Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:11:02.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predicting Willingness-to-Pay a Premium for Integrated Pest Management Produce: A Logistic Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Ramu Govindasamy ,
John Italia  and
Adesoji Adelaja
Ramu Govindasamy
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics at Rutgers University
John Italia
Affiliation:
Merrill Lynch USPC Strategic Marketing
Adesoji Adelaja
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics at Rutgers University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Pesticide residue has repeatedly been documented as a leading source of food safety concern among consumers. While many studies have presented aggregate, descriptive illustrations of consumer response to Integrated Pest Management (IPM), consumer willingness-to-pay a premium for IPM produce and the factors that determine such willingness have received relatively little research attention. Such information is critical in the marketing of IPM produce.

This study empirically evaluates the demographic characteristics that influence consumers to pay a premium for IPM grown produce. Results indicate that females, those with higher annual incomes, younger individuals, and those who frequently purchase organic produce are all more likely to pay a premium for IPM produce.

Type
Articles
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , October 2001 , pp. 151 - 159
Copyright
Copyright © 2001 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, Molly. 1993. Pesticides and Their Alternatives: Perspectives of New England Vegetable Growers. Summer Report. School of Nutrition, Tufts University, Medford, MA.Google Scholar
Burn, A., Coaker, T., and Jepson, P. 1987. Integrated Pest Management. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Burgess, R., Kovach, J., Petzoldt, C., Shelton, A., Tette, J. 1994. Results of IPM Marketing Survey. New York State IPM Program, NYS Dept. Ag. and Mkts., NYSAES Geneva, Cornell University, Fingerlakes Research, New York.Google Scholar
Buzby, Jean, Ready, Richard and Skees, Jerry. 1995. “Contingent Valuation in Food Policy Analysis: A Case Study of a Pesticide-Residue Risk Reduction.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics. 27: 613–25.Google Scholar
Byrne, Patrick, Conrado Gempesaw, II, and Toensmeyer, Ulrich. 1991. “An Evaluation of Consumer Pesticide Residue Concerns and Risk Perceptions.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, 23(2).Google Scholar
Cate, James and Hinkle, Maureen. 1994. Integrated Pest Management: The Path of a Paradigm. The National Audubon Society, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Dunlap, Riley, and Beus, Curtis. 1992. “Understanding Public Concerns about Pesticides: An Empirical Examination.” The Journal of Consumer Affairs 26(2): 418–38.Google Scholar
Elnagheeb, A. and Jordan, J. 1990. “Public Perceptions of Food Safety: The Case of Pesticide Residues on Fresh Produce,” Paper #FS-90-20. Dept. of Agricultural Economics, Georgia Experiment Station.Google Scholar
Eom, Young Sook. 1994. “Pesticide Residue Risk and Food Safety Valuation: A Random Utility Approach.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76: 760–771, (November 1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez-Corneho, Jorge, Douglas Beach, E., and Huang, Wen-Yuan. 1994. The Adoption of IPM Techniques By Vegetable Growers in Florida, Michigan, and Texas.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 26(1): 158–72.Google Scholar
Govindasamy, Ramu and Italia, John. 1997. “Consumer Response to Integrated Pest Management and Organic Agriculture: An Econometric Analysis.” New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Rutgers University, #P-02137-2-97, November, 1997.Google Scholar
Govindasamy, Ramu and Italia, John. 1998a. “Predicting Consumer Risk Perceptions Toward Pesticide Residue: A Logistic Analysis.” Applied Economic Letters (5): 793–796.Google Scholar
Govindasamy, Ramu and Italia, John. 1998b. “A Willingness-to-Purchase Comparison of Integrated Pest Management and Conventional Produce.” Agribusiness: An International Journal 4(5): 403–414.Google Scholar
Govindasamy, Ramu, Italia, John and Adelaja, Adesoji. 1998. “Predicting Consumer Risk Aversions to Synthetic Pesticide Residues: A Logistic Analysis.” New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Rutgers University, #P-02137-1-98, January, 1998.Google Scholar
Govindasamy, Ramu, Italia, John and Liptak, Claire. 1997. “Quality of Agricultural Produce: Consumer Preferences and Perceptions.” New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Rutgers University, #P-02137-1-97.Google Scholar
Greene, Catherine. 1991. “Environmental Concern Sparks Renewed Interest in IPM.” Food Review. April-June.Google Scholar
Grobe, Deana and Douthitt, Robin. 1995. “Consumer Acceptance of Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone: Interplay Between Beliefs and Perceived Risks.” The Journal of Consumer Affairs 29(1): 128–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gujarati, Damodar. 1992. Essentials of Econometrics. McGraw Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Hamilton, George. 1995. “Comparison of Eggplant Grown Under Conventional and Biological Control Intensive Pest Management Conditions in New Jersey.” Rutgers Cooperative Extension, NJ.Google Scholar
Hoban, T. and Woodrum, E. (1990). “Public Attitudes Toward Agricultural Biotechnology.” Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work, North Carolina State University, Raleigh.Google Scholar
Hollingsworth, Craig, Pascall, M., Cohen, Nancy and Coli, William. 1993. “Support in New England for Certification and Labeling of Produce Grown using Integrated Pest Management.” American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 8(2): 78–84.Google Scholar
Huang, Chung. 1993. “A Simultaneous System Approach for Estimation of Consumer Risk Perceptions, Attitudes, and Willingness to Pay for Residue-Free Produce.” Selected paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association Meeting, Orlando, Florida.Google Scholar
Jussaume, R. and Judson, D. 1992. “Public Perceptions About Food Safety in the United States and Japan.” Rural Society 57(2): 235–49.Google Scholar
Misra, S., Huang, C. and Ott, S. 1991. “Consumer Preferences for Certified Pesticide Residue Free Fresh Produce and Willingness to Pay for Testing and Certification.” Paper presented at the Southern Agricultural Economics Association meeting, Fort Worth, TX.Google Scholar
Misra, Sukant, Huang, Chung, and Ott, Stephen. 1991. “Consumer Willingness to Pay for Pesticide Free Fresh Produce.” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 16(2): 218–227.Google Scholar
Morris, Patricia McGrath, Rosenfeld, Allen, and Bellinger, Mark. 1993. What Americans Think About Agrichemicals. Public Voice for Food and Health Policy, Washington DC.Google Scholar
NFO Research, Inc. 1989. Results of Pesticide Attitude Study Conducted for the National Agricultural Chemicals Association by NFO Research, Inc., Toledo, Ohio.Google Scholar
Ott, Stephen, Huang, Chung, and Misra, Sukant. 1991. “Consumers’ Perceptions of Risks from Pesticide Residues and Demand for Certification of Residue-Free Produce.” Economics of Food Safety, Julie, Caswell, ed. Elsevier, New York, pp. 175–88.Google Scholar
Prostak, Donald. What is IPM? Rutgers Cooperative Extension Fact Sheet, Rutgers University, NJ.Google Scholar
Pindyck, Robert and Rubinfeld, Daniel. 1991. Econometric Models & Economic Forcasts. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Robson, Mark, Hamilton, George, Samulis, Raymond and Prostko, Eric. 1995. “An Assessment of Regulatory, Market and Financial Obstacles to Integrated Pest Management in New Jersey.” Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Rutgers University, NJ. Google Scholar
Sauber, Colleen M. 1994. The Meaning of the Word Organic. Harvard Health Letter 19(4): 4.Google Scholar
Underhill, Sheila and Figueroa, Enrique. 1996. “Consumer Preferences for Non-Conventionally Grown Produce.” Journal of Food Distribution Research 27(2): 56–66.Google Scholar
Van Ravenswaay, Eileen and Hoehn, John. 1991. “The Impact of Health Risk Information on Food Demand: A Case Study of Alar and Apples.” Economics of Food Safety Caswell, Julie, ed. Elsevier, New York.Google Scholar
Weaver, Robert, Evans, David and Luloff, A.E. 1989. “Pesticide Use in Tomato Production: Consumer Concerns and Willingness to Pay.” Agribusiness 8(2): 131–41.Google Scholar