Trading off health, environmental and genetic modification attributes in food

European Review of Agricultural Economics

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 389-408

  Hu, Wuyang ^a   Hünnemeyer, Anne ^a   Veeman, Michele ^a   Adamowicz, Wiktor ^a   Srivastava, Lorie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Dirichlet regression; Genetically modified; Heterogeneity; Latent class; Risk preferences

Indexed keywords

EID: 12444288497     PISSN: 01651587     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/erae/31.3.389     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Alfnes, F. (2004). Stated preferences for imported and hormone-treated beef: application of a mixed logit model. European Review of Agricultural Economics 31: 19-37.
2. Andrews, R. L. and Currim, I. S. (2003). A comparison of segment retention criteria for finite mixture logit models. Journal of Marketing Research 40: 235-243.
3. Ben-Akiva, M. and Swait, J. (1986). The Akaike Likelihood Ratio Index. Transportation Science 20: 133-136.
4. Boxall, P. C. and Adamowicz, W. L. (2002). Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: a latent class approach. Environmental and Resource Economics 23: 421-446.
5. Brodahl, L. (2001). Determinants of consumer attitudes and purchase intentions with regard to genetically modified foods - results of a cross-national survey. Journal of Consumer Policy 24: 23-61.
6. Burton, M., Rigby, D., Young, T. and James, S. (2001). Consumer attitudes to genetically modified organisms in the UK. European Review of Agricultural Economics 28: 479-498.
7. Carlin, B. P. and Louis, T. A. (1996). Bayes and Empirical Bayes Methods for Data Analysis, 2nd edn. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press.
8. Chern, W. S. and Rickertsen, K. (2002). Consumer acceptance of GMO: survey results from Japan, Norway, Taiwan and the United States. 2002 World Congress of Environmental and Resource Economists, Monterey, CA.
9. Fennell, G., Allenby, G. M., Yang, S. and Edwards, Y. (2003). The effectiveness of demographic and psychographic variables for explaining brand and product category use. Quantitative Marketing and Economics 1: 223-244.
10. Finlay, K., Morris, S., Londerville, J. and Watts, T. (1999). The impact of information and trust on consumer perceptions of biotechnology. Canadian Journal of Marketing Research 18: 15-30.
11. Food and Consumer Products Manufacturers of Canada (1998). As reported by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, http://www.gov.nf.ca/agric/ marketin/APPEND-D.HTM. Accessed 9 April 2004.
12. Frewer, L. J., Howard, C. and Aaron, J. A. (1998). Consumer acceptance of transgenic crops. Pesticide Science 52: 388-393.
13. Grunert, K. G., Lähteenmäki, L., Nielsen, N. A., Poulsen, J. B., Ueland, O. and Aström, A. (2000). Consumer Perception of Food Products Involving Genetic Modification: Results from a Qualitative Study in Four Nordic Countries. MAPP Working Paper No. 72, The Aarhus School of Business. Aarhus, Denmark: The Aarhus School of Business.
14. Gupta, S. and Chintagunta, P. K. (1994). On using demographic variables to determine segment membership in logit mixture models. Journal of Marketing Research 31:128-136.
15. Huffman, W. E., Shogren, J. F., Rousu, M. and Tegene, A. (2003). Consumer willingness to pay for genetically modified food labels in a market with diverse information: evidence from experimental auctions. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 28: 481-503.
16. Hunt, S. and Frewer, L. (2001). Trust in source of information about genetically modified food risks in the U.K. British Food Journal 103: 46-62.
17. Kamakura, W. and Russell, G. (1989). A probabilistic choice model for market segmentation and elasticity structure. Journal of Marketing Research 26: 379-390.
18. Krinsky, I. and Robb, A. (1986). On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. Review of Economics and Statistics 68: 715-719.
19. Lusk, J. L., House, L. O., Valli, C., Jaeger, S. R., Moore, M., Morrow, J. L. and Traill, W. B. (2004). Effect of information about benefits of biotechnology on consumer acceptance of genetically modified food: evidence from experimental auctions in the United States, England, and France. European Review of Agricultural Economics 31: 179-204.
20. Lusk, J. L., Roosen, J. and Fox, J. A. (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. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85: 16-29.
21. Marks, L. A., Kalaitzandonakes, N. and Zakharova, L. (2002). On the media rollercoaster: will biotech foods finish the ride? Choices (Spring): 6-10.
22. McFadden, D. (1999). Rationality for economists? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 19: 73-105.
23. Noussair, C., Robin, S. and Ruffieux, B. (2002). Do consumers not care about biotech foods or do they just not read the labels? Economics Letters 75: 47-53.
24. Ramaswamy, V., Desarbo, W. S., Reibstein, D. J. and Robinson, W. T. (1993). An empirical pooling approach for estimating marketing mix elasticities with PIMS data. Marketing Sciences 12: 103-124.
25. Rousu, M. C., Huffman, W. E., Shogren, J. and Tegene, A. (2004). Estimating public value of conflicting information: the case of genetically modified foods. Land Economics 80: 125-135.
26. Statistics Canada (2001). 2001 Census, http://www12.statcan.ca/english/ census01/home/index.cfm. Accessed 30 March 2004.
27. Swait, J. R. (1994). A structural equation model of latent segmentation and product choice for cross-sectional revealed preference choice data. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 1: 77-89.
28. Tegene, A., Huffman, W. E., Rousou, M. and Shogren, J. F. (2003). The Effects of Information on Consumer Demand for Biotech Foods: Evidence from Experimental Auctions. USDA Electronic Report from the Economic Research Service, Technical Bulletin Number 1903. www.ers.usda.gov. Accessed 13 November 2003.
29. Veeman, M. (2001). Consumers, Public Perceptions and Biotechnology. Staff Paper No. 00-01, Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta. Edmonton: University of Alberta.
30. Wedel, M. and Kamakura, W. A. (2000). Market Segmentation: Conceptual and Methodological Foundations, 2nd edn. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
31. Woodland, A. D. (1979). Stochastic specification and the estimation of share equations. Journal of Econometrics 1: 361-383.