Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Regular Articles

Vol. 22 No. 3 (2020)

Consumers’ assessment of labelled and packaged fresh potato: Evidence from Experimental Auctions

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/ecag3-2020oa11046
Submitted
maggio 18, 2020
Published
2020-12-31

Abstract

Worldwide, the potato is the third more important crop, coming after wheat and rice. In Argentina, it is the horticultural product with the highest consumption in fresh state, but Argentine consumers know little to nothing about potatoes attributes.
The objective of this research is to identify the attributes that influence the assessment that consumers make of a potato with differentiated quality. Due to this, a Vickrey Second Price Experimental Auction took place in April 2017. The experiment involved 155 participants, who were students and employees of the School of Economic and Social Sciences of the National University of Mar del Plata. A Multiple Correspondence Analysis was applied based on the data of the bids and the survey carried out at the Auction.
The main results showed that the participants, after receiving information about the culinary aptitude of the differentiated potato and its production method – its lower content of agrochemicals –, were willing to pay a higher price for the product. Additionally, participants opted for a higher price of potato when it was presented in a labelled package. Likewise, an identify group of participants were shown to be willing to pay more for this differentiated food.

References

  1. Alfnes, F. (2007). Willingness to pay versus expected consumption value in Vickrey Auctions for new experience goods. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 89(4), 921-931, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8276.2007.01028.x.
  2. Balzarini, M.G., González, L., Tablada, M., Casanoves, F., Di Rienzo, J.A. & Robledo, C.W. (2017). Manual del Usuario InfoStat. Córdoba-Argentina: Brujas.
  3. Boccaletti, S. & Moro, M. (2000). Consumer willingness to pay for gm food products in Italy. AgBioForum., 3(4), 259-267.
  4. Buzby, J.C. & Skees, J.R. 1994. Consumers Want reduced Exposure to Pesticides on Food. Food Review, 17(2), 19-26.
  5. Cacace, J.M. & Huarte, M. (1996). Descubriendo la papa. Balcarce-Argentina: Fundación ArgenInta, inta.
  6. Canavari, M., Drichoutis, A.C., Lusk, J.L. & Nayga Jr., R.M. (2019). How to run an experimental auction: a review of recent advances. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 1-61, doi: 10.1093/erae/jbz038.
  7. Caswell, J.A. (2000). Analyzing quality and quality assurance (including labeling) for GMOs. AgBioForum, 3(4), 225-230. -- http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi: 10.1.1.876.965&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
  8. Colson, G. (2009). Improving nutrient content through genetic modification: evidence from experimental auctions on consumer acceptance and willingness to pay for intragenic foods. Tesis Doctor of Philosophy. Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 168p.
  9. Depositario, D.P., Nayga, R.M. Jr., Wu, X. & Laude, T.P. (2009). Should students be used as subjects in experimental auctions?. Economics Letters, 102, 122-124, doi: 10.1016/j.econlet.2008.11.018.
  10. Drichoutis, A.C., Lazaridis, P. & Nayga, R.M. (Jr.) (2006). Consumers’ use of nutritional labels: A review of research studies and issues. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 9, 93-118.
  11. Drichoutis, A.C., Lazaridis, P. & Nayga, R.M. (Jr.) (2009). On consumers’s valuation of nutrition information. Bulletin of Economic Research, 61(3), 223-247.
  12. Fox, J.A., Shogren, J.F., Hayes, D.J. & Kliebnstei, J.B. (1995). Experimental Auctions to measure willingness to pay for food safety. In: Caswel, J.A., Valuing Food Safety and Nutrition. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.
  13. Gil, J.M. & Soler, F. (2006). Knowledge and willingness to pay for organic food in Spain: evidence from Experimental Auctions. Food Economics - Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section C, 3(3-4), 109-124, doi: 10.1080/16507540601127656.
  14. Govindasamy, R. & Italia, J. (1997). Consumer response to integrated pest management and organic agriculture: an econometric analysis. State University of New Jersey - Rutgers Working Paper. P Series 36727.
  15. Grunert, K.G. (2011). Sustainability in the food sector: a consumer behaviour perspective. International Journal Food System Dynamics, 2(3), 207-218, doi: 10.18461/ijfsd.v2i3.232.
  16. Huarte, M., Huarte D., Lucca, F., Carmona, D., Mairosser, A. & Viglianchino, L. (2011). Protocolo para la producción integrada de papa consumo en el sudeste de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Balcarce-Argentina: EEA-INTA.
  17. Issanchou, S. (1996). Consumer expectations and perceptions of meat and meat products quality. Meat Science, 43(S), 5-19, doi: 10.1016/0309-1740(96)00051-4.
  18. Johnson, R.A. & Wichern, D.W. (2007). Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. USA: Prentice-Hall.
  19. Kajale, D.B. & Becker, T.C. (2014). Effects of information in young consumers’ willingness to pay for genetically modified food: Experimental Auction Analysis. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 53, 292-311, doi: 10.1080/03670244.2013.824433.
  20. Lacy, K. & Huffman, W.E. (2016). Consumer demand for potato products and willingness-to-pay for low-acrylamide, sulfite-free fresh potatoes and dices: evidence from lab auctions. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 41(1), 116-137, doi: 10.1007/s12230-017-9577-1.
  21. Loureiro, M.L. & Hine, S. (2001). Discovering niche markets: a comparison of consumer willingness to pay for a local (Colorado-grown), organic, and GMO-free product. American Agricultural Economics Association Meetings, 24p.
  22. Lupín, B., Rodríguez, E.M.M. & Lacaze, V. (2010). Aspectos valorados en el consumo de un alimento funcional: El potencial de la papa fresca obtenida bajo el sistema de producción integrada. 41º Reunión Anual de la Asociación Argentina de Economía Agraria, Argentina, october 2010.
  23. Lusk, J.L., Feldkamp, T. & Schroeder, T.C. (2004). Experimental Auction Procedure: impact on valuation of quality differentiated goods. American Journal Agricultural Economics, 86(2), 389-405, doi: 10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00586.x.
  24. Lusk, J.L. & Shogren, J.F. (2007). Experimental Auctions. methods and applications in economic and marketing research. UK: Cambridge University Press.
  25. Martinez-Carrasco Martinez, L., Vidal, F., Poole, N. (2006). Evaluación de preferencias hacia las mandarinas en el mercado británico. Aplicación de las Subastas Vickrey. Economía Agraria y Recursos Naturales, 6(11), 157-175, doi: 10.22004/ag.econ.8004.
  26. Martinez-Carrasco Martinez, L., Brugarolas Molla Bauza, M., Martinez Poveda, A., Espinosa Ferrer, D. & Fresquet, E. (2012). Disposición a pagar por tomates mejorados genéticamente. Aplicación de una subasta experimental. Revista Española de Estudios Agrosociales y Pesqueros, 233, 101-128.
  27. Nalley, L., Hudson, D. & Parkhurst, G. (2004). The impacts of taste, location of origin,and health information on market demand for sweet potatoes. Department of Agricultural Economics-Mississippi State University. Research Report 2004-001.
  28. Nalley, L., Hudson, D. & Parkhurst, G. (2006). Consistency of Consumer Valuation Under Different Information Sets: An Experimental Auction with Sweet Potatoes. Journal of Food Distribution Research, 37(3), 1-12.
  29. Nayga Jr., R.M. (1996). Sociodemographic influences consumer concern for food safety: the case of irradiation, antibiotics, hormones and pesticides. Review of Agricultural Economics, 18(3), 467-475.
  30. Nayga Jr., R.M. (2000). Nutrition knowledge, gender, and food label use. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 341, 97-112.
  31. Napolitano, G., Senesi, S., Dulce, E., Inchausti, M. & Tagliacozzo, R. (2011). Estudio de calidad y competitividad del agronegocio de la papa. Informe Final. Alimentos Argentinos, Ministerio de Agroindustria-Presidencia de la Nación. -- http://www.alimentosargentinos.gob.ar/contenido/procal/estudios/06_AgrNegPapa/AgronegocioPapa_2011_Dic.pdf.
  32. Restrepo-Betancurt, L.F., Rodríguez-Espinosa, H. & Valencia, D. (2016). Caracterización del consumo de pescado y mariscos en población universitaria de la ciudad de Medellín-Colombia. Rev. Universidad y Salud, 18(2), 257-265. doi: 10.22267/rus.161802.36.
  33. Rodríguez, E.M.M., Lupín, B. & González, J. (2015). Willingness to pay for a differentiated potato applying a choice modelling experiment by socioeconomics levels of Argentinean consumers. 29 International Conference of Agricultural Economists, Milan [ita], August 8-14, 2015. -- http://nulan.mdp.edu.ar/2301/.
  34. Rodriguez, J. (2018). Valoración de los atributos de una papa diferenciada: aplicación del Método Subasta Experimental (Master’s Thesis). FCA-UNMdP, Mar del Plata-Argentina.
  35. Rodriguez, J., Rodríguez, E.M. & Lupín, B. (2018). A Consumers’ valuation of Frital inta: An empirical Research that applies the Experimental Auction Method. 10th World Potato Congress-XXVIII Congreso de la Asociación Latinoamericana de la Papa (alap 2018). Cuzco-Perú. -- http://nulan.mdp.edu.ar/2904/1/rodriguez-etal-2018.pdf.
  36. Roosen, J., Fox, J.A., Hennessy, D.A. & Schreiber, A. (1998). Consumers’ valuation of insecticide use restrictions: an application to apples. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 23(2), 367-384.
  37. Shogren, J.F., Margolias, M., Koo, C. & List, J.A. (2001). A Random nth-Price Auction. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 46, 409-421, doi: 10.1016/s0167-2681(01)00165-2.
  38. Steenkamp, J.B. (1990). Conceptual model of the quality perception process. Journal of Business Research, 21(4), 309-333.
  39. Strzok, J.L. & Huffman, W. E. (2015). Willingness to Pay for Organic Food Products and Organic Purity: Experimental Evidence. AgBioForum, 18(3), 345-353, doi: 10.31274/etd-180810-1292.
  40. Thorne, F., Loughran, D., Fox, S., Mullins, E. & Wallace, M. (2014). Consumer willingness to pay for genetically modified potatoes in Ireland: an experimental auction approach. 88th Annual Conference of the Agricultural Economics Society, AgroParisTech, Paris, France. Abril 2014. En CD.
  41. Vecchio, R., Van Loo, E.J. & Annunziata, A. (2016). Consumers’ willingness to pay for conventional, organic and functional yogurt: evidence from Experimental Auctions. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 40, 368-378, doi: 10.1111/ijcs.12264.
  42. Vickrey, W. (1961). Counter speculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders. Journal of Finance, 16(1), 8-37, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1961.tb02789.x.
  43. Villano, R., Chang, H., Kewa, J. & Irving, D. 2016. Factors affecting consumers’ willingness to pay for good quality sweetpotato in Papúa New Guinea. Australasian Agribusiness Review, 24(3).
  44. Zhang, K.M. & Vickers, Z. (2014). The order of tasting and information presentation in an experimental auction matters. Journal of Food Quality and Preference, 36, 12-19, doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.02.008.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...