IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ias/cpaper/04-wp371.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Guaranteed Tender Beef: Opportunities and Challenges for a Differentiated Agricultural Product

Author

Listed:
  • Miguel Carriquiry

Abstract

Participants in the beef supply chain have, at best, imperfect information about some quality attributes of the product (e.g., live animals, carcasses, or cuts) they are buying, handling, and/or processing and selling to their downstream customers. In many cases, the quality of the final product, destination, and/or appropriate handling or processing of the input is contingent on these unobservable quality attributes. Assessing the quality of an input is particularly important for firms that want to move into niche markets by differentiating their products with some attribute that consumers can only assess imperfectly prior to consumption (e.g., beef tenderness or breed). The success or failure of these ventures is often dependent on whether the selling firm is seen as dependable and trustworthy by its customers. This paper provides a summary and analysis of the literature on beef tenderness assessment and its use for classifying beef according to quality in order to cash in on the premiums consumers are willing to pay for guaranteed tender beef. Opportunities afforded by product quality differentiation are explored, and insights on the challenges of designing a classification system are provided. These challenges have led to the proposal of different thresholds by different authors. However, before any economically meaningful optimal threshold is proposed, two questions need to be clearly answered: What is the objective pursued by the system? and What are the relative consequences of rejecting a product that would have been considered tender by consumers versus certifying a product that will be considered noncompliant.

Suggested Citation

  • Miguel Carriquiry, 2004. "Guaranteed Tender Beef: Opportunities and Challenges for a Differentiated Agricultural Product," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 04-wp371, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
  • Handle: RePEc:ias:cpaper:04-wp371
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.card.iastate.edu/products/publications/pdf/04wp371.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.card.iastate.edu/products/publications/synopsis/?p=535
    File Function: Online Synopsis
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jayson L. Lusk & John A. Fox & Ted C. Schroeder & James Mintert & Mohammad Koohmaraie, 2001. "In-Store Valuation of Steak Tenderness," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(3), pages 539-550.
    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. Bodo E. Steiner, 2017. "A phenomenon-driven approach to the study of value creation and organizational design issues in agri-business value chains," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 19(1), pages 89-118.
    2. Morales, Luis Emilio & Fleming, Euan M. & Wright, Vic & Griffith, Garry R. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2008. "Product And Branding Innovations In The Australian Beef Marketing System," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 5993, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    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. Ward, Clement E. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Dutton, Jennifer M., 2008. "Implicit Value of Retail Beef Product Attributes," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-18.
    2. Chavez, Daniel & Palma, Marco, 2015. "Off the reservation: Pushing the bounds of rationality in experimental auctions," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 202164, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Schulz, Lee L. & Schroeder, Ted C. & White, Katharine L., 2012. "Value of Beef Steak Branding: Hedonic Analysis of Retail Scanner Data," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 41(2), pages 1-14, August.
    4. Martinez, Stephen W. & Hanagriff, Roger D. & Smith, Kevin E., 2006. "Strategic Alliances in U.S. Branded Beef Programs," 2006 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2006, Orlando, Florida 35399, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Xue, Hong & Mainville, Denise Y. & You, Wen & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr., 2009. "Nutrition Knowledge, Sensory Characteristics and Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Pasture-Fed Beef," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49277, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Lijia Shi & Lisa A. House & Zhifeng Gao, 2013. "Impact of Purchase Intentions on Full and Partial Bids in BDM Auctions: Willingness-to-pay for Organic and Local Blueberries," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 707-718, September.
    7. Demont, Matty & Rutsaert, Pieter & Ndour, Maimouna & Verbeke, Wim & Seck, Papa Abdoulaye & Tollens, Eric, 2012. "Experimental auctions, collective induction and choice shift: Willingness-to-pay for rice quality in Senegal," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126861, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood & J. Ross Pruitt, 2006. "Consumer Demand for a Ban on Antibiotic Drug Use in Pork Production," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1015-1033.
    9. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    10. Bull, Charles & Courty, Pascal & Doyon, Maurice & Rondeau, Daniel, 2019. "Failure of the Becker–DeGroot–Marschak mechanism in inexperienced subjects: New tests of the game form misconception hypothesis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 235-253.
    11. Colson, Gregory, 2009. "Improving nutrient content through genetic modification: Evidence from experimental auctions on consumer acceptance and willingness to pay for intragenic foods," ISU General Staff Papers 200901010800001872, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. repec:ken:wpaper:0804 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. David A. Hennessy, 2005. "Slaughterhouse Rules: Animal Uniformity and Regulating for Food Safety in Meat Packing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(3), pages 600-609.
    14. John Fox & Jayson Lusk, 2003. "Value elicitation in laboratory and retail environments," Framed Field Experiments 00185, The Field Experiments Website.
    15. Rousu, Matthew C. & Nonnemaker, James & Farrelly, Matthew, 2009. "The Value of Countermarketing Information to Smokers: Evidence from Field Auctions," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49219, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Alfnes, Frode & Rickertsen, Kyrre & Ueland, Oydis, 2005. "Experimental Evidence of Risk Aversion in Consumer Markets: The Case of Beef Tenderness," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19285, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    17. Martinez, Stephen W. & Hanagriff, Roger D. & Lau, Michael H. & Harris, James Michael, 2007. "Factors Affecting Demand for Branded Beef," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34885, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    18. Gunther Bensch & Jörg Peters, 2020. "One‐Off Subsidies and Long‐Run Adoption—Experimental Evidence on Improved Cooking Stoves in Senegal," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(1), pages 72-90, January.
    19. Badruddoza, Syed & Amin, Modhurima & McCluskey, Jill, 2019. "Assessing the Importance of an Attribute in a Demand SystemStructural Model versus Machine Learning," Working Papers 2019-5, School of Economic Sciences, Washington State University.
    20. Donatella Baiardi & Riccardo Puglisi & Simona Scabrosetti, 2012. "Individual Attitudes on Food Quality and Safety: Empirical Evidence on EU Countries," DEM Working Papers Series 014, University of Pavia, Department of Economics and Management.
    21. Marco A. Palma & Myriah D. Johnson & David P. Anderson, 2019. "The effects of experience versus description of attributes on willingness‐to‐pay for beefsteaks," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 50(2), pages 129-137, March.

    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:ias:cpaper:04-wp371. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caiasus.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.