IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea22/343896.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mutual Recognition and Regulatory Disharmony in Organic Honey Certification

Author

Listed:
  • Bir, Courtney L.
  • Lambert, Lixia H.
  • Schaefer, K. Aleks

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Bir, Courtney L. & Lambert, Lixia H. & Schaefer, K. Aleks, 2024. "Mutual Recognition and Regulatory Disharmony in Organic Honey Certification," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 343896, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea22:343896
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.343896
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/343896/files/28914.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.343896?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. Kristina Brščić & Tina Šugar & Danijela Poljuha, 2017. "An empirical examination of consumer preferences for honey in Croatia," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(58), pages 5877-5889, December.
    2. Chian Jones Ritten & Linda Thunström & Mariah Ehmke & Jenny Beiermann & Donald McLeod, 2019. "International honey laundering and consumer willingness to pay a premium for local honey: an experimental study," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(4), pages 726-741, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood, 2005. "Effect of Experimental Design on Choice-Based Conjoint Valuation Estimates," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(3), pages 771-785.
    5. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May.
    6. Raghava R Gundala & Anupam Singh, 2021. "What motivates consumers to buy organic foods? Results of an empirical study in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-17, September.
    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. Adalja, Aaron & Hanson, James & Towe, Charles & Tselepidakis, Elina, 2015. "An Examination of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Local Products," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 253-274, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Ken Belcher & Andrea Germann & Josef Schmutz, 2007. "Beef with environmental and quality attributes: Preferences of environmental group and general population consumers in Saskatchewan, Canada," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 24(3), pages 333-342, September.
    4. List John A. & Sinha Paramita & Taylor Michael H., 2006. "Using Choice Experiments to Value Non-Market Goods and Services: Evidence from Field Experiments," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-39, January.
    5. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Lagerkvist, Carl Johan, 2004. "Consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare - transportation of farm animals to slaughter versus the use of mobile abattoirs," Working Papers in Economics 149, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    6. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2013. "Dynamic hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments: Evidence from measuring the impact of corporate social responsibility on consumers demand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 53-61.
    7. Jochen Hartl & Roland Herrmann, 2009. "Do they always say no? German consumers and second‐generation GM foods," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(5), pages 551-560, September.
    8. 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.
    9. Sonja Fagernäs & Panu Pelkonen, 2011. "Whether to Hire Local Contract Teachers? Trade-off Between Skills and Preferences in India," Working Paper Series 1811, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    10. Rombach, Meike & Widmar, Nicole Olynk & Byrd, Elizabeth & Bitsch, Vera, 2018. "Do all roses smell equally sweet? Willingness to pay for flower attributes in specialized retail settings by German consumers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 91-99.
    11. Stavroula Tsigou & Stathis Klonaris, 2018. "Factors affecting farmers’ WTP for innovative fertilizer against soil salinity," Working Papers 2018-3, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    12. repec:ags:afjare:225657 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Lee, Sang Hyeon & Lee, Ji Yong & Han, Doo Bong & Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr., 2014. "Assessing Korean Consumers' Valuation for BSE-Tested and Country of Origin Labeled Beef Products," Journal of Rural Development/Nongchon-Gyeongje, Korea Rural Economic Institute, vol. 37(3), pages 1-21.
    14. Aadland, David & Caplan, Arthur J., 2005. "A Bayesian Examination of Anchoring Bias and Cheap Talks in Constructed Markets," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19568, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods," Papers 2102.02945, arXiv.org.
    16. Banerjee, Swagata (Ban) & Martin, Steven W. & Hudson, Darren, 2006. "A Choice-Based Conjoint Experiment with Genetically Engineered Cotton in the Mississippi Delta," 2006 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2006, Orlando, Florida 35389, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    17. Hartl, Jochen & Herrmann, Roland, 2009. "Would Consumers Value New Functional Properties of GM Food? A Choice-Modeling Approach for Rapeseed Oil," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51728, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Wuepper, David & Clemm, Alexandra & Wree, Philipp, 2019. "The preference for sustainable coffee and a new approach for dealing with hypothetical bias," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 475-486.
    19. John C. Whitehead & Daniel K. Lew, 2020. "Estimating recreation benefits through joint estimation of revealed and stated preference discrete choice data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 2009-2029, April.
    20. Petjon Ballco & Fatma Jaafer & Tiziana de Magistris, 2022. "Investigating the price effects of honey quality attributes in a European country: Evidence from a hedonic price approach," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(4), pages 885-904, October.
    21. Emily Lancsar & Jordan Louviere, 2008. "Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(8), pages 661-677, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Livestock Production/Industries; Marketing;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aaea22:343896. 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.