Consumers’ preferences for a local food product: a real choice experiment

Empirical Economics - Tập 47 - Trang 111-128 - 2013
Azucena Gracia1
1Unidad de Economía Agraria y de los Recursos Naturales, Centro de Investigación y Tecnología Agroalimentaria de Aragón (CITA),  Zaragoza, Spain

Tóm tắt

This paper analyses consumers’ preferences for a local food in Spain and assesses their willingness to pay (WTP) using a real choice experiment to mitigate possible hypothetical bias. In particular, preferences for fresh lamb meat were investigated and two attributes evaluated, “locally grown” and the type of lamb meat. Data came from an experiment conducted in Spain during 2009. An error component random Parameter model with correlated errors was used to estimate the effect of the attributes on consumers’ utility and derive their WTP. Results suggest that consumers positively value both attributes and are willing to pay a premium of 9 % price increase for the “locally grown” lamb meat (“Ojinegra from Teruel”) and 13 % price increase for the “Ternasco” lamb meat. If we assume a market where only “Ternasco” lamb meat without indication of the local origin is sold, and then a new “Ternasco” lamb is introduced in the market with the “Ojinegra from Teruel” label, this new local lamb meat would capture 18 % of the market if the package is assumed to be sold at 3.5 $$\hbox {C}\!\!\!\!\!=$$ and a 10 % market share if the package is assumed to be sold at 4 $$\hbox {C}\!\!\!\!\!=$$ .

Tài liệu tham khảo

Adamowicz W, Boxall P, Williams M, Louviere J (1998) Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation. Am J Agric Econ 80:64–75. doi:10.2307/3180269 Alfnes F, Guttormsen AG, Steine G, Kolstad K (2006) Consumers’ willingness to pay for the color of salmon: a choice experiment with real economic incentives. Am J Agric Econ 88(4):1050–1061. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2006.00915x Barreiro-Hurlé J, Gracia A, de-Magistris T (2009) Market implications of new regulations: impact of health and nutrition information on consumer choice. Span J Agric Res 7(2):257–268 Bernabeu R, Tendero A (2004) Diferencias en las preferencias de los consumidores de carne de cordero. Distribución y Consumo 73:101–107 Bernabeu R, Tendero A (2005) Preference structure for lamb meat consumers. A Spanish case study. Meat Sci 71:464–470. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.04.027 Bond CA, Thilmany D, Bond JK (2008) Understanding consumer interest in product and process-based attributes for fresh produce. Agribusiness 24:231–252. doi:10.1002/agr.20157 Cameron TA, Poe GL, Ethier RG, Schulze WD (2002) Alternative non-market value-elicitation methods: are the underlying preferences the same? J Environ Econ Manag 44:391–425 Campbell D (2007) Willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements: Combining mixed logit and random effects models. J Agric Econ 58(3):467–483. doi:10.1111/j.1477-9552.2007.00117.x Campbell BL, Lesschaeve I, Bowen AJ, Onufrey SR, Moskowitz H (2010) Purchase drivers of Canadian consumers of local and organic produce. HortScience 45(10):1480–1488 Carlson F, Martinsson P (2001) Do hypothetical and actual marginal willingness to pay differ in choice experiments? J Environ Econ Manag 41:179–192 Carpio CE, Isengildina-Massa O (2009) Consumers willingness to pay for locally grown products: the case of South Carolina. Agribusiness 25(3):412–426. doi:10.1002/agr.20210 Chambers S, Lobb A, Butler L, Harvey K, Traill BW (2007) Local, national and imported foods: a qualitative study. Appetite 49:208–213. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2007.02.003 Chang JB, Lusk J, Norwood FB (2009) How closely do hypothetical surveys and laboratory experiments predict field behaviour? Am J Agric Econ 91(2):518–534 Conner D, Colasanti K, Ross BR, Smalley SB (2010) Locally grown foods and farmers markets: consumer attitudes and behaviours. Sustainability 2:742–756 Costanigro M, McFadden DT, Kroll S, Nurse G (2011) An in-store valuation of local and organic apples: the role of social desirability. Agribusiness 27(4):465–477. doi:10.1002/agr.20281 Darby K, Batte MT, Ernst S, Roe B (2008) Decomposing local: a conjoint analysis of locally produced foods. Am J Agric Econ 90(2):476–486. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2007.01111.x de Magistris T, Gracia A, Nayga R (2012) On the use of honesty priming task to mitigate hypothetical bias in choice experiments. Working paper 12/01. Centro de Investigación y Tecnología Agroalimentaria de Aragón. Gobierno de Aragón. Available on line at http://www2.cita-aragon.es/citarea/bitstream/10532/1827/3/2012_031_1.pdf. Accessed 27 Feb 2012 Ding M, Grewal R, Liechty J (2005) Incentive-aligned conjoint analysis. J Mark Res 42:67–82. doi:10.1509/jmkr.42.1.67.56890 European Committee of the Regions (1996) Promoting and protecting local products: a trumpcard for the regions. Committee of the Regions, Brussels Giraud KL, Bond GA, Bond JJ (2005) Consumer preferences for locally made speciality food products across Northern New England. Agric Resour Econ Rev 34(2):204–216 Groves A (2005) The local and regional food opportunity. IGD. http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/food/industry/regional/pdf/localregfoodopps.pdf. Accessed 6 March 2011 Grunert KG (2006) How changes in consumer behaviour and retailing affect competence requirements for food producers and processors. Econ Agrar Recurs Nat 6(11):3–22 Hand MS, Martinez S (2010) Just what does local mean?. Choice, 1st Quarter 25(1): 1–4 Hein JR, Ilbery B, Kneafsey M (2006) Distribution of local food activity in England and Wales: an index of food relocalization. Reg Stud 40(3):289–301. doi:10.1080/0034300600631533 Hensher DA, Rose JM, Greene WH (2005) Applied choice analysis. A primer. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Hess S, Rose J (2009) Should reference alternatives in pivot design SC surveys be treated differently? Environ Resour Econ 42:297–317 Hu W, Woods T, Bastin S (2009) Consumer acceptance and willingness to pay for blueberry products with nonconventional attributes. J Agric Appl Econ 41(1):47–60. doi:10.1093/erae/jbr039 Hu W, Batte MT, Woods T, Ernst S (2012) Consumer preferences for local production and other value-added label claims for a processed food product. Eur Rev Agric Econ 39(3):489–510. doi:10.1093/erae/jbr039 Hustvedt G, Bernard JC (2008) Consumer willingness to pay for sustainable apparel: the influence of labelling for fibre origin and production methods. Int J Consum Stud 32:491–498. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2008.00706.x Instituto Aragonés de Estadística (IAEST) (2010). Datos básicos de Aragón, Año James JS, Rickard BJ, Rossman WJ (2009) Product differentiation and market segmentation in applesauce: using a choice experiment to assess the value of organic, local and nutrition attributes. Agric Resour Econ Rev 38(3):357–370 Johansson-Stenman O, Svedsäter H (2008) Measuring hypothetical bias in choice experiments: the importance of cognitive consistency. Berkeley Electron J Econ Anal Policy 8(1):article 41. Available at: http://www.bepress.com/bejeap/vol8/iss1/art41. Accessed 11 May 2010 Keeling-Bond J, Thilmany D, Bond CA (2006) Direct marketing of fresh produce: understanding consumer purchasing decisions. Choices 21(4):229–235 Kezis A, Gwebu T, Peavey S, Cheng H (1998) A case study of consumers at a small farmers’ market in Maine: results form a 1995 survey. J Food Distrib Res 29(1):91–99 Lancaster K (1966) A new approach to consumer theory. J Polit Econ 74:132–157 List JA (2003) Does market experience eliminate market anomalies? Q J Econ 118:41–71. doi:10.1162/00335530360535144 Loomis J, Bell P, Cooney H, Asmus C (2009) A comparison of actual and hypothetical willingness to pay of parents and non-parents for protecting infant health: the case of nitrates in drinking water. J Agric Appl Econ 41(3):697–712 Loureiro ML, Hine S (2002) Discovering niche markets: a comparison of consumer willingness to pay for local (Colorado grown), organic, and GMO-free products. J Agric Appl Econ 34(3):477–487 Lusk J, Roosen J, Fox JA (2003) Demand for beef from cattle administered growth hormones or fed genetically modified corn: a comparison of consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. Am J Agric Econ 85(1):16–29. doi:10.1111/1467-8276.00100 Lusk JL, Schroeder TC (2004) Are choice experiments incentive compatible? A test with quality differentiated beef steaks. Am J Agric Econ 86(2):467–482 Lusk JL, Fields D, Prevett W (2008) An incentive compatible conjoint ranking mechanism. Am J Agric Econ 90(2):487–498. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2007.01119.x Lusk JL, Norwood FB (2011) The Locavore’s Dilemma: why pineapples shouldn’t be grown in North Dakota. http://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2011/LuskNorwoodlocavore.html. Accessed 10 Oct 2012 McFadden D (1974) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka Paul (ed) Frontiers in econometrics. Academic Press, New York, pp 105–142 Roininen K, Arvola A, Lahteenmaki L (2006) Exploring consumers perceptions of local food with two different qualitative techniques: laddering and word association. Food Qual Prefer 17(1–2):20–30. doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.04.012 Scarpa R, Del Giudice T (2004) Market segmentation via mixed logit: extra-virgin olive oil in urban Italy. J Agric Food Ind Organ 2:article 7 Scarpa R, Campbell D, Hutchinson G (2007) Benefit estimates for landscape improvements: sequential Bayesian design and respondents rationality in a choice experiment. Land Econ 83(4):617–634 Scarpa R, Thiene M, Marangon F (2008) Using exible taste distributions to value collective reputation for environmentally friendly production methods. Can J Agric Econ 56:145–162 Schneider ML, Francis CA (2005) Marketing locally produced foods: consumer and farmer opinions in Washington County, Nebraska. Renew Agric Food Syst 20(4):252–260. doi:10.1079/RAF2005114 Street D, Burges L, Louviere J (2005) Quick and easy sets: constructing optimal and nearly optimal stated choice experiment. Int J Res in Mark 22:459–470. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.09.003 Street D, Burgess L (2007) The construction of optimal stated choice experiments. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken Tonsor GT, Schroeder TC, Pennings JME, Mintert J (2009) Consumer valuations of beef steak food safety enhancement in Canada, Japan, Mexico, and the United States. Can J Agric Econ 57:395–416. doi:10.1111/j.1744-7976.2009.01158.x Train K (2003) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Volinskiy D, Adamowicz W, Veeman M, Srivastava L (2009) Does choice context affect the results from incentive-compatible experiments? The case of non-GM and country-of-origin premia in canola oil. Can J Agric Econ 57:205–221 Wolf CA, Tonsor GT, Olynk NJ (2011) Understanding U.S. consumer demand for mild production attributes. J Agric Resour Econ 36(2):326–342 Yue C, Tong C (2009) Organic or local? Investigating consumer preference for fresh produce using a choice experiment with real economic incentives. HortScience 44(2):366–371 Zepeda L, Leviten-Reid C (2004) Consumers’ views on local food. Journal of Food Distribution Research 35(3):1–6