignani & Frode Alfnes, 2021. "Quick and easy? Respondent evaluations of the Becker–DeGroot–Marschak and multiple price list valuation mechanisms," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(2), pages 215-234, April.
    10. Haolong Liu, 2022. "The Tripartite Evolutionary Game of Green Agro-Product Supply in an Agricultural Industrialization Consortium," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.
    11. Zhu, Zhanguo & Zhang, Tong & Hu, Wuyang, 2023. "The accumulation and substitution effects of multi-nation certified organic and protected eco-origin food labels in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    12. Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano & Lamonaca, Emilia, 2020. "Objective risk and subjective risk: The role of information in food supply chains," MPRA Paper 104515, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Duan, Dinglin & Gao, Zhifeng & Uddin, Md Azhar & Nian, Yefan & Nguyen, Ly, 2022. "Tracing the Trends in Consumer Preferences for Eco-labeled Food: A Text Mining and Topic Modeling Approach," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322419, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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. Zhou, Yang & Shi, Zhixiong & Shi, Zhengyu & Gao, Qing & Wu, Libo, 2019. "Disaggregating power consumption of commercial buildings based on the finite mixture model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 243(C), pages 35-46.
    2. Alessandro Acquisti & Hal R. Varian, 2005. "Conditioning Prices on Purchase History," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 367-381, May.
    3. Hazel Bateman & Christine Eckert & Fedor Iskhakov & Jordan Louviere & Stephen Satchell & Susan Thorp, 2017. "Default and naive diversification heuristics in annuity choice," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 42(1), pages 32-57, February.
    4. Denzil G. Fiebig & Michael P. Keane & Jordan Louviere & Nada Wasi, 2010. "The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 393-421, 05-06.
    5. Woo, JongRoul & Moon, Sungho & Choi, Hyunhong, 2022. "Economic value and acceptability of advanced solar power systems for multi-unit residential buildings: The case of South Korea," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    6. Byun, Hyunsuk & Shin, Jungwoo & Lee, Chul-Yong, 2018. "Using a discrete choice experiment to predict the penetration possibility of environmentally friendly vehicles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 312-321.
    7. Bradlow, Eric T. & Gangwar, Manish & Kopalle, Praveen & Voleti, Sudhir, 2017. "The Role of Big Data and Predictive Analytics in Retailing," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 79-95.
    8. Yan Lin & Wai Fong Boh, 2020. "How different Are crowdfunders? Examining archetypes of crowdfunders," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(11), pages 1357-1370, November.
    9. Nicholas Economides & Przemyslaw Jeziorski, 2017. "Mobile Money in Tanzania," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 815-837, November.
    10. Marc R. Dotson & Joachim Büschken & Greg M. Allenby, 2020. "Explaining Preference Heterogeneity with Mixed Membership Modeling," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(2), pages 407-426, March.
    11. Laura Grigolon, 2021. "Blurred boundaries: A flexible approach for segmentation applied to the car market," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(4), pages 1273-1305, November.
    12. Kwangpil Chang & S. Siddarth & Charles B. Weinberg, 1999. "The Impact of Heterogeneity in Purchase Timing and Price Responsiveness on Estimates of Sticker Shock Effects," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 178-192.
    13. Linhai Wu & Hongsha Wang & Dian Zhu & Wuyang Hu & Shuxian Wang, 2016. "Chinese consumers’ willingness to pay for pork traceability information—the case of Wuxi," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 71-79, January.
    14. Allenby, Greg M., 2017. "Structural forecasts for marketing data," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 433-441.
    15. Danaher, Peter J. & Dagger, Tracey S. & Smith, Michael S., 2011. "Forecasting television ratings," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 1215-1240, October.
    16. Ke-Wei Huang, 2009. "Optimal criteria for selecting price discrimination metrics when buyers have log-normally distributed willingness-to-pay," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 321-341, September.
    17. Joel Huber and Kenneth Train., 2000. "On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths," Economics Working Papers E00-289, University of California at Berkeley.
    18. Choi, Hyunhong & Shin, Jungwoo & Woo, JongRoul, 2018. "Effect of electricity generation mix on battery electric vehicle adoption and its environmental impact," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 13-24.
    19. Dimitris Bertsimas & Velibor V. Mišić, 2017. "Robust Product Line Design," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 19-37, February.
    20. Leonardo Cei & Edi Defrancesco & Paola Gatto & Francesco Pagliacci, 2023. "Pay more for me, I’m from the mountains! The role of the EU Mountain Product term and other credence attributes in consumers’ valuation of lamb meat," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, December.

    More about this item

    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:wly:agribz:v:35:y:2019:i:1:p:53-68. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6297 .

    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.