Feed them facts: Value perceptions and consumer use of sustainability-related product information

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 510-519

  Meise, Jan Niklas ^a   Rudolph, Thomas ^a   Kenning, Peter ^b   Phillips, Diane M ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ST GALLEN   (Switzerland)

^b ZEPPELIN UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c SAINT JOSEPH S UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice models; Decision making; Pricing; Retailing; Sustainability; Value differentiation

Indexed keywords

CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; RETAILING; SUSTAINABILITY; TRADE-OFF;

EID: 84901452006     PISSN: 09696989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.03.013     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Alpert M.I. Identification of determinant attributes: a comparison of methods. J. Mark. Res. 1971, 8(2):184-191.
2. Auger P., Burke P., Devinney T.M., Louviere J.J. What will consumers pay for social product features?. J. Bus. Ethics 2003, 42(3):281-304.
3. Auger P., Devinney T.M., Louviere J.J., Burke P.F. Do social product features have value to consumers?. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2008, 25(3):183-191.
4. Batsell R., Louviere J. Experimental analysis of choice. Mark. Lett. 1991, 2(3):199-214.
5. Baumgartner B., Steiner W.J. Are consumers heterogeneous in their preferences for odd and even prices? Findings from a choice-based conjoint study. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2007, 24(4):312-323.
6. Bernard J.C., Gifford K. Consumer willingness to pay premiums for non-GM and organic foods. Consum. Interests Annu. 2006, 52:343-354.
7. Binnekamp M., Ingenbleek P. Do 'good' food products make others look 'bad'?. Br. Food J. 2008, 110(9):843-864.
8. Bjorner T.B., Hansen L.G., Russell C.S. Environmental labelling and consumers[U+05F3] choice - an empirical analysis of the effect of the Nordic Swan. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2004, 47(3):411-434.
9. Bretton-Clark, 1989. Conjoint LINMAP, Morristown, New Jersey.
10. Brom F. Food, consumer concerns, and trust: food ethics for a globalizing market. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2000, 12(2):127-139.
11. Brundtland Report, 1987. Report of the world commission on environment and development: our common future, transmitted to the United Nations General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427.
12. Brynjolfsson E., Hu Y.J., Rahman M.S. Competing in the Age of Omnichannel Retailing. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2013, 54(4):22-29.
13. Carrigan M., Attalla A. The myth of the ethical consumer - do ethics matter in purchase behaviour?. J. Consum. Mark. 2001, 18(7):560-577.
14. Chang C.A., Burke R.R. Consumer choice of retail shopping aids. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2007, 14:339-346.
15. Crane A., Matten D. Business ethics: a European perspective. Managing Corporate Citizenship and Sustainability in the Age of Globalization 2004, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
16. De Boer J. Sustainability labelling schemes: the logic of their claims and their functions for stakeholders. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2003, 12(4):254-264.
17. De Pelsmacher P., Driesen L., Rayp G. Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness to pay for Fair-Trade coffee. J. Consum. Aff. 2005, 39(2):363-385.
18. Devinney T.M., Auger P., Eckhardt G., Birtchnell T. The other CSR. Stanf. Soc. Innov. Rev. 2006, 4(3):30-37.
19. Diehl K., Kornish L.J., Lynch J.G. Smart agents: when lower search costs for quality information increase price sensitivity. J. Consum. Res. 2003, 30(6):56-71.
20. Ding M., Grewal R., Liechty J. Incentive-aligned conjoint analysis. J. Mark. Res. 2005, 42(1):67-82.
21. Elrod, T., Chrzan, K., 2007. The value of extent-of-preference information in choice-based conjoint analysis, in: Gustafsson, A., Herrmann, A., Huber, F. (Eds.), Conjoint Measurement: Methods and Applications, pp. 133-144.
22. Emerson, J., Esty, D.C., Hsu, A., 2012. The Environmental Performance Index, Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy, Yale University, epi.yale.edu. (accessed 30.4.12).
23. Ganesan S., George M., Jap S., Palmatier R., Weitz B. Supply chain management and retailer performance: emerging trends, issues, and implications for research and practice. J. Retail. 2009, 85(1):84-94.
24. Grankvist G., Dahistrand U., Biel A. The impact of environmental labelling on consumer preference: negative vs. positive labels. J. Consum. Policy 2004, 27(2):213-230.
25. Green P.E., Srinivasan V. Conjoint analysis in consumer research: issues and outlook. J. Consum. Res. 1978, 5(2):103-123.
26. Grunert K.G. Current issues in the understanding of consumer food choice. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2002, 13(8):275-285.
27. Gupta S., Pirsch J. The influence of a retailer[U+05F3]s corporate social responsibility program on re-conceptualizing store image. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2008, 15(6):516-526.
28. Houghton J., Rowe G., Frewer L., Van Kleef E., Chryssochoidis G., Kehagia O., Korzen-Bohr S., Lassen J., Pfenning U., Strada A. The quality of food risk management in Europe: perspectives and priorities. Food Policy 2008, 33:13-26.
29. Hu W., Veeman M.M., Adamowicz W.L. Labelling genetically modified food: heterogeneous consumer preferences and the value of information. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 2005, 53:83-102.
30. Huffman C., Kahn B.E. Variety for sale: mass customization or mass confusion?. J. Retail. 1998, 74(Winter):491-513.
31. Islam T., Louviere J.J., Burke P.F. Modeling the effects of including/excluding attributes in choice experiments on systematic and random components. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2007, 24(4):289-300.
32. Janiszewski C., Silk T., Cooke A. Different scales for different frames: the role of subjective scales and experience in explaining attribute-framing effects. J. Consum. Res. 2003, 30(3):311-325.
33. Jedidi, K., Jagpal, S., 2009. Willingness to pay: measurement and managerial implications, in: Rao, V.R. (Ed.), Handbook of Pricing Research in Marketing, pp. 37-60.
34. Johnson R.D., Levin I.P. More than meets the eye: the effect of missing information on purchase evaluations. J. Consum. Res. 1985, 12(2):169-177.
35. Karniouchina E., Moore W., van der Rhee B., Verma R. Issues in the use of ratings-based versus choice-based conjoint analysis in operations management research. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2009, 197(1):340-348.
36. Kaul A., Wittink D.R. Empirical generalizations about the impact of advertising on price sensitivity and price. Mark. Sci. 1995, 14(3):G151-G160.
37. Kivetz R., Simonson I. The effects of incomplete information on consumer choice. J. Mark. Res. 2000, 37(4):427-448.
38. La Via G., Nucifora A. The determinants of the price mark-up for organic fruit and vegetable products in the European Union. Br. Food J. 2002, 104(3-5):319-336.
39. Loureiro M.L., Hine S.E. Discovering niche markets: a comparison of consumer willingness to pay for local (Colorado Grown), organic, and GMO-free products. J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 2002, 34(3):477-487.
40. Louviere J.J., Islam T. A comparison of importance weights and willingness-to-pay measures derived from choice-based conjoint, constant sum scales and best-worst scaling. J. Bus. Res. 2008, 61(9):903-911.
41. Louviere J.J., Islam T., Wasi N., Street D., Burgess L. Designing discrete choice experiments: do optimal designs come at a price?. J. Consum. Res. 2008, 35(8):360-375.
42. Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A., Swait, J.D., 2000. Stated choice methods: analysis and applications.
43. Lusk J.L., Daniel M.S., Mark D.R., Lusk C.L. Alternative calibration and auction institutions for predicting consumer willingness to pay for nongenetically modified corn chips. J. Agric. Res. Econ. 2001, 26(1):40-57.
44. Lynch J.G., Ariely D. Wine online: search costs affect competition on price, quality, and distribution. Mark. Sci. 2000, 19(1):83-103.
45. Mariani, D., 2011. Traders short change Swiss consumers, July 14 (accessed 27.4.12). http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/specials/swiss_franc/Traders_short_change_Swiss_consumers.html?cid=30678492.
46. Marucheck A., Greis N., Mena C., Cai L. Product safety and security in the global supply chain: issues, challenges and research opportunities. J. Oper. Manag. 2011, 29:707-720.
47. McEachern M., Schroder M. Integrating the voice of the consumer within the value chain: a focus on value-based labelling communications in the fresh-meat sector. J. Consum. Mark. 2004, 21(7):497-509.
48. McGoldrick P.J., Freestone O.M. Ethical product premiums: antecedents and extent of consumers[U+05F3] willingness to pay. Int. Rev. Retail, Distrib. Consum. Res. 2008, 18(2):185-201.
49. McGregor S.L.T. Understanding consumers[U+05F3] moral consciousness. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2006, 30(2):164-178.
50. Meyer R.J. A mode of multiattribute judgements under uncertainty and informational constraints. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18(11):428-441.
51. Mitra A., Lynch J.G. Toward a reconciliation of market power and information theories of advertising effects and price elasticity. J. Mark. 1995, 21(3):644-659.
52. Mittal B. A comparative analysis of four scales of consumer involvement. Psychol. Mark. 1995, 12(7):663.
53. Moore W.L. A cross-validity comparison of rating-based and choice-based conjoint analysis models. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2004, 21(3):299-312.
54. Morschett D., Rudolph T., Bauer J., Donath A., Meise N. Retailing in Switzerland - players, strategies and developments. Eur. Retail Res. 2009, 23(2):163-190.
55. Napolitano F., Braghieri A., Piasentier E., Favotto S., Naspetti S., Zanoli R. Effect of information about organic production on beef liking and consumer willingness to pay. Food Qual. Prefer. 2010, 21:207-212.
56. Nilsson H., Tuncer B., Thidell A. The use of eco-labelling like initiatives on food products to promote quality assurance - is there enough credibility?. J. Clean. Prod. 2004, 12(5):517-526.
57. O'Donovan P., McCarthy M. Irish consumer preference for organic meat. Br. Food J. 2002, 104(3):353-370.
58. Padel S., Foster C. Exploring the gap between attitudes and behaviour: understanding why consumers buy or do not buy organic food. Br. Food J. 2005, 107(8):606.
59. Perrini F., Castaldo S., Misani N., Tencati A. The impact of corporate social responsibility associations on trust in organic products marketed by mainstream retailers: a study of Italian consumers. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2010, 19(8):512-526.
60. Radas S., Teisl M., Roe B. An open mind wants more: opinion strength and the desire for genetically modified food labelling policy. J. Consum. Aff. 2008, 42(3):335-361.
61. Reisch L., Eberle U., Lorek S. Sustainable food consumption: an overview of contemporary issues and policies. Sustain.: Sci., Pract., Policy 2013, 9(2):7-25.
62. Roest H., Rindfleisch A. The influence of quality cues and typicality cues on restaurant purchase intention. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2010, 17:10-18.
63. Rokka J., Uusitalo L. Preference for green packaging in consumer product choices "Do consumers care?". Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2008, 32(5):516-525.
64. Rolfe J., Bennett J. The impact of offering two versus three alternatives in choice modelling experiments. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68(4):1140-1148.
65. Roosen J., Fox J.A., Hennessy D.A., Schreiber A. Consumers[U+05F3] valuation of insecticide use restrictions: an application to apples. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 1998, 23(2):367-384.
66. Roth A., Tsay A., Pullman M., Gray J. Unraveling the food supply chain: strategic insights from China and the 2007 recalls. J. Supply Chain Manag. 2008, 44(1):22-39.
67. Russo J.E. The value of unit price information. J. Mark. Res. 1977, 14(5):193-201.
68. Sethuraman R., Kerin R.A., Cron W.L. A field study comparing online and offline data collection methods for identifying product attribute preferences using conjoint analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2005, 58(5):602-610.
69. Shaw D.S., Clarke I. Culture, consumption and choice: towards a conceptual relationship. J. Consum. Stud. Home Econ. 1998, 22(3):163-168.
70. Slovic P., MacPhillamy D. Dimensional commensurability and cue utilization in comparative measurement. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 1974, 11(4):172-194.
71. Stratton J.P., Werner M.J. Consumer behavior analysis of Fair Trade Coffee: evidence from field research. Psychol. Rec. 2013, 63:363-374.
72. Tellis G.J., Gaeth G.J. Best value, price-seeking, and price aversion: the impact of information and learning on consumer choices. J. Mark. 1990, 54(4):34-45.
73. Train K. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation 2003, Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
74. Trudel R., Cotte J. Does it pay to be good?. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2009, 50(2):61-68.
75. Van Trijp H., Hoyer W., Inman J. Why switch? Product category-level explanations for true variety-seeking behavior. J. Mark. Res. 1996, 33(3):281-292.
76. Völckner F. The dual role of price: decomposing consumers[U+05F3] reactions to price. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2008, 36(3):359-377.