IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae05/24599.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Impact of Labeling Practices on Perceived Quality of GM Food Products: A Revealed Preferences Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Scatasta, Sara
  • Wesseler, Justus
  • Hobbs, Jill E.

Abstract

This article contributes to the ongoing discussion about the impact of different labeling practices on the quality of genetically modified (GM) food products as perceived by the consumer. Thus far, many studies have adopted a stated preferences approach, finding that consumers have different willingness to pay for GM and non-GM products. This article offers an empirically tractable theoretical model that can be used easily to investigate the impact of GM labeling practices on the perceived quality of GM food products, making use of market data.

Suggested Citation

  • Scatasta, Sara & Wesseler, Justus & Hobbs, Jill E., 2005. "The Impact of Labeling Practices on Perceived Quality of GM Food Products: A Revealed Preferences Approach," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24599, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae05:24599
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.24599
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/24599/files/cp05sc01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.24599?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. Michael Spence, 1976. "Product Selection, Fixed Costs, and Monopolistic Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 43(2), pages 217-235.
    2. Caplin, Andrew & Nalebuff, Barry, 1991. "Aggregation and Imperfect Competition: On the Existence of Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(1), pages 25-59, January.
    3. Jaskold Gabszewicz, J. & Thisse, J. -F., 1979. "Price competition, quality and income disparities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 340-359, June.
    4. Lutz, Stefan & Lyon, Thomas P & Maxwell, John W, 1998. "Strategic Quality Choice with Minimum Quality Standards," CEPR Discussion Papers 1793, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. John Crespi & Stéphan Marette, 2003. "“Does Contain” vs. “Does Not Contain”: Does it Matter which GMO Label is Used?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 327-344, November.
    6. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    7. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    8. Noussair, Charles & Robin, Stephane & Ruffieux, Bernard, 2002. "Do consumers not care about biotech foods or do they just not read the labels?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 47-53, March.
    9. Avner Shaked & John Sutton, 1982. "Relaxing Price Competition Through Product Differentiation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 49(1), pages 3-13.
    10. Neven, D. & Thisse, J-F., 1989. "On Quality And Variety Competition," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1989020, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    11. Tabuchi, Takatoshi, 1994. "Two-stage two-dimensional spatial competition between two firms," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 207-227, April.
    12. Economides, Nicholas, 1989. "Quality variations and maximal variety differentiation," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 21-29, February.
    13. Degryse, Hans, 1996. "On the Interaction between Vertical and Horizontal Product Differentiation: An Application to Banking," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 169-186, June.
    14. Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1980. "An Almost Ideal Demand System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 312-326, June.
    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. Sara Scatasta & Justus Wesseler & Jill Hobbs, 2007. "Differentiating the consumer benefits from labeling of GM food products," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(2‐3), pages 237-242, September.
    2. Simon P. Anderson & André De Palma, 2006. "Market Performance With Multiproduct Firms," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 95-124, March.
    3. Carlo Ciccarelli & Gianni De Fraja & Silvia Tiezzi, 2021. "How hard is it to maximize profit? Evidence from a 19th-century Italian state monopoly," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 73(2), pages 879-902.
    4. Andrea Mangani & Paolo Patelli, 2002. "The Max-Min Principle of Product Differentiation: An Experimental Analysis," LEM Papers Series 2002/05, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    5. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899, January.
    6. Barigozzi, Francesca & Ma, Ching-to Albert, 2018. "Product differentiation with multiple qualities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 380-412.
    7. Fullerton, Don & Metcalf, Gilbert E., 2002. "Tax incidence," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 26, pages 1787-1872, Elsevier.
    8. Parenti, Mathieu & Ushchev, Philip & Thisse, Jacques-François, 2017. "Toward a theory of monopolistic competition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 86-115.
    9. Rosenkranz, Stephanie, 2003. "Simultaneous choice of process and product innovation when consumers have a preference for product variety," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 183-201, February.
    10. Anderson, Simon P. & Gabszewicz, Jean J., 2006. "The Media and Advertising: A Tale of Two-Sided Markets," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, in: V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 567-614, Elsevier.
    11. Manez, J.A. & Waterson, M., 2001. "Multiproduct Firms and Product Differentiation: a Survey," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 594, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    12. Auer, Raphael A. & Sauré, Philip, 2017. "Dynamic entry in vertically differentiated markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 177-205.
    13. Dos Santos Ferreira, Rodolphe & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1996. "Horizontal and vertical differentiation: The Launhardt model," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 485-506, June.
    14. Tauman, Yair & Urbano, Amparo & Watanabe, Junichi, 1997. "A Model of Multiproduct Price Competition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 377-401, December.
    15. Ralph Siebert, 2003. "The Introduction of New Product Qualities by Incumbent Firms: Market Proliferation versus Cannibalization," CIG Working Papers SP II 2003-11, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    16. Nicholas Economides & Joel Steckel, "undated". "The Max-Min Principle of Product Differentiation," Networks, Compatibility 94-16, Economics of Networks.
    17. Degryse, Hans & Irmen, Andreas, 2001. "Attribute dependence and the provision of quality," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 547-569, September.
    18. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2006. "Multiproduct Cournot oligopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 583-601, September.
    19. Peter-J. Jost & Stefanie Schubert & Miriam Zschoche, 2015. "Incumbent positioning as a determinant of strategic response to entry," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 577-596, March.
    20. Alessio Emanuele Biondo & Alfio Giarlotta & Alessandro Pluchino & Andrea Rapisarda, 2016. "Perfect Information vs Random Investigation: Safety Guidelines for a Consumer in the Jungle of Product Differentiation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-26, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Consumer/Household Economics;

    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:eaae05:24599. 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/eaaeeea.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.