IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02541728.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consumer Inequality Aversion and Risk Preferences in Community Supported Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Kévin Bernard

    (SMART-LERECO - Structures et Marché Agricoles, Ressources et Territoires - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - INSTITUT AGRO Agrocampus Ouest - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement)

  • Aurélie Bonein

    (CREM - Centre de recherche en économie et management - UNICAEN - Université de Caen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université - UR - Université de Rennes - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Douadia Bougherara

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - UM - Université de Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro - Montpellier SupAgro - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement)

Abstract

In community-supported agriculture (CSA), consumers face a tradeoff between (i.) the desire to support a CSA farmer and obtain environmentally-friendly goods and (ii.) the risk associated with a long-term commitment. We elicit inequality aversion and risk preferences of a sample of 162 French CSA consumers using incen-tivized field experiments. We find that CSA consumers are concerned about payoff inequalities. While we obtain evidence of advantageous inequality aversion toward CSA farmers, we also find disadvantageous inequality seeking. We find that CSA consumers are risk averse and loss averse and distort probabilities. We also observe that inequality and risk preferences in the loss domain might complement each other to strengthen consumers' support for CSA farmers.

Suggested Citation

  • Kévin Bernard & Aurélie Bonein & Douadia Bougherara, 2020. "Consumer Inequality Aversion and Risk Preferences in Community Supported Agriculture," Post-Print hal-02541728, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02541728
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106684
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02541728
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02541728/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106684?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Filippin, Antonio & Crosetto, Paolo, 2014. "A Reconsideration of Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," IZA Discussion Papers 8184, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. David Bruner, 2011. "Multiple switching behaviour in multiple price lists," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(5), pages 417-420.
    3. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    4. Antonio A. Arechar & Simon Gächter & Lucas Molleman, 2018. "Conducting interactive experiments online," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(1), pages 99-131, March.
    5. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2013. "Eliciting risk and time preferences under induced mood states," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 18-27.
    6. Cheryl Brown & Stacy Miller, 2008. "The Impacts of Local Markets: A Review of Research on Farmers Markets and Community Supported Agriculture (CSA)," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(5), pages 1298-1302.
    7. Aurélie Bonein & Laurent Denant-Boèmont, 2015. "Self-control, commitment and peer pressure: a laboratory experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 543-568, December.
    8. Alexander W. Cappelen & James Konow & Erik ?. S?rensen & Bertil Tungodden, 2013. "Just Luck: An Experimental Study of Risk-Taking and Fairness," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(4), pages 1398-1413, June.
    9. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    10. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    11. 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.
    12. Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2007. "Estimating Risk Attitudes in Denmark: A Field Experiment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 109(2), pages 341-368, June.
    13. Charles Bellemare & Sabine Kröger & Arthur van Soest, 2008. "Measuring Inequity Aversion in a Heterogeneous Population Using Experimental Decisions and Subjective Probabilities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(4), pages 815-839, July.
    14. Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2010. "Behavioral econometrics for psychologists," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 553-576, August.
    15. Hans-Martin von Gaudecker & Arthur van Soest & Erik Wengstrom, 2011. "Heterogeneity in Risky Choice Behavior in a Broad Population," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 664-694, April.
    16. Bougherara, Douadia & Grolleau, Gilles & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2009. "Buy local, pollute less: What drives households to join a community supported farm?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1488-1495, March.
    17. Blanco, Mariana & Engelmann, Dirk & Normann, Hans Theo, 2011. "A within-subject analysis of other-regarding preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 321-338, June.
    18. Steffen Andersen & Glenn Harrison & Morten Lau & E. Rutström, 2009. "Elicitation using multiple price list formats," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(3), pages 365-366, September.
    19. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer & Quang Nguyen, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences: Linking Experimental and Household Survey Data from Vietnam," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 557-571, March.
    20. Yang, Yang & Onderstal, Sander & Schram, Arthur, 2016. "Inequity aversion revisited," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-16.
    21. Daniel Zizzo, 2010. "Experimenter demand effects in economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 13(1), pages 75-98, March.
    22. Chang, Jae Bong & Lusk, Jayson L., 2009. "Fairness and food choice," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 483-491, December.
    23. Müller, Stephan & Rau, Holger A., 2016. "The relation of risk attitudes and other-regarding preferences: A within-subjects analysis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-7.
    24. Aurélie Bonein & Laurent Denant-Boemont, 2015. "Self-control, commitment and peer pressure: a laboratory experiment," Post-Print hal-02387279, HAL.
    25. Dirk Engelmann & Martin Strobel, 2004. "Inequality Aversion, Efficiency, and Maximin Preferences in Simple Distribution Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 857-869, September.
    26. Thomas W. Sproul & Jaclyn D. Kropp & Kyle D. Barr, 2015. "The pricing of community supported agriculture shares: evidence from New England," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 75(3), pages 313-329, September.
    27. Brian C. Briggeman & Jayson L. Lusk, 2011. "Preferences for fairness and equity in the food system," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(1), pages 1-29, March.
    28. Glenn Harrison & E. Rutström, 2009. "Expected utility theory and prospect theory: one wedding and a decent funeral," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(2), pages 133-158, June.
    29. Frechette, Guillaume R. & Schotter, Andrew (ed.), 2015. "Handbook of Experimental Economic Methodology," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195328325.
    30. Quang Nguyen & Colin Camerer & Tomomi Tanaka, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences Linking Experimental and Household Data from Vietnam," Post-Print halshs-00547090, HAL.
    31. Fredrik Carlsson & Dinky Daruvala & Olof Johansson‐Stenman, 2005. "Are People Inequality‐Averse, or Just Risk‐Averse?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 72(287), pages 375-396, August.
    32. Hans-Martin von Gaudecker & Arthur van Soest & Erik Wengstrom, 2011. "Heterogeneity in Risky Choice Behavior in a Broad Population," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 664-694, April.
    33. Antonio Filippin, 2022. "Gender differences in risk attitudes," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 100-100, October.
    34. Antonio Filippin & Paolo Crosetto, 2016. "A Reconsideration of Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3138-3160, November.
    35. Stephen Toler & Brian C. Briggeman & Jayson L. Lusk & Damian C. Adams, 2009. "Fairness, Farmers Markets, and Local Production," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1272-1278.
    36. Peterson, Hikaru Hanawa & Taylor, Mykel R. & Baudouin, Quentin, 2015. "Preferences of locavores favoring community supported agriculture in the United States and France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 64-73.
    37. Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
    38. Jack P. Cooley & Daniel A. Lass, 1998. "Consumer Benefits from Community Supported Agriculture Membership," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(1), pages 227-237.
    39. John Loomis, 2011. "What'S To Know About Hypothetical Bias In Stated Preference Valuation Studies?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 363-370, April.
    40. repec:bla:econom:v:72:y:2005:i:3:p:375-396 is not listed on IDEAS
    41. Grebitus, Carola & Printezis, Iryna & Printezis, Antonios, 2017. "Relationship between Consumer Behavior and Success of Urban Agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 189-200.
    42. Glenn W. Harrison & Eric Johnson & Melayne M. McInnes & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2005. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(3), pages 897-901, June.
    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. Liu, Kui & Meng, Chuyan & Yang, Shasha & Zhang, Guanglu, 2024. "Air pollution and individual risk preference: Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    2. He, Ke & Ye, Lihong & Li, Fanlue & Chang, Huayi & Wang, Anbang & Luo, Sixuan & Zhang, Junbiao, 2022. "Using cognition and risk to explain the intention-behavior gap on bioenergy production: Based on machine learning logistic regression method," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    3. Ousmane Z. Traoré & Lota D. Tamini & Bernard Korai, 2023. "Willingness to pay for credence attributes associated with agri‐food products—Evidence from Canada," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 71(3-4), pages 303-327, September.
    4. Yahya Dabaghi & Shahla Choobchian & Hassan Sadighi & Hossein Azadi, 2022. "Consumers’ attitude toward participation in community-supported aquaculture: a case of Kurdistan province in the west of Iran," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(4), pages 870-889, December.
    5. Jasper Grashuis & Ye Su, 2022. "Inequality aversion and consumer ethnocentrism: Food consumer preferences for payoff distributions to farm producers," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(3), pages 608-619, July.
    6. Ruoyan Zhang & Ru Chen, 2023. "The regulatory effect of cooperation degree in increasing tobacco farmers’ income by mitigating production risk shocks," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(4), pages 1323-1344, 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. Bernard, Kévin & Bonein, Aurélie & Bougherara, Douadia, 2016. "Community Supported Agriculture and Preferences for Risk and Fairness," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 234904, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Kerri Brick & Martine Visser & Justine Burns, 2012. "Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence from South African Fishing Communities," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 133-152.
    3. Bougherara, Douadia & Friesen, Lana & Nauges, Céline, 2022. "Risk-taking and skewness-seeking behavior in a demographically diverse population," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 83-104.
    4. Hans-Martin Gaudecker & Arthur Soest & Erik Wengström, 2012. "Experts in experiments," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 159-190, October.
    5. David Blake & Edmund Cannon & Douglas Wright, 2021. "Quantifying loss aversion: Evidence from a UK population survey," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 63(1), pages 27-57, August.
    6. Arianna Galliera & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2021. "Crowded out: Heterogeneity in risk attitudes among poor households in the US," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 103-132, October.
    7. Ola Andersson & Håkan J. Holm & Jean‐Robert Tyran & Erik Wengström, 2020. "Risking Other People's Money: Experimental Evidence on the Role of Incentives and Personality Traits," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 122(2), pages 648-674, April.
    8. Galizzi, Matteo M. & Machado, Sara R. & Miniaci, Raffaele, 2016. "Temporal stability, cross-validity, and external validity of risk preferences measures: experimental evidence from a UK representative sample," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 67554, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Lejarraga, Tomás, 2021. "Elicitation of risk preferences through satisficing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    10. Jonathan Chapman & Erik Snowberg & Stephanie Wang & Colin Camerer, 2018. "Loss Attitudes in the U.S. Population: Evidence from Dynamically Optimized Sequential Experimentation (DOSE)," NBER Working Papers 25072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Galarza, Francisco, 2009. "Choices under Risk in Rural Peru," MPRA Paper 17708, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Lucks, Konstantin E. & Lührmann, Melanie & Winter, Joachim, 2020. "Assortative matching and social interaction: A field experiment on adolescents’ risky choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 313-340.
    13. Tamás Csermely & Alexander Rabas, 2016. "How to reveal people’s preferences: Comparing time consistency and predictive power of multiple price list risk elicitation methods," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 107-136, December.
    14. Boschini, Anne & Dreber, Anna & von Essen, Emma & Muren, Astri & Ranehill, Eva, 2019. "Gender, risk preferences and willingness to compete in a random sample of the Swedish population✰," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    15. Schleich, Joachim & Gassmann, Xavier & Meissner, Thomas & Faure, Corinne, 2019. "A large-scale test of the effects of time discounting, risk aversion, loss aversion, and present bias on household adoption of energy-efficient technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 377-393.
    16. Galizzi, Matteo M. & Miraldo, Marisa & Stavropoulou, Charitini & van der Pol, Marjon, 2016. "Doctor–patient differences in risk and time preferences: A field experiment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 171-182.
    17. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Imas, Alex, 2013. "Experimental methods: Eliciting risk preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 43-51.
    18. Ranoua Bouchouicha & Lachlan Deer & Ashraf Galal Eid & Peter McGee & Daniel Schoch & Hrvoje Stojic & Jolanda Ygosse-Battisti & Ferdinand M. Vieider, 2019. "Gender effects for loss aversion: Yes, no, maybe?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 171-184, October.
    19. Holden , Stein T. & Tilahun , Mesfin, 2019. "The Devil is in the Details: Risk Preferences, Choice List Design, and Measurement Error," CLTS Working Papers 3/19, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 16 Oct 2019.
    20. Konstanting Lucks & Melanie Lührmann & Joachim K. Winter, 2017. "Peer effects in risky choices among adolescents," IFS Working Papers W17/16, Institute for Fiscal Studies.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Inequality aversion preferences; Risk aversion; Field experiment; Community supported agriculture;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy

    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:hal:journl:hal-02541728. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.