Consumers' valuation of functional properties of foods: Results from a Canada-wide survey

Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics

Volumn 50, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 541-558

  West, Gale E ^a   Gendron, Carole ^a   Larue, Bruno ^a   Lambert, Rémy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038054743     PISSN: 00083976     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7976.2002.tb00354.x     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Best, S. G. 1997. Strategie pour convaincre les consommateurs. Biofutur 172: 29-31.
2. Conseil consultatif sur le cancer. 1997. La promotion de la santé et la prevention du cancer. Québec, Québec: Ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux.
3. Einsiedel, E. F. 2000. Biotechnology and the Canadian Public: 1997 and 2000. Calgary, AB: University of Calgary.
4. Eurobarometre. 1991. Les Europeéns et la biotechnologie, Eurobarometre 35.1. Brussells, Belgium: INRA (Europe) - European Coordination Office.
5. Eurobarometre. 1993. Les Europeéns et la biotechnologie, Eurobarometre 39.1. Brussells, Belgium: INRA (Europe) - European Coordination Office.
6. Eurobarometre. 1996. Les Europeéns et la biotechnologie, Eurobarometre 46.1. Brussells, Belgium: INRA (Europe) - European Coordination Office.
7. Eurobarometre. 1999. Les Europeéns et la biotechnologie, Eurobarometre 52.1. Brussells, Belgium: INRA (Europe) - European Coordination Office.
8. Eurobarometer. 2000. Les Européens et la biotechnologie, Eurobaromètre 52.1. Brussells, Belgium: INRA (Europe) - Eurpoean Coordination Office.
9. Frewer, L. J., C. Howard and R. Shepherd. 1997. Public concern in the United Kingdom about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: Risk, benefit and ethics. Science, Technology and Human Values 22: 98-124.
10. Halbrendt, C., J. Pesek, A. Parsons and R. Lindner. 1995. Using conjoint analysis to assess consumer's acceptance of pST-supplemented pork. In Valuing Food Safety and Nutrition, edited by J. A. Caswell, pp. 129-53. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
11. Hoban, T. J. 1996. Trends in consumer attitudes about biotechnology. Journal of Food Distribution Research 27 (1): 1-10.
12. Hoban, T. J. 1998. International acceptance of agricultural biotechnology. National Agricultural Biotechnology Council Report 10: Agricultural Biotechnology and Environmental Quality: Gene escape and pest resistance, pp. 59-74. Available at: http://www.cals.cornell.edu/extension/nabc/pubs/nabc_10.pdf.
13. Hoban, T. J. and L. D. Katic. 1998. American consumer views on biotechnology. Cereal Foods World 43 (1): 20-22.
14. Hoban, T. J. and P. A. Kendall. 1992. Consumer Attitudes about the Use of Biotechnology in Agriculture and Food Production. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University.
15. International Food Information Council. 2001. U.S. Consumer Attitudes toward Food Biotechnology. Wirthlin Group Quorum Surveys. Available at: http://ific.org/proactive/newsroom/release.vtml?id = 19241.
16. Louviere, J., D. A. Hensher and J. D. Swait. 2000. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17. Lusk, J. L., M. S. Daniel, D. R. Mark and C. L. Lusk. 2001. Alternative calibration and auction institutions for predicting consumer willingness to pay for nongenetically modified corn chips. Journal of Agricultural Resource Economics 26 (1): 40-57.
18. McFadden, D. 1989. A method of simulated moments for estimation of discrete choice models without numerical integration. Econometrica 57: 995-1026.
19. Moschini, G. 2001. Biotech: Who wins? Economic benefits and costs of biotechnology innovations in agriculture. The Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy 2 (1): 93-117.
20. Noussair, C., S. Robin and B. Ruffieux. 2002. Do consumers not care about biotech foods or do they just not read the labels? Economic Letters 75 (1): 47-53.
21. Nunes, L.C., M. A. Cunha-e-Sa, M. M. Ducla-Soares, M. A. Rosado and B. H. Day. 2001. Identifying nonconsistent choice behavior in recreation demand models. Economics Letters 72 (3): 403-10.
22. Optima. 1994. Rapport d'enquête: Analyse de l'attitude des consommateurs face à la nouvelle industrie de la biotechnologie. Ottawa, ON: OPTIMA Conseillers en recherches sociales appliquees, Inc.
23. Poppy, G. 2000. GM crops: Environmental risks and nontarget effects. Trends in Plant Science 5: 1, 4-6.
24. Revelt, D. and K. Train. 1998. Mixed logit with repeated choices: Households' choices of appliance efficiency level. Review of Economics and Statistics 80 (4): 647-77.
25. Train, K. 1998. Recreation demand models with taste difference over people. Land Economics 74 (2): 230-39.
26. Train, K. 1999. Halton sequences for mixed logit. Available at: http://elsa.berkeley.edu/users/train/papers/html.
27. West, G. E., C. Gendron, B. Larue and R. Lambert. 2002a. Consumers' valuation of functional properties of foods: Results from a Canada-wide survey. CREA Working Paper R.01.05. Ste-Foy, QC: CREA, Univeristé Laval. Available at: http://alpha.eru.ulaval.ca/crea/listepub.html.
28. West, G. E., B. Larue, C. Gendron and S. L. Scott. 2002b. Consumer confusion over the significance of meat attributes: The case of veal. Journal of Consumer Policy 25: 65-88.