IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/agribz/v9y1993i3p295-307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Product quality in organic and conventional produce: Is there a difference?

Author

Listed:
  • Neilson C. Conklin

    (School of Agribusiness and Environmental Resources, Arizona State University)

  • Gary Thompson

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, The University of Arizona)

Abstract

Economists studying markets for organic produce and proponents of organic agriculture have often assumed that organic produce has more defects than conventional produce and that consumers buying organics are exchanging visual quality for perceived food safety and environmental benefits. Analysis of primary retail-level data on quality for eight organic and conventional produce items found no statistically significant difference in quality for most products. The results provide evidence that the assumption that organic produce is necessarily of inferior visual quality is unwarranted. © 1993 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Suggested Citation

  • Neilson C. Conklin & Gary Thompson, 1993. "Product quality in organic and conventional produce: Is there a difference?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(3), pages 295-307.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:agribz:v:9:y:1993:i:3:p:295-307
    DOI: 10.1002/1520-6297(199305)9:3<295::AID-AGR2720090309>3.0.CO;2-N
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hutchinson, T. Q., 1970. "Consumers' Knowledge and Use of Government Grades for Selected Food Items," Marketing Research Reports 313620, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Transportation and Marketing Program.
    2. A. L. Owens & F. R. Taylor, 1955. "Consumer Knowledge of Quality Determining Factors in Eggs," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 37(4), pages 625-637.
    3. Ravenswaay, Eileen O. van & Hoehn, John P., 1991. "Contingent Valuation and Food Safety: The Case of Pesticide Residues in Food," Staff Paper Series 201042, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    4. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    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. Zvonko PACANOSKI, 2009. "The myth of organic agriculture," Plant Protection Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 45(2), pages 39-48.
    2. Payson, Steven & Lin, Biing-Hwan & Wertz, Jane, 1994. "Some Barriers to Organic Produce at the Wholesale Level," Food Review/ National Food Review, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 17(2), May.

    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. Jones, Eluned & Conklin, Neilson C., 1993. "Grades and Standards: Issues for the Twenty-first Century The Role of Grades and Standards in Moving from 'Traditional' To Consumer-Oriented Agri-Markets," Food and Agricultural Marketing Issues for the 21st Century - FAMC 1993 Conference 265928, Food and Agricultural Marketing Consortium (FAMC).
    2. 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.
    3. Maynard, Leigh J. & Burdine, Kenneth H. & Meyer, A. Lee, 2003. "Market Potential for Locally Produced Meat Products," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(2), pages 1-12, July.
    4. Ward, Clement E. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Dutton, Jennifer M., 2008. "Implicit Value of Retail Beef Product Attributes," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-18.
    5. Reynolds, Travis & Kolodinsky, Jane & Murray, Byron, 2012. "Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for compact fluorescent lighting: Policy implications for energy efficiency promotion in Saint Lucia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 712-722.
    6. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    7. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    8. Hyowon Kim & Dong Soo Kim & Greg M. Allenby, 2020. "Benefit Formation and Enhancement," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 419-468, December.
    9. Anderson, Simon P. & Foros, Øystein & Kind, Hans Jarle, 2012. "Product quality, competition, and multi-purchasing," Discussion Papers 2012/9, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    10. Mika Kortelainen & Timo Kuosmanen, 2007. "Eco-efficiency analysis of consumer durables using absolute shadow prices," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 57-69, October.
    11. Barnett, William A. & Serletis, Apostolos, 2008. "Consumer preferences and demand systems," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 210-224, December.
    12. Mtimet, Nadhem & Ujiie, Kiyokazu & Kashiwagi, Kenichi & Zaibet, Lokman & Nagaki, Masakazu, 2011. "The effects of Information and Country of Origin on Japanese Olive Oil Consumer Selection," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114642, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Jitender Singh, 2016. "Quality of Public Goods, Public Policy and Human Development: A State-wise Analysis," Indian Journal of Human Development, , vol. 10(2), pages 215-235, August.
    14. Choi, Andy S., 2013. "Nonmarket values of major resources in the Korean DMZ areas: A test of distance decay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 97-107.
    15. 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.
    16. Schleich, Joachim & Faure, Corinne & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte & Tu, Gengyang, 2020. "Conveyance, envy, and homeowner choice of appliances," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    17. Trojanek, Radoslaw & Huderek-Glapska, Sonia, 2018. "Measuring the noise cost of aviation – The association between the Limited Use Area around Warsaw Chopin Airport and property values," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 103-114.
    18. Veneziani, Mario & Sckokai, Paolo & Moro, Daniele, 2012. "Consumers’ willingness to pay for a functional food," 2012 First Congress, June 4-5, 2012, Trento, Italy 124101, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    19. John K. Dagsvik & Zhiyang Jia, 2016. "Labor Supply as a Choice Among Latent Jobs: Unobserved Heterogeneity and Identification," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 487-506, April.
    20. Blum, Bianca, 2018. "Ausgestaltung einer Steuerpolitik zur Förderung von LED-Beleuchtung," The Constitutional Economics Network Working Papers 01-2018, University of Freiburg, Department of Economic Policy and Constitutional Economic Theory.

    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:9:y:1993:i:3:p:295-307. 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.