Do native and invasive labels affect consumer willingness to pay for plants? Evidence from experimental auctions

Agricultural Economics

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 195-205

  Yue, Chengyan ^a   Hurley, Terrance M ^a   Anderson, Neil ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Auction; Invasive plants; Labeling; Marketing; Native plants; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECOLABELING; ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; INVASIVE SPECIES; MARKETING; NATIVE SPECIES; ORNAMENTAL SPECIES; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 79951646773     PISSN: 01695150     EISSN: 15740862     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-0862.2010.00510.x     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Alfnes, F., Rickertsen, K., 2003. European consumers' willingness to pay for U.S. beef in experimental auction markets. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 85(2), 396-405.
2. Anderson, N.O., 2004. Invasive horticultural crops (Part 3): Who's monitoring and controlling them? Minnesota Nursery Landscape Assoc. News 28(6), 45-47.
3. Anderson, N.O., Galatowitsch, S.M., Gomez, N., 2006. Selection strategies to reduce invasive potential in introduced plants. Euphytica 148, 203-206.
4. Anderson, N.O., Gomez, N. Galatowitsch, S., 2006. A non-invasive crop ideotype to reduce invasive potential. Euphytica 148, 185-202.
5. Barbier, E., Knowler, D., 2006. Commercialization decisions and the economics of introduction. Euphytica 148, 151-164.
6. Baskin, Y., 2002. The greening of horticulture: New codes of conduct aim to curb plant invasions. Bioscience 52, 464-471.
7. Basu, A.K., Chau, N.H., Grote, U., 2004. On export rivalry and the greening of agriculture: The role of eco-labels. Agric. Econ. 31, 135-147.
8. Blend, J.R., Van Ravenswaay, E.O., 1999. Measuring consumers' demand for ecolabeled apples. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 81(5), 1072-1077.
9. Brown, J., Cranfield, J.A.L., Henson, S., 2005. Relating consumer willingness-to-pay for food safety to risk tolerance: An experimental approach. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 53(2), 249-263.
10. Burt, J.W., Muir, A.A., 2007. Preventing horticultural introductions of invasive plants potential efficacy of voluntary initiatives. Biol. Invasions 9(8), 909-923.
11. Cavaliere, A., 2000. Overcompliance and voluntary agreements. Environ. Res. Econ. 17(2), 195-202.
12. Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health, 2010., accessed June 2010.
13. Cronbach, L.J., 1951. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16, 297-334.
14. Dehnen-Schmutz, K., Touza, J., Perrings, C., Williamson, M., 2007. A century of the ornamental plant trade and its impact on invasion success. Diversity Distrib. 13, 527-534.
15. Executive Order 13112., 1999. Fed. Register 64(25, February 8), 1683-6186.
16. Fox, A.M., Gordon, D.R., Stocker, R.K., 2003. Challenges of reaching consensus on assessing which non-native plants are invasive in natural areas. HortScience 38(1), 11-13.
17. Gagliardi, J.A., Brand, M.H., 2007. Connecticut nursery and landscape industry preferences for solutions to the sale and use of invasive plants. HortTechnology 17(1), 39-45.
18. Galatowitsch, S.M., Anderson, N.O., Ascher, P.D., 1999. Invasiveness in wetland plants in temperate North America. Wetlands 19, 733-755.
19. Goodwin, B.J., McAllister, A.J., Fahrig, L., 1999. Predicting invasiveness of plant species based upon biological attributes. Conservation Biol. 13(2), 422-426.
20. Greene, W.H., 2002. Econometric Analysis, 5th ed. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ
21. Harrington, R.A., Kujawski, R., Ryan, H.P.D., 2003. Invasive plants and the green industry. J. Arboricult. 19, 42-48.
22. Harrison, G.W., Harstad, R.M., Rutstrom, E.E., 2004. Experimental methods and the elicitation of values. Exp. Econ. 7, 123-140.
23. Hobbs, J.E., Bailey, D., Dickinson, D.L., Haghiri, M., 2005. Traceability in the Canadian red meat sector: Do consumers care? Can. J. Agric. Econ. 53(1), 47-65.
24. Huffman, W.E., Shogren, J.F., Rousu, M., Tegene, A., 2003. Consumer willingness to pay for genetically modified food labels in a market with diverse information: Evidence from experimental auctions. J. Agric. Res. Econ. 28(3), 481-502.
25. Kagel, J., Levin, D., Harstad, R., 1987. Information impact and allocation rules in auctions with affiliated private values: A laboratory study. Econometrica 55(6), 1275-1304.
26. Kelley, K.M., Conklin, J.R., Sellmer, J.C., Bates, R.M., 2006. Invasive plant species: Results of a consumer awareness, knowledge and expectations survey conducted in Pennsylvania. J. Environ. Horticult. 24, 53-58.
27. King, A.A., Lenox, M.J., 2000. Industry self-regulation without sanctions: The chemical industry's responsible care program. Acad. Manage. J. 43(4), 698-716.
28. List, J., Lucking-Reilly, D., 2000. Demand reduction in multi-unit auctions: Evidence from a sportscard field experiment. Am. Econ. Rev. 90(4), 961-972.
29. Lusk, J.L., Feldkamp, T., Schroeder, T.C., 2004. Experimental auction procedure: Impact on valuation of quality differentiated goods. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 86, 389-405.
30. Lusk, J.L., Shogren, J.F., 2007. Experimental Auctions: Methods and Applications in Economic and Marketing Research. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK
31. Mack, R.N. 2003. Plant naturalizations and invasions in the Eastern United States: 1634-1860. Ann. Missouri Botanical Garden 90(1), 77-90.
32. Mack, R.N., 2005. Predicting the identity of plant invaders: Future contributions from horticulture. HortScience 40(5), 1168-1174.
33. Mack, R.N., Erneberg, M., 2002. The United States naturalized flora: Largely the product of deliberate introductions. Ann. Missouri Botanical Garden 89(2), 176-189.
34. Melton, B.E., Huffman, W.E., Shogren, J.F., Fox, J.A., 1996. Consumer preferences for fresh food items with multiple quality attributes: Evidence from an experimental auction of pork chops. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 78, 916-923.
35. Milgrom, P.R., Weber, R.J., 1982. A theory of auctions and competitive bidding. Econometrica 50, 1089-1122.
36. Minnesota Nursery and Landscape Association, 2007., accessed June 2010.
37. MN Compass, 2010., accessed June 2010.
38. National Sustainable Agriculture Service, 1997. Purple loosestrife: Public enemy #1 on federal lands. ATTRA Interior Helper 1(2), 2.
39. Nimon, W., Beghin, J., 1999. Are eco-labels valuable? Evidence from the apparel industry. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 81(4), 801-811.
40. Pauly, P.J. 2007. Fruits and Plains: The Horticultural Transformation of America. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
41. Pemberton R.W., Liu, H., 2009. Marketing time predicts naturalization of horticultural plants. Ecology 90, 69-80.
42. Pietsch, G.M., Anderson, N.O., Li, P., 2009. Cold tolerance and short day acclimation in perennial Gaura coccinea and G. drummondii. Scientia Horticulturae 120, 418-425.
43. Pimentel, D., Lach, L. Zuniga, R., Morrison, D., 2000. Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous species in the United States. Bioscience 50(1), 53-65.
44. Randall, J.M., Marinelli, J., 1996. Invasive plants: Weeds of the global garden. Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Brooklyn, NY
45. Reichard, S.H., Hamilton, C.W., 1997. Predicting invasions of woody plants introduced into North America. Conservation Biol. 11, 193-203.
46. Reichard, S.H., White, P., 2001. Horticulture as a pathway of invasive plant introductions in the United States. Bioscience 51, 103-113.
47. Roosen, J., Fox, J.A., Hennessy, D.A., Schreiber, A., 1998. Consumers' valuation of insecticide use restrictions: An application to apples. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 23, 367-384.
48. Rozan, A., Stenger, A., Willinger, M., 2004. Willingness-to-pay for food safety: An experimental investigation of quality certification on bidding behaviour. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 31(4), 409-425.
49. Thompson, G.D., Kidwell, J., 1998. Explaining the choice of organic produce: Cosmetic defects, prices, and consumer preferences. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 80, 277-287.
50. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation Service, 2010. The PLANTS Database (). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA Accessed February 2010.
51. Veisten, K., 2007. Willingness to pay for eco-labeled wood furniture: Choice-based conjoint analysis versus open-ended contingent valuation. J. Forest Econ. 13(1), 29-48.
52. Vetter, H., Karantininis, K., 2002. Moral hazard, vertical integration, and the public monitoring of credence goods. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 29(2), 271-279.
53. Vickrey, W., 1961. Counterspeculation, auctions, and competitive sealed bids. J. Finance 16, 8-37.
54. Wessels, C.R., Johnson, R.J., Holger, D., 1999. Assessing consumer preferences for ecolabeled seafood: The influence of species, certifier, and household attributes. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 81, 1084-1089.
55. Yue, C., Behe, B.K., 2008. Estimating U.S. consumers' choice of floral retail outlets. HortScience 43(3), 764-769.
56. Yue, C., Alfnes, F., Jensen, H.H., 2009. Discounting spotted apples: Investigating consumers' willingness to accept cosmetic damage in an organic product. J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 14(1), 29-46.