IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea16/235917.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum revisited: The influence of social networks and health status on preferences for functional food

Author

Listed:
  • Henning, Christian
  • Zubek, Nana

Abstract

Combining the new consumer theory of Becker with a network model of belief formation developed in sociology we derive a theory of peer group influence on households' consumer beliefs regarding the impact of health related attributes on households utility and hence on households' willingness to pay for functional food. In particular, our theory implies peer group effects on households' preferences for functional food, while following the famous De-Gustibus-Non-Est-Disputandum paradigm of Bekcer and Stigler our theory implies no peer group effects on households z-good preferences, e.g. WTP for health, taste or convenience as nutrition related z-goods. Using own unique social and medical survey data of 2000 probands, the KIK-panel (Kieler- Interventions-Kohorte), collected within the Focus-project in Germany during the years 2012 and 2013 we test our theory applying a two-stage latent class estimation of macro and micro food preferences. In particular, the approach allows a statistical testing of the impact of peer group network effects on consumer beliefs, preferences and nutrition behavior. Central results are (i) estimation confirming our theory implying significant peer group effects on consumer beliefs and implied WTP for functional food attributes; (ii) however, we also found significant peer group effects on z-good preferences which contradicts the De-Gustibus-Non-Est-Disputandum paradigm. (iii) accordingly we offer a modified new consumer theory allowing for peer group effects on z-good preferences. At a practical level, our results have interesting implications for specific marketing strategies promoting demand for functional food as well as for specific political communication strategies preventing nutrition based morbidities and thus promoting public health.

Suggested Citation

  • Henning, Christian & Zubek, Nana, 2016. "De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum revisited: The influence of social networks and health status on preferences for functional food," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235917, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea16:235917
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.235917
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/235917/files/AAEA1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.235917?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. Deb, Partha & Trivedi, Pravin K., 2002. "The structure of demand for health care: latent class versus two-part models," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 601-625, July.
    2. Adam Drucker, 2007. "Measuring Heterogeneous Preferences for Cattle Traits among Cattle-Keeping Households in East Africa," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(4), pages 1005-1019.
    3. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    4. Gary S. Becker, 1983. "A Theory of Competition Among Pressure Groups for Political Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 98(3), pages 371-400.
    5. Christian H. C. A. Henning & Nana Zarnekow & Peter Kaufmann, 2013. "Understanding rural migration in industrialised countries: the role of heterogeneity, amenities and social networks," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 40(1), pages 95-120, February.
    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. Zarnekow, Nana & Henning, Christian H.C.A., 2015. "Nice Neighborhood or Network Capital: What drives Residential Quality of Life?," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205637, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Lai, John & Olynk Widmar, Nicole J. & Gunderson, Michael A. & Widmar, David A. & Ortega, David L., 2018. "Prioritization of farm success factors by commercial farm managers," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(6), July.
    3. Lai, Yufeng & Yue, Chengyan & Watkins, Eric & Barnes, Mike, 2023. "Investigating the Efficacy of Government Rebates: A Case of the Smart Irrigation System," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 48(3), September.
    4. 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.
    5. Wolf, Christopher A. & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2012. "Dairy Farmer Preferences for 2012 Farm Bill," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124866, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Kevin W. Maina & Martin C. Parlasca & Elizaphan J. O. Rao & Matin Qaim, 2024. "Farmer‐friendly delivery of veterinary services: Experimental insights from the Kenyan dairy sector," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(3), pages 829-846, September.
    7. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities, China," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212609, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Muunda, Emmanuel & Mtimet, Nadhem & Schneider, Franziska & Wanyoike, Francis & Dominguez-Salas, Paula & Alonso, Silvia, 2021. "Could the new dairy policy affect milk allocation to infants in Kenya? A best-worst scaling approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    9. 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.
    10. Carnegie, Rachel & Wang, Holly & Widmar, Nicole & Ortega, David, 2014. "Consumer Preferences for Quality and Safety Attributes of Duck in Restaurant Entrees: Is China A Viable Market for The U.S. Duck Industry?," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170717, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Eija, Pouta & Annika, Tienhaara & Heini, Ahtiainen, 2014. "Citizens’ preferences for policies to conserve agricultural genetic resources," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182679, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Richartz, P. Christoph & Abdulai, Awudu & Kornher, Lukas, 2020. "Attribute Non Attendance and Consumer Preferences for Online Food Products in Germany," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(01), March.
    13. Alegre, Joaquín & Mateo, Sara & Pou, Llorenç, 2011. "A latent class approach to tourists’ length of stay," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 555-563.
    14. Tonsor, Glynn T. & Olynk, Nicole & Wolf, Christopher, 2009. "Consumer Preferences for Animal Welfare Attributes: The Case of Gestation Crates," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 713-730, December.
    15. Arnstein Øvrum, 2011. "Socioeconomic status and lifestyle choices: evidence from latent class analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(8), pages 971-984, August.
    16. Jae Eun You & Jong Woo Choi, 2022. "An analysis of food culture and technology acceptance for youth: Using a choice experiment and a latent class model," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(2), pages 510-522, March.
    17. Schreiner, Julia Anette, 2018. "Saving the breeds: German Farmers’ preferences for Endangered Dairy Breed conservation programs," 2018 International European Forum (163rd EAAE Seminar), February 5-9, 2018, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 276866, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    18. Catalina M. Torres & Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley, 2014. "Incorrectly accounting for preference heterogeneity in choice experiments: what are the implications for welfare measurement?," DEA Working Papers 65, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Departament d'Economía Aplicada.
    19. Angel Bujosa & Antoni Riera & Robert Hicks, 2010. "Combining Discrete and Continuous Representations of Preference Heterogeneity: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(4), pages 477-493, December.
    20. Widmar, Nicole J. Olynk & Byrd, Elizabeth S. & Wolf, Christopher A. & Acharya, Lalatendu, 2016. "Health Consciousness and Consumer Preferences for Holiday Turkey Attributes," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 47(2), pages 1-15, July.

    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:ags:aaea16:235917. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.