IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/apecpp/v44y2022i1p299-323.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer valuation of blockchain traceability for beef in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Aaron M. Shew
  • Heather A. Snell
  • Rodolfo M. Nayga
  • Mary C. Lacity

Abstract

Blockchain (BC) technology, defined as a shared information system to validate, secure, and permanently store transactions among multiple parties on a distributed ledger, presents many applications in agricultural and food industries. This study examines the application of BC in food traceability for beef in the United States using a choice experiment. Findings indicate that consumers value USDA certifications over BC traceability to guide their meat preferences. Our study suggests a number of industry implications, the most important of which suggests focusing business and consumer education on the value of product data, rather than on the value of the technologies that manage data.

Suggested Citation

  • Aaron M. Shew & Heather A. Snell & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Mary C. Lacity, 2022. "Consumer valuation of blockchain traceability for beef in the United States," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(1), pages 299-323, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:apecpp:v:44:y:2022:i:1:p:299-323
    DOI: 10.1002/aepp.13157
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13157
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/aepp.13157?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. Liu, Ruifeng & Gao, Zhifeng & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Snell, Heather Arielle & Ma, Hengyun, 2019. "Consumers’ valuation for food traceability in China: Does trust matter?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    2. Scarpa, Riccardo & Rose, John M., 2008. "Design efficiency for non-market valuation with choice modelling: how to measure it, what to report and why," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(3), pages 1-30.
    3. Scott J. Savage & Donald M. Waldman, 2008. "Learning and fatigue during choice experiments: a comparison of online and mail survey modes," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 351-371.
    4. Ubilava, David & Foster, Kenneth, 2009. "Quality certification vs. product traceability: Consumer preferences for informational attributes of pork in Georgia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 305-310, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    7. Folkes, Valerie S, 1988. "Recent Attribution Research in Consumer Behavior: A Review and New Directions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 14(4), pages 548-565, March.
    8. Thiene, Mara & Scarpa, Riccardo & Longo, Alberto & Hutchinson, William George, 2018. "Types of front of pack food labels: Do obese consumers care? Evidence from Northern Ireland," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 84-102.
    9. Powe, N.A. & Garrod, G.D. & McMahon, P.L., 2005. "Mixing methods within stated preference environmental valuation: choice experiments and post-questionnaire qualitative analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 513-526, March.
    10. Jayson L. Lusk & Jutta Roosen & John A. Fox, 2003. "Demand for Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison of Consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 16-29.
    11. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    12. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    13. Schroeder, Ted C. & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2012. "International cattle ID and traceability: Competitive implications for the US," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 31-40.
    14. Schroeder Ted C. & Tonsor Glynn T. & Pennings Joost M.E. & Mintert James, 2007. "Consumer Food Safety Risk Perceptions and Attitudes: Impacts on Beef Consumption across Countries," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-29, December.
    15. 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.
    16. Pendell, Dustin L. & Tonsor, Glynn T. & Dhuyvetter, Kevin C. & Brester, Gary W. & Schroeder, Ted C., 2013. "Evolving beef export market access requirements for age and source verification," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 332-340.
    17. Jayson L. Lusk, 2003. "Effects of Cheap Talk on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Golden Rice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 840-856.
    18. Sarrias, Mauricio & Daziano, Ricardo, 2017. "Multinomial Logit Models with Continuous and Discrete Individual Heterogeneity in R: The gmnl Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 79(i02).
    19. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    20. Balcombe, Kelvin & Fraser, Iain & Falco, Salvatore Di, 2010. "Traffic lights and food choice: A choice experiment examining the relationship between nutritional food labels and price," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 211-220, June.
    21. Lusk, Jayson L. & Tonsor, Glynn T. & Schroeder, Ted C. & Hayes, Dermot J., 2018. "Effect of government quality grade labels on consumer demand for pork chops in the short and long run," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 91-102.
    22. Li, Xiaogu & Jensen, Kimberly L. & Clark, Christopher D. & Lambert, Dayton M., 2016. "Consumer willingness to pay for beef grown using climate friendly production practices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 93-106.
    23. Kathleen Krzyzanowski Guerra & Kathryn A. Boys, 2022. "A new food chain: Adoption and policy implications to blockchain use in agri‐food industries," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(1), pages 324-349, March.
    24. David L Ortega & Jayson L Lusk & Wen Lin & Vincenzina Caputo, 0. "Predicting responsiveness to information: consumer acceptance of biotechnology in animal products," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 47(5), pages 1644-1667.
    25. Silva, Andres & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. & Campbell, Benjamin L. & Park, John L., 2011. "Revisiting Cheap Talk with New Evidence from a Field Experiment," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-12, August.
    26. Gao, Zhifeng & House, Lisa & Bi, Xiang, 2016. "Impact of satisficing behavior in online surveys on consumer preference and welfare estimates," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 26-36.
    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. Goldsby, Curtis M. & Hanisch, Marvin, 2023. "Agency in the algorithmic age: The mechanisms and structures of blockchain-based organizing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    2. Bart L. MacCarthy & Surajit Das & Wafaa A. H. Ahmed, 2024. "Smell the Perfume: Can Blockchain Guarantee the Provenance of Key Product Ingredients in the Fragrance Industry?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-29, July.
    3. Geneci da Silva Ribeiro Rocha & Letícia de Oliveira & Edson Talamini, 2021. "Blockchain Applications in Agribusiness: A Systematic Review," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-16, April.
    4. 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.
    5. Aditi S. Saha & Rakesh D. Raut & Vinay Surendra Yadav & Abhijit Majumdar, 2022. "Blockchain Changing the Outlook of the Sustainable Food Supply Chain to Achieve Net Zero?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-21, December.
    6. Yu, Yanan & He, Yong & Guo, Xiaotong & Li, Dong & Huang, Hongfu, 2024. "Quality disclosure strategy with asymmetric demand information in food supply chains," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    7. Tadesse Kenea Amentae & Girma Gebresenbet, 2021. "Digitalization and Future Agro-Food Supply Chain Management: A Literature-Based Implications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-24, November.
    8. Shahzad, Khuram & Zhang, Qingyu & Zafar, Abaid Ullah & Ashfaq, Muhammad & Rehman, Shafique Ur, 2023. "The role of blockchain-enabled traceability, task technology fit, and user self-efficacy in mobile food delivery applications," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    9. Caterina Contini & Fabio Boncinelli & Giovanna Piracci & Gabriele Scozzafava & Leonardo Casini, 2023. "Can blockchain technology strengthen consumer preferences for credence attributes?," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, 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. 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.
    2. Shijiu Yin & Shanshan Lv & Yusheng Chen & Linhai Wu & Mo Chen & Jiang Yan, 2018. "Consumer preference for infant milk‐based formula with select food safety information attributes: Evidence from a choice experiment in China," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 66(4), pages 557-569, December.
    3. Jeff Luckstead & Heather A. Snell & Lawton Lanier Nalley & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Joshua Sarpaning, 2022. "A multi‐country study on consumers' valuation for child‐labor‐free chocolate: Implications for child labor in cocoa production," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(2), pages 1021-1048, June.
    4. Liu, Ruifeng & ,, 2021. "What We Can Learn from the Interactions of Food Traceable Attributes? a Case Study of Fuji Apple in China," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315916, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Ward, Patrick S. & Ortega, David L. & Spielman, David J. & Singh, Vartika, 2013. "Farmer preferences for drought tolerance in hybrid versus inbred rice: Evidence from Bihar, India:," IFPRI discussion papers 1307, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. West, Grant H. & Snell, Heather & Kovacs, Kent & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2020. "Estimation of the preferences for the intertemporal services from groundwater," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304220, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Wang, Shuxian & Wu, Linhai & Zhu, Dian & Wang, Hongsha & Xu, Lingling, 2014. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food attributes: The case of pork," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 165639, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Wu, Linhai & Wang, Shuxian & Zhu, Dian & Hu, Wuyang & Wang, Hongsha, 2015. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food quality and safety attributes: The case of pork," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 121-136.
    9. Ward, Patrick S. & Ortega, David L. & Spielman, David J. & Singh, Vartika, 2014. "Heterogeneous Demand for Drought-Tolerant Rice: Evidence from Bihar, India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 125-139.
    10. Wongprawmas, Rungsaran & Canavari, Maurizio, 2017. "Consumers’ willingness-to-pay for food safety labels in an emerging market: The case of fresh produce in Thailand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 25-34.
    11. Lin Bai & Zhanguo Zhu & Tong Zhang, 2021. "How to Improve Food Quality in the Domestic Market: The Role of “Same Line Same Standard Same Quality”—Evidence from a Consumer Choice Experiment in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-16, May.
    12. Van Wezemael, Lynn & Caputo, Vincenzina & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Chryssochoidis, George & Verbeke, Wim, 2014. "European consumer preferences for beef with nutrition and health claims: A multi-country investigation using discrete choice experiments," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 167-176.
    13. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    14. Di Fang & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Grant H. West & Claudia Bazzani & Wei Yang & Benjamin C. Lok & Charles E. Levy & Heather A. Snell, 2021. "On the Use of Virtual Reality in Mitigating Hypothetical Bias in Choice Experiments," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(1), pages 142-161, January.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Olynk, Nicole J., 2011. "Modeling heterogeneity in consumer preferences for select food safety attributes in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 318-324, April.
    18. Jeff Luckstead & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Heather A. Snell, 2023. "US domestic workers' willingness to accept agricultural field jobs," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(3), pages 1693-1715, September.
    19. Ochs, Dan & Wolf, Christopher A. & Widmar, Nicole Olynk & Bir, Courtney & Lai, John, 2019. "Hen housing system information effects on U.S. egg demand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-1.
    20. McKendree, Melissa G.S. & Olynk Widmar, Nicole & Ortega, David L. & Foster, Kenneth A., 2013. "Consumer Preferences for Verified Pork-Rearing Practices in the Production of Ham Products," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-21.

    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:apecpp:v:44:y:2022:i:1:p:299-323. 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: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2040-5804 .

    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.