Effects of Information on Young Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Food: Experimental Auction Analysis

REFERENCES

• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anand, A., R. C. Mittelhammer, and J. J. McCluskey. 2007. Consumer respnse to infroamtion and second-generation genetically modified food in India. Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Oragnization 5 (1): 8.
   Google Scholar
• Batrinou, A. M., E. Dimitriou, D. Liatsos, and V. Pletsa. 2005. Genetically modified foods: The effect of information. Nutrition & Food Science 35 (3): 148–155.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, U. 1992. Risk society—Towards a new modernity. London and New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Bernard, J. C., C. Zhang, and K. Gifford. 2006. An experimental investigation of consumer willingness to pay for non-GM foods when an organic option is present. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 35 (2): 374–385.
   Google Scholar
• Colson, G., and W. Huffman. 2009. Consumers’ willingness to pay for new genetically modified food products: Evidence from experimental auctions of intragenic and transgenic foods. Paper presented at the International Association of Agricultural Economists’ 2009 Conference, August 16–22, Beijing.
   Google Scholar
• Curtis K. R., J. J. McCluskey, and T. Wahl. 2004. Consumer acceptance of genetically modified food products in the developing world. Agbioforum 7 (1-2): 70–75.
   Google Scholar
• Dannenberg, A., S. Scatasta, and B. Sturm. 2008. Does mandatory labeling of genetically modified food grant consumers the right to know? Evidence from an economic experiment. Center for European Economic Research (ZEW) No. 08–29. Mannheim, Germany: Center for European Economic Research (ZEW).
   Google Scholar
• Depositario, D. P. T., R. M. Nayag, X. Wu, and T. P. Laude. 2009a. Effects of information on consumers’ willingness to pay for golden rice. Asian Economic Journal 23 (4): 457–476.
   Google Scholar
• Depositario, D. P. T., R. M. Nayag, X. Wu, and T. P. Laude. 2009b. Should students be used as subjects in experimental auctions? Economics Letters 102 (2): 122–124.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishbein, M. 1963. An investigation of the relationships between beliefs about an object and the attitude toward that object. Human Relations 16 (3): 233–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, J. A., D. J. Hayes, and J. F. Shogren. 2002. Consumer preferences for food irradiation: How favorable and unfavorable descriptions affect preferences for irradiated pork in experimental auctions. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 24 (1): 75–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frewer, L. J., C. Howard, and R. Shepherd. 1998. The importance of initial attitudes on responses to communication about genetic engineering in food production. Agriculture and Human Values 15 (1): 15–30.
   Google Scholar
• González, C., N. Johnson, and M. Qaim. 2009. Consumer acceptance of second-generation GM foods: The case of biofortified cassava in the north-east of Brazil. Journal of Agricultural Economics 60 (3): 604–624.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gruere, G. P., and S. R. Rao. 2007. A review of international labeling policies of genetically modified food to evaluate India’s proposed rule. AgBioForum 10 (1): 51–64.
   Google Scholar
• Guivant, J. 2006. Transgene and public perception of science in Brazil. [In Portuguese.] Ambiente and Sociedad 9 (1): 81–103.
   Google Scholar
• Hallman, W. K., W. C. Hebden, H. L. Aquino, C. L. Cuite, and J. T. Lang. 2003. Public perception of genetically modified foods: A national study of American knowledge and opinion. New Brunswick, NJ: Food Policy Institute, Rutgers University.
   Google Scholar
• Harstad, R. M. 2000. Dominant strategy adoption and bidders’ experience with pricing rules. Experimental Economics 3 (3): 261–280.
   Google Scholar
• Hu, W., F. Zhong, and Y. Ding. 2006. Actual media reports on GM foods and Chinese consumers’ willingness to pay for GM soybean oil. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 31 (02): 326–390.
   Google Scholar
• Huffman, W. E., M. Rousu, J. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2006. The effects of prior beliefs and learning on consumers’ acceptance of genetically modified foods. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 63 (1): 193–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, C. 2009. Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2009. ISAAA Brief 41. Ithaca, NY: ISAAA.
   Google Scholar
• Kagel, J. 1995. Auctions: A survey of experimental research. Handbook of experimental economics, ed. J. Kagel and A. Roth, 501–585. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, J. L. Knetsch, and R. H. Thaler. 1990. Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase Theorem. Journal of Political Economy 98 (6): 1325–1348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karni, E., and Z. Safra. 1986. Dynamic consistency: Revelations in auctions and structure of preferences. Review of Economic Studies 56 (3): 421–434.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knetsch, J. L., F. F. Tang, and R. H. Thaler. 2001. The endowment effect and repeated market trials: Is the Vickrey auction demand revealing? Experimental Economics 4 (3): 257–269.
   Google Scholar
• Kwieciński, J. 2009. Genetically modified abominations? EMBO 10:1187–1190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Q., R. Kynda, J. Curtis, J. McCluskey, and T. I. Wahl. 2002. Consumer attitudes toward genetically modified foods in Beijing, China. AgBioForum 5 (4): 145–152.
   Google Scholar
• Li, Q., J. J. McCluskey, and T. I. Wahl. 2004. Effects of information on consumers’ willingness to pay for GM-corn-fed beef. Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization 2 (2): 9
   Google Scholar
• Lusk, J. L. 2003. Using experimental auctions for marketing applications: A discussion. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 35 (2): 349–360.
   Google Scholar
• Lusk, J. L. M. Daniel, D. Mark, and C. Lusk, C. 2001. Alternative calibration and auction institutions for predicting consumer willingness to pay for non-genetically modified corn chips. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 26 (1): 40–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lusk, J. L., T. Feldkamp, and T. C. Schroeder. 2004. Experimental auction procedure: Impact on valuation of quality differentiated goods. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86 (2): 389–405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lusk, J. L., L. O. House, C. Valli, S. R. Jager, M. Moore, J. L. Morrow, and W. B. Traill. 2004. Effect of information about benefits of biotechnology on consumer acceptance of genetically modified food: evidence from experimental auction in the United States, England and France. European Review of Agricultural Economics 31 (2): 28–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinez-Poveda, A., M. Brugarolas, L. Martinez-Carrasco, and F. J. D. Campo. 2005. Effect of the information on the intention of GM food consumption. Paper prepared for presentation at the 99th seminar of the European Association of Agricultural Economics (EAAE), August 24–27, Copenhagen.
   Google Scholar
• Martinez-Poveda, A., M. B. Molla-Bauza, L. M. Martinez, F. J. D. C. Gomis, and L. M. C. Martinez. 2009. Consumer-perceived risk model for the introduction of genetically modified food in Spain. Food Policy 34 (6): 519–528.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAfee, R. P., and J. McMillan. 1987. Auctions and bidding. Journal of Economic Literature 25 (2): 699–738.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moon, W., and S. K. Balasubramanian. 2001. A multi-attribute model of public acceptance of genetically modified organisms. Paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association 2001 Annual Meeting, August 5–8, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Parkhurst, G., J. F. Shogren, and D. L. Dickinson. 2004. Negative values in Vickrey auctions. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86 (1): 222–235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips, P.W. B., and D. Corkindale. 2002. Marketing GM foods: The way forward. AgBioForum 5 (3): 113–121.
   Google Scholar
• Rommens, C. M. 2010. Barriers and paths to market for genetically engineered crops. Plant Biotechnology Journal 8 (2): 101–111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rousu, M., W. E. Huffman, J. F. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2004. Are United States consumers tolerant of genetically modified foods? Review of Agricultural Economics 26:19–31.
   Google Scholar
• Rousu, M., W. E. Huffman, J. F. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2007. Effects and value of verifiable information in a controversial market: Evidence from lab auctions of genetically modified food. Economic Inquiry 45 (3): 409–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rousu, M. C., D. C. Monchuk, J. F. Shogren, and K. M. Kosa. 2005. Consumer willingness to pay for second-generation genetically engineered products and the role of marketing information. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 37 (03): 647–657.
   Google Scholar
• Seippel, O. 1996. Risk society: A theoretical and empirical critique. [In Norwegian.] Prosus Norges forskningsråd (Norwegian Research Council) 1:5.
   Google Scholar
• Scholderer, J., and L. J. Frewer. 2003. The biotechnology communication paradox: Experimental evidence and the need for a new strategy. Journal of Consumer Policy 26 (2): 125–157.
   Google Scholar
• Shin, S. Y., J. Kliebenstein, D. J. Hayes, and J. F. Shogren. 1992. Consumer willingness to pay for safer food products. Journal of Food Safety 13 (1): 51–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shogren, J. F., J. A. Fox, J. H. Dermot, and J. B. Kliebenstein. 1994. Bid sensitivity and the structure of the Vickrey auction. The American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76 (5): 1089–1095.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shogren, J. F., S. Y. Shin, D. J. Hayes, and J. B. Kliebenstein. 1994. Resolving differences in willingness to pay and willingness to accept. American Economic Review 84 (1): 255–270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Springer, A., K. Mattas, G. T. Papastefanou, and A. Tsioumanis. 2002. Comparing consumer attitudes towards genetically modified food in Europe. Paper presented at the 10th European Congress of Agricultural Economists, August 28–31, Zaragoza, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Tegene, A., W. Huffman, M. Rousu, and J. Shogren. 2003. The effects of information on consumer demand for biotech foods: Evidence from experimental auctions. Technical Bulletin 1903 (28), ERS Research Briefs. Washington, DC: USDA. www.ers.usda.gov/publications/tb1903 (accessed January 2011).
   Google Scholar
• USDA-FAS. 2010. India and China: Divergent markets for U.S. agricultural exports. Washington, DC: USDA Foreign Agricultural Service. http://www.fas.usda.gov/itp/china/India_Chinamarket022010.pdf (accessed January 2011).
   Google Scholar
• Vickrey, W. 1961. Counterspeculation, auctions and competitive sealed tenders. Journal of Finance 16 (1): 8–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viscusi, W. K., W. A. Magat, and J. Huber. 1987. An investigation of the rationality of consumer valuations of multiple health risks. RAND Journal of Economics 18 (4): 465–479.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilcoxon, F. 1945. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bulletin 1 (6): 80–83.
   Google Scholar