IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ualbnp/91557.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Canadian Consumers' Preferences for Food Safety and Agricultural Environment Safety

Author

Listed:
  • Veeman, Michele M.
  • Li, Yu

Abstract

This project applies statistical models to analyse the relative importance ratings for selected food risk issues given in January 2003 by a representative cross-Canada sample of consumers. Ratings for environmental risks that may be associated with agriculture are also assessed. Results of ordered probit econometric models that analyze the influence of respondent's socio-economic and demographic characteristics on food and environmental risk ratings indicate that these are influenced by gender, age, income, employment and location of residence. Males tended to choose lower risk ratings; residents of Quebec tended to give higher risk ratings to most of the queried food and environmental safety issues. The results suggest that measures of trust in institutions associated with the regulation and marketing of food also influence individuals' risk assessments associated with food and agriculture.

Suggested Citation

  • Veeman, Michele M. & Li, Yu, 2006. "Canadian Consumers' Preferences for Food Safety and Agricultural Environment Safety," Consumer and Market Demand Network Papers 91557, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ualbnp:91557
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.91557
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/91557/files/8511.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.91557?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. Wuyang Hu, 2004. "Trading off health, environmental and genetic modification attributes in food," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 31(3), pages 389-408, September.
    2. Rodolfo M. Nayga, 1996. "Sociodemographic Influences on Consumer Concern for Food Safety: The Case of Irradiation, Antibiotics, Hormones, and Pesticides," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 18(3), pages 467-475.
    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. Zingg, Alexandra & Siegrist, Michael, 2012. "People’s willingness to eat meat from animals vaccinated against epidemics," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 226-231.
    2. Violet Muringai & Ellen Goddard, 2018. "Trust and consumer risk perceptions regarding BSE and chronic wasting disease," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 240-265, March.

    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. Bond, Craig A. & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Bond, Jennifer Keeling, 2008. "What to Choose? The Value of Label Claims to Fresh Produce Consumers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-26.
    2. Danilo Bertoni & Daniele Cavicchioli & Franco Donzelli & Giovanni Ferrazzi & Dario G. Frisio & Roberto Pretolani & Elena Claire Ricci & Vera Ventura, 2018. "Recent Contributions of Agricultural Economics Research in the Field of Sustainable Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    3. Koistinen, Laura & Pouta, Eija & Heikkila, Jaakko & Forsman-Hugg, Sari & Kotro, Jaana & Makela, Jarmo & Niva, M., 2011. "Impact of meat type, methods of production, fat content, price and carbon footprint information on meat choice," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114710, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Grace Melo & Gregory Colson & Octavio A. Ramirez, 2014. "Hispanic American Opinions toward Immigration and Immigration Policy Reform Proposals," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 36(4), pages 604-622.
    5. Vellini, Nicolás Andrés & Lupín, Beatriz, 2021. "Aceptación de un sello de calidad hortícola. Una aplicación de tablas de contingencia a tres vías," Nülan. Deposited Documents 3498, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    6. Chengyan Yue & Ben Campbell & Charles Hall & Bridget Behe & Jennifer Dennis & Hayk Khachatryan, 2016. "Consumer Preference for Sustainable Attributes in Plants: Evidence from Experimental Auctions," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 222-235, April.
    7. Jaakko Heikkilä & Jarkko K. Niemi & Katriina Heinola & Eero Liski & Sami Myyrä, 2016. "Anything left for animal disease insurance? A choiceexperiment approach," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 97(4), pages 237-249.
    8. Jae-Hwan Han & R. Wes Harrison, 2007. "Factors Influencing Urban Consumers' Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(4), pages 700-719.
    9. Birol, Ekin & Kontoleon, Andreas & Smale, Melinda, 2006. "Combining revealed and stated preference methods to assess the private value of agrobiodiversity in Hungarian home gardens:," EPTD discussion papers 156, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    10. Kaneko, Naoya & Chern, Wen S., 2006. "Identification of Consumer Segments and Its Implication on the Willingness-to-Pay Distribution: The Case of Demand for Non-Genetically Modified Vegetable Oil in the United States," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21194, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Heinola, Katriina, 2016. "Anything left for animal disease insurance? A choice experiment approach," 156th Seminar, October 4, 2016, Wageningen, The Netherlands 249985, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. He, Senhui & Fletcher, Stanley M. & Rimal, Arbindra, 2004. "Acceptance Of Irradiated Beef And Its Effect On Beef Consumption," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 35(1), pages 1-6, March.
    13. Zhu, Zhanguo & Zhang, Tong & Hu, Wuyang, 2023. "The accumulation and substitution effects of multi-nation certified organic and protected eco-origin food labels in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    14. Melo, Tatiane F.N. & Vasconcellos, Klaus L.P. & Lemonte, Artur J., 2009. "Some restriction tests in a new class of regression models for proportions," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(12), pages 3972-3979, October.
    15. Joan Costa-Font & Elias Mossialos, 2005. "Is dread of Genetically Modified food associated with the consumers' demand for information?," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(14), pages 859-863.
    16. Birol, Ekin & Villalba, Eric Rayn & Smale, Melinda, 2009. "Farmer preferences for milpa diversity and genetically modified maize in Mexico: a latent class approach," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 521-540, August.
    17. Michaelidou, Nina & Hassan, Louise M., 2010. "Modeling the factors affecting rural consumers' purchase of organic and free-range produce: A case study of consumers' from the Island of Arran in Scotland, UK," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 130-139, April.
    18. Agnes Emberger‐Klein & Marina Zapilko & Klaus Menrad, 2016. "Consumers’ Preference Heterogeneity for GM and Organic Food Products in Germany," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 203-221, April.
    19. Maples, Joshua G. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Peel, Derrell S., 2018. "Unintended consequences of the quest for increased efficiency in beef cattle: When bigger isn’t better," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 65-73.
    20. Ekin Birol & Sukanya Das, 2010. "Valuing the Environment in Developing Countries: Modeling the Impact of Distrust in Public Authorities’ Ability to Deliver on the Citizens’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Environmental Quality," Working Papers 2010-055, Madras School of Economics,Chennai,India.

    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:ualbnp:91557. 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/drualca.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.