IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/iptwpa/jrc119484.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Empirical testing of the impact on consumer choice resulting from differences in the composition of seemingly identical branded products

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Differences in the composition of seemingly identical branded food products (DC-SIP) has been a source of growing concern in the EU in recent years. This was particularly the case after tests conducted in several Member States (MS) confirmed the presence of differences in composition of some branded food products sold across different Member States. To provide further evidence on DC-SIP practices, in close collaboration with experts from Member States' competent authorities and stakeholders of the food chain, the Joint Research Centre (JRC) developed a harmonised methodology for the comparative testing of DC-SIP in food across MS. The result of the application of this methodology to different products found that 9% and 22% of evaluated food products had differences in composition but had identical or similar front packaging, respectively. While the JRC’s comparative testing found evidence on the scale of the DC-SIP issue across EU, there is still a lack of empirical evidence on consumer preferences for DC-SIP. This report aims to contribute to the existing studies by verifying whether the presence of DC-SIP influences consumer preferences and willingness to pay for a different version of the same branded product. The study applied two different methodologies, an (online) discrete choice experiment (DCE) and a sensory testing experiment ('lab experiment'), in six MS (i.e. Germany, Hungary, Lithuania, Romania, Spain, and Sweden) with a total of 10,600 respondents.

Suggested Citation

  • Federica Di Marcantonio & Luisa Menapace & Jesus Barreiro-Hurle & Pavel Ciaian & François J. Dessart & Liesbeth Colen, 2020. "Empirical testing of the impact on consumer choice resulting from differences in the composition of seemingly identical branded products," JRC Research Reports JRC119484, Joint Research Centre.
    • Handle: RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc119484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC119484
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ulrich Enneking, 2004. "Willingness-to-pay for safety improvements in the German meat sector: the case of the Q&S label," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 31(2), pages 205-223, June.
    2. Warren J Bilkey & Erik Nes, 1982. "Country-of-Origin Effects on Product Evaluations," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 13(1), pages 89-100, March.
    3. Sam K. Hui & Eric T. Bradlow & Peter S. Fader, 2009. "Testing Behavioral Hypotheses Using an Integrated Model of Grocery Store Shopping Path and Purchase Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(3), pages 478-493.
    4. Alfnes, Frode & Guttormsen, Atle G. & Steine, Gro & Kolstad, Kari, 2006. "Ajae Appendix: Consumers’ Willingness To Pay For The Color Of Salmon: A Choice Experiment With Real Economic Incentives," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1-8, November.
    5. 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.
    6. McFadden, Daniel, 1974. "The measurement of urban travel demand," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 303-328, November.
    7. Gro Steine & Kari Kolstad, 2006. "Consumers' Willingness to Pay for the Color of Salmon: A Choice Experiment with Real Economic Incentives," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1050-1061.
    8. Yoo, Boonghee & Donthu, Naveen, 2001. "Developing and validating a multidimensional consumer-based brand equity scale," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 1-14, April.
    9. Antonio Iazzi & Savino Santovito, 2016. "Branded Versus Non-Branded: Differences in Consumer Preferences," International Journal of Marketing Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(1), pages 57-71, February.
    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. Pavel Ciaian & Federica Di Marcantonio & Liesbeth Colen & Kjersti Nes & Jesus Barreiro-Hurle & François J. Dessart & Luisa Menapace & Carlo Russo & Annarita Colamatteo & Negin Fathinejad & Maria Anna , 2020. "Economic analyses of differences in composition of seemingly identical branded food products in the Single Market," JRC Research Reports JRC120297, Joint Research Centre.

    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. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny, 2011. "Demand for improved food safety and quality: a cross-regional comparison," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108791, Agricultural Economics Society.
    2. Wang, Shuxian & Wu, Linhai & Zhu, Dian & Wang, Hongsha & Xu, Lingling, 2014. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food attributes: The case of pork," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 165639, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Sckokai, Paolo & Veneziani, Mario & Moro, Daniele & Castellari, Elena, 2014. "Consumer willingness to pay for food safety: the case of mycotoxins in milk," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 3(1), pages 1-19, April.
    4. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    5. Villas-Boas, Sofia B & Taylor, Rebecca & Krovetz, Hannah, 2016. "Willingness to Pay for Low Water Footprint Food Choices During Drought," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt9vh3x180, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    6. Villas-Boas, Sofia B & Copfer, Jackie & Campbell, Nica, 2021. "Preferences for Sustainability and Supply Chain Essential Worker Conditions: Survey Evidence during COVID-19," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt0nv2n39w, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    7. Asche, Frank & Larsen, Thomas A. & Smith, Martin D. & Sogn-Grundvåg, Geir & Young, James A., 2015. "Pricing of eco-labels with retailer heterogeneity," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 82-93.
    8. Celine Michaud & Daniel Llerena & Iragael Joly, 2013. "Willingness to pay for environmental attributes of non-food agricultural products: a real choice experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 40(2), pages 313-329, March.
    9. Linhai Wu & Xiaolin Liu & Dian Zhu & Hongsha Wang & Shuxian Wang & Lingling Xu, 2015. "Simulation of Market Demand for Traceable Pork with Different Levels of Safety Information: A Case Study in Chinese Consumers," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 63(4), pages 513-537, December.
    10. Li, Hao & Elbakidze, Levan, 2016. "Application of Regression Discontinuity Approach in Experimental Auctions: A Case Study of Gaining Participants’ Trust and Their Willingness to Pay," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236149, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Cindybell Gamboa & Goedele Van den Broeck & Miet Maertens, 2018. "Smallholders’ Preferences for Improved Quinoa Varieties in the Peruvian Andes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-22, October.
    12. James Hilger & Eric Hallstein & Andrew W. Stevens & Sofia B. Villas-Boas, 2019. "Measuring Willingness to Pay for Environmental Attributes in Seafood," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(1), pages 307-332, May.
    13. Abdelradi, Fadi & Abdu, Khaled, 2015. "Evaluation of consumers' lifestyles and willingness to pay for dates: A hybrid choice model approach," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202720, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Daniele Moro & Mario Veneziani & Paolo Sckokai & Elena Castellari, 2015. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Catechin‐enriched Yogurt: Evidence from a Stated Choice Experiment," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 243-258, April.
    15. Hannah Krovetz & Rebecca Taylor & Sofia B. Villas-Boas, 2018. "Willingness to Pay for Low Water Footprint Foods during Drought," NBER Chapters, in: Agricultural Productivity and Producer Behavior, pages 251-291, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Ozge Dinc‐Cavlak & Ozlem Ozdemir, 2021. "Comparing the willingness to pay through three elicitation mechanisms: An experimental evidence for organic egg product," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(4), pages 782-803, October.
    17. Khachatryan, Hayk & Rihn, Alicia & Wei, Xuan, 2021. "Consumers’ Preferences for Eco-labels on Plants: The Influence of Trust and Consequentiality Perceptions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    18. Grebitus, Carola & Jensen, Helen H. & Roosen, Jutta, 2013. "US and German consumer preferences for ground beef packaged under a modified atmosphere – Different regulations, different behaviour?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 109-118.
    19. Gamboa, Cindybell & Van Den Broeck, Goedele & Maertens, Miet, 2018. "Adoption of improved quinoa varieties among smallholder farmers in the Peruvian Andes," Working Papers 277984, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    20. Pallante, Giacomo & Drucker, Adam G. & Sthapit, Sajal, 2016. "Assessing the potential for niche market development to contribute to farmers' livelihoods and agrobiodiversity conservation: Insights from the finger millet case study in Nepal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 92-105.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    dual food quality; food chain; branded food products; differences in composition; consumers;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • L66 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Food; Beverages; Cosmetics; Tobacco

    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:ipt:iptwpa:jrc119484. 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: Publication Officer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipjrces.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.