Conformity and the Demand for Environmental Goods
Tóm tắt
The existing literature on eco-labeling and green consumerism has been framed within a classical market context where price and quality are the drivers of consumer choice. However, it seems possible that consumers are also concerned about the choices made by other consumers. In fact, it is unclear that people’s consumption decisions are made independently of social context. For instance, under the desire to conform to certain social norms—or in the presence of status concerns—some individuals may be willing to pay a higher price premium for green products the more widespread green consumerism is in society. We test this hypothesis using a choice experiment where the respondents were asked to choose among coffee products varying with respect to their share of ecological beans, share of fair trade beans, and price. Three treatments were used, differing only in the information given about the choices made by other consumers. We find different responses to the treatments across individuals and we can only confirm our hypothesis of conformity for women, although men appear to have stronger preferences for ecological coffee than women have.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Akerlof G, Kranton R (2000) Economics and identity. Q J Econ 115: 715–753
Albrecht J, Björklund A, Vroman S (2003) Is there a glass ceiling in sweden?. J Lab Econ 21: 145–177
Alpizar F, Carlsson F, Martinsson P (2003) Using choice experiments for non-market valuation. Econ Issues 8: 83–110
Alpizar F, Carlsson F, Johansson-Stenman O (2005) How much do we care about absolute versus relative income and consumption?. J Econ Behav Organ 56: 405–421
Alpizar F, Carlsson F, Johansson-Stenman O (2008) Anonymity, reciprocity, and conformity: evidence from voluntary contributions to a national park in costa rica. J Public Econ 92: 1047–1060
Amacher G, Koskela E, Ollikainen M (2004) Environmental quality competition and eco-labeling. J Environ Econ Manag 47: 284–306
Andreoni J, Vesterlund L (2001) Which is the fair sex? Gender differences in altruism. Q J Econ 116: 293–312
Arnot C, Boxall P, Cash S (2006) Do ethical consumers care about price? A revealed preference analysis of fair trade coffee purchases. Can J Agri Econ 54: 555–565
Bacon C (2005) Confronting the coffee crisis: can fair trade, organic, and specialty coffees reduce small-scale farmer vulnerability in northern nicaragua?. World Dev 33: 491–511
Bardsley N, Sausgruber R (2005) Conformity and reciprocity in public good provision. J Econ Psych 26: 664–681
Bernheim B (1994) A theory of conformity. J Polit Econ 102: 841–877
Bjorner TB, Hansen LG, Russell CS (2004) Environmental labeling and consumers’ choice—an empirical analysis of the effect of the nordic swan. J Environ Econ Manag 47: 411–424
Blend JR, Van Ravenswaay EO (1999) Measuring consumer demand for ecolabeled apples. Amer J Agr Econ 81: 1072–1077
Carlsson F, Frykblom P, Lagerkvist CJ (2005) Using cheap-talk as a test of validity in choice experiments. Econ Lett 89: 147–152
Carlsson F, Frykblom P, Lagerkvist CJ (2007) Consumer benefits of labels and bans on gm foods—choice experiments with swedish consumers. Amer J Agr Econ 89: 152–161
Carlsson F, Martinsson P (2001) Do hypothetical and actual marginal willingness to pay differ in choice experiments?. J Environ Econ Manag 41: 179–192
Carlsson F, Martinsson P (2003) Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics. Heal Econ 12: 281–294
Carsson R, Groves T (2007) Incentive and informational properties of preferences questions. Environ Resour Econ 37: 181–210
Cremer H, Thisse J-F (1999) On the taxation of polluting products in a differentiated industry. Europ Econ Rev 43: 575–594
Croson R, Gneezy U (2009) Gender differences in preferences. J Econ Lit 47: 448–474
Durevall D (2007) Competition in the swedish coffee market 1978–2002. Int J Ind Organ 25: 721–739
European Coffee Federation (2009) European coffee report 2008. Rijswijk. Available at http://www.ecf-coffee.org/ecf/documents/European_Coffee_Report_2008.pdf
Frey B, Meier S (2004) Social comparisons and pro-social behavior: testing conditional cooperation in a field experiment. Amer Econ Rev 94: 1717–1722
Greene W (2000) Econometric analysis. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey
Hanemann M (1984) Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. Amer J Agr Econ 66: 332–341
Heinrich J, Boyd R, Bowles S, Camerer C, Fehr E, Gintis H (2001) In search of homo economicus: behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. Amer Econ Rev 91: 73–78
Huang CL (1996) Consumer preferences and attitudes towards organically grown produce. Europ Rev Agr Econ 23: 331–342
Huber J, Zwerina K (1996) The importance of utility balance in efficient choice designs. J Mark Res 33: 307–317
International Coffee Organization ICO (2005) Overview of the coffee market, document ICC-93-5. Available at http://dev.ico.org/documents/icc93-5e.pdf
Johansson-Stenman O, Carlsson F, Daruvala D (2002) Measuring future grandparents’ preferences for equality and relative standing. Econ J 112: 362–383
Johansson-Stenman O, Svedsäter H (2008) Measuring hypothetical bias in choice experiments: the importance of cognitive consistency. BE J Econ Anal Poli 8, Article 41
Johnston RJ, Wessells CR, Donath H, Asche F (2001) Measuring consumer preferences for ecolabeled seafood: an international comparison. J Agr Resou Econ 26: 20–39
Ladenburg J, Olsen SB (2008) Gender specific starting point bias in choice experiments: evidence from an empirical study. J Environ Econ Manag 56: 275–285
Levitt S, List J (2007) What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world?. J Econ Pers 21: 153–174
Lewin B, Giovannucci D, Varangis P (2004) Coffee markets: new paradigms in global supply and demand. Agriculture and rural development Discussion Paper 3. World Bank, Washington, DC
List J (2004) Young, selfish and male: field evidence of social preferences. Econ J 114: 121–149
List J, Sinha P, Taylor M (2005) Using choice experiments to value non-market goods and services: evidence from field experiments. Adv Econ Anal Pol, 6, Article 2
Loureiro ML, Lotade J (2005) Do fair trade and eco-labels in coffee wake up the consumer conscience?. Ecolog Econ 53: 129–138
Louviere J, Hensher D, Swait J (2000) Stated choice methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Lusk J, Schroeder T (2004) Are choice experiments incentive compatible? A test with quality differentiated beef-steaks. Amer J Agr Econ 85: 840–856
Manski CF (2000) Economic analysis of social interactions. J Econ Pers 14: 115–136
Nimon W, Beghin J (1999) Are eco-labels valuable? Evidence from the apparel industry. Amer J Agr Econ 81: 801–811
Shang J, Croson R (2009) Field experiments in charitable contribution: the impact of social influence on the voluntary provision of public goods. Econ J 199: 1422–1439
Solnick S, Hemenway D (1998) Is more always better? A survey on positional concerns. J Econ Behav Organ 37: 373–383
Solnick S, Hemenway D (2005) Are positional concerns stronger in some domains than in others. Amer Econ Rev 95: 147–151
Sterner T (2003) Policy instruments for environmental and natural resource management. RFF Press, Washington
Swait J, Louviere J (1993) The role of the scale parameter in the estimation and comparison of multinomial logit models. J Mark Res 30: 305–314
Teisl MF, Roe B, Hicks RL (2002) Can eco-labels tune a market? Evidence from dolphin-safe labeling. J Environ Econ Manag 43: 339–359
Train K (2003) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, New York
Venkatesan M (1966) Experimental study of consumer behavior conformity and independence. J Mark Res 3: 384–387
Zelezny L, Chua P, Aldrich C (2000) Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. J Soc Issues 56: 443–457