Us and german consumer preferences for ground beef packaged under a modified atmosphere - different regulations, different behaviour?

Food Policy

Volumn 40, Issue , 2013, Pages 109-118

  Grebitus, Carola ^a   Jensen, Helen H ^b   Roosen, Jutta ^c  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c TUM SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT   (Germany)

Author keywords

Carbon monoxide; Food regulation; Food safety; Information provision; Modified atmosphere packaging; New technology; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

CARBON MONOXIDE; CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; FOOD PROCESSING; FOOD SAFETY; MEAT; TECHNOLOGY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

GERMANY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84876298965     PISSN: 03069192     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.02.005     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Aaslyng M.D., Torngren M.A., Madsen N.T. Scandinavian consumer preference for beef steaks packed with or without oxygen. Meat Science 2010, 85:519-524.
2. Alfnes, F., Rickertsen, K., 2011. Non-market valuation: experimental methods. In: Lusk, J.L., Roosen, J., Shogren, J., (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Food Consumption and Policy. Oxford Handbooks in Economics.
3. Alfnes F., Guttormsen A.G., Steine G., Kolstad K. Consumers' willingness to pay for the colour of salmon: a choice experiment with real economic incentives. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2006, 884:1050-1061.
4. Allende A., Luo Y., McEvoy J.L., Artés F., Wang C.Y. Microbial and quality changes in minimally processed baby spinach leaves stored under super atmospheric oxygen and modified atmosphere conditions. Postharvest Biology and Technology 2004, 33:51-59.
5. Baker G.A., Burnham T.A. Consumer response to genetically modified foods: market segment analysis and implications for producers and policy makers. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 2001, 26:387-403.
6. Bjerklie, S., 2007. A mystery, still. Researchers Have Many Questions But Few Answers for This Year's Spike in E. coli Outbreaks. Meat and Poultry, December 1, 2007; Section: Front Page; Page: 30 (viewed September 2010). http://am1.sosland.com/Olive/ODE/meatpoultry/PrintComponentView.htm.
7. Brehm J.W. A Theory of Psychological Reactance 1966, Academic Press, New York.
8. Brooks J.C., Alvarado M., Stephens T.P., Kellermeier J.D., Tittor A.W., Miller M.F., Brashears M.M. The spoilage and safety characteristics of ground beef packaged in traditional and modified atmosphere packages. Journal of Food Protection 2008, 712:293-301.
9. CFIA - Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Chapter 2-Basic Labeling Requirements, 2007 (viewed 11.11.08). http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/labeti/guide/ch2e.shtml.
10. Cliffe-Byrnes V., O'Beirne D. Effects of chlorine experiment and packaging on the quality and shelf-life of modified atmosphere MA packaged coleslaw mix. Food Control 2005, 16:707-716.
11. Daly A., Hess S., de Jong G. Calculating errors for measures derived from choice modelling estimates. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 2012, (February):333-341.
12. EC, 2001: Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on the Use of Carbon Monoxide as Component of Packaging Gases in Modified Atmosphere Packaging For Fresh Meat Adopted On 13 December 2001. European Commission Health & Consumer Protection Directorate - General Directorate C - Scientific Opinions C2 - Management of scientific committees; scientific co-operation and networks.
13. Directive 95/2/EWG, 1995. ABl. L 61 of March 18 1995.
14. Directive EG 94/54, 1995. ABl L 300 of November 23 1994.
15. FAO 2001: Packing Fish in a Modified Atmosphere (viewed 19.11.08). http://www.fao.org/wairdocs/tan/x5956e/x5956e01.htm#What%20is%20modified%20atmosphere%20packing.
16. FDA U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2002. 2/21/2002 GRAS Notice No. 000083 (26.9.2006). http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~rdb/opa-g083.html.
17. FDA U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2004. 7/29/2004 GRAS Notice No. 000143 (26.9.2006). http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~rdb/opa-g143.html.
18. Gao Z., Schroeder T. Effects of additional quality attributes on consumer willingness to pay for food labels. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2009, 91:795-809.
19. Hajivassiliou, V., Ruud, P., 1994. Classical estimation methods for LDV models using simulation. In: Engle, R., McFadden, D. (Eds.), Handbook of Econometrics, Vol. 4, Elsevier, New York.
20. Jayas D.S., Jeyamkondan S. Modified atmosphere storage of grains meats fruits and vegetables. Biosystems Engineering 2002, 823:235-251.
21. Lee L., Fox J.A. On efficiency of methods of simulated moments and maximum Ssmulated likelihood estimation of discrete choice models. Econometric Theory 1992, 8:518-552.
22. Loureiro M.L., Umberger W.J. A choice experiment model for beef: what US consumer response tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labelling, and traceability. Food Policy 2007, 32:496-514.
23. Lusk J.L., Fox J.A. Value elicitation in retail and laboratory environments. Economics Letters 2003, 79:27-34.
24. Lusk J.L., House L.O., Valli C., Jaeger S.R., Moore M., Morrow J.L., Traill W.B. Effects 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 2004, 312:179-204.
25. McFadden, D., 1973. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka, P. (Ed.), Frontiers in Econometrics, Academic Press, New York.
26. McMillin K.W. Where is MAP going? A review and future potential of modified atmosphere packaging for meat. Meat Science 2008, 801:43-65.
27. Menapace, L., Colson, G., Grebitus, C., Facendola, M., 2008. Consumer preferences for extra virgin olive oil with COOL and GI labels in Canada. AgEcon Search. http://purl.umn.edu/6430.
28. Meyerhoff J., Liebe U. Status quo effect in choice experiments: empirical evidence on attitudes and choice task complexity. Land Economics 2009, 85:515-528.
29. New Zealand Food Safety Authority, 2008. Long-life Fresh Food in Modified Atmosphere Packaging (viewed 10.11.08).
30. Phillips C.A. Review: modified atmosphere packaging and its effects on the microbiological quality and safety of produce. International Journal of Food Science and Technology 1996, 31:463-479.
31. Revelt, D., Train, K., 1999. Customer-specific Taste Parameters and Mixed Logit. Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of California, Berkeley, USA.
32. Rocculi P., Romani S., Dalla Rosa M. Evaluation of physico-chemical parameters of minimally processed apples packed in non-conventional modified atmosphere. Food Research International 2004, 37:329-335.
33. Sørheim, O., Nissen, H., Aune, T., Nesbakken, T., 2001. Use of Carbon Monoxide in Retail Meat Packaging. Manuscript for IAAFSC, Indianapolis, 2001.
34. Skandamis P.N., Nychas G.-J.E. Preservation of fresh meat with active and modified atmosphere packaging conditions. International Journal of Food Microbiology 2002, 79:35-45.
35. Steenkamp, J.-B., 1989. Product Quality: An Investigation into the Concept and How It Is Perceived by Consumers. Van Gorcum, Assen/Maastricht, The Netherlands.
36. Train K.E. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation 2003, Cambridge, New York, USA.
37. USDA, 2008. Inspection Report U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General, Office of Inspections and Research. Food Safety and Inspection Service's Evaluation of the Carbon Monoxide-Based Modified Atmospheric Packaging under the Generally Recognized as Safe Regulatory Process. Report No. 24901-01-IR, March 2008.
38. Van Wezemael L., Ueland O., Verbeke W. European consumer response to packaging technologies for improved beef safety. Meat Science 2011, 891:45-51.
39. Viana E.S., Gomide L.A.M., Vanetti M.C.D. Effect of modified atmospheres on microbiological, colour and sensory properties of refrigerated pork. Meat Science 2005, 7144:696-705.
40. Zusatzstoffzulassungsverordnung (ZZulV) 1998. BGBl. I, of January 29 1998.