Consumers’ Preferences for Apple Production Attributes: Results of a Choice Experiment
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Guiding Principles of Willingness to Pay
2.2. Factors Influencing Consumer Preference
2.3. Certification, Traceability, and Their Functions in Chinese Agrifood Supply Chain
2.4. Growing Fruits and Their Field Requirements
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Theoretical Framework and Experimental Design
3.1.1. Attribute Selection
3.1.2. Experimental Design
3.1.3. Data Collection
3.2. Modeling Technique
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Descriptive Statistics
4.2. CL and RPL Model Results
4.2.1. Homogeneity and Heterogeneity Preference
4.2.2. Factors Influencing Pesticide Application Preferences
4.3. Latent Class Model Results
4.4. Willingness to Pay
4.5. Policy Discussions from Model Outcomes
5. Concluding Remarks
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Pesticide Times | Number of Farmers | % |
---|---|---|
4 | 12 | 2.8% |
5 | 63 | 14.6% |
6 | 119 | 27.6% |
7 | 140 | 32.4% |
8 | 70 | 16.1% |
9 | 14 | 3.2% |
10 | 15 | 3.4% |
Appendix B
Appendix C
Classes | LLF | Nparam | AIC | CAIC | BIC |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2 | −5573.175 | 19 | 11,184.35 | 11,293.29 | 11,274.29 |
3 | −5338.09 | 29 | 10,734.18 | 10,900.45 | 10,871.45 |
4 | −5253.497 | 39 | 10,584.99 | 10,808.6 | 10,769.6 |
5 | −5153.681 | 49 | 10,405.36 | 10,686.3 | 10,637.3 |
6 | −5072.586 | 59 | 10,263.17 | 10,601.44 | 10,542.44 |
7 | −5025.859 | 69 | 10,189.72 | 10,585.32 | 10,516.32 |
8 | −4989.642 | 79 | 10,137.28 | 10,590.22 | 10,511.22 |
9 | −4966.998 | 89 | 10,112 | 10,622.27 | 10,533.27 |
10 | −4943.648 | 99 | 10,085.3 | 10,652.9 | 10,553.9 |
References
- Hung, Y.; Kok, T.D.; Verbeke, W. Consumer attitude and purchase intention towards processed meat products with natural compounds and a reduced level of nitrite. Meat Sci. 2016, 121, 119–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, Y. Reflections on Fiscal Support for the Organic Connection between Small Farmers and Modern Agriculture. China Financ. 2019, 14, 3. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Nana, W.; Wei, F. Ecological dilemma of small farmers in the process of agricultural transformation: A case study of pesticide use by farmers in Mengcun, Shandong Province. J. Nanjing Agric. Univ. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2022, 22, 96–104. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hui, C.; Kai, Z. Non-agricultural Employment of Farmers, Understanding of Cultivated Land Protection Policies, and Selection of Pro-Environmental Agricultural Technologies: Based on Survey Data from 1422 Grain-Producing Counties. Agric. Technol. Econ. 2019, 5, 52–65. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Shijie, L.; Xuelan, Z.; Xiaowei, H.; Kailei, W. Farmers’ Cognition, Pesticide Subsidies and Farmers’ Willingness to Use Safe Pesticides for Agricultural Production: Based on a Questionnaire Survey of Winter Melon and Vegetable Farmers in Hainan Province. China Rural Obs. 2013, 5, 15. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, N.; Wolf, J.; Zhang, F.S. Towards sustainable intensification of apple production in China—Yield gaps and nutrient use efficiency in apple farming systems. J. Integr. Agric. 2016, 15, 716–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qu, R.; Wu, Y.; Chen, J.; Jones, G.D.; Li, W.; Jin, S.; Chang, Q.; Cao, Y.; Yang, G.; Li, Z.; et al. Effects of agricultural cooperative society on farmers’ technical efficiency: Evidence from stochastic frontier analysis. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.; Xue, X.; Feng, X.; Chen, N. Consumers’ preference for traceability information of seafood and willingness to pay: An Empirical Analysis Based on choice experiment. Macro Qual. Res. 2019, 7, 110–119. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Liu, R.; Gao, Z.; Snell, H.A.; Ma, H. Food safety concerns and consumer preferences for food safety attributes: Evidence from China. Food Control 2020, 112, 107157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.; Wu, L. Study on the willingness to pay of urban residents for the quality and safety attributes of pork—Based on the analysis of choice experiments. Agric. Technol. Econ. 2014, 11, 24–31. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Xu, S. Study on Consumers’ Preference and Willingness to Pay for Traceable Food Quality and Safety Attributes. Ph.D. Thesis, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, China, 2019. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
- Sanders, R. A Market Road to Sustainable Agriculture? Ecological Agriculture, Green Food and Organic Agriculture in China. Dev. Change 2010, 37, 201–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, Z.; Liao, Q.; Qian, H.; Gong, Y. An overview of research on agricultural non-point source pollution modelling in China. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2012, 84, 104–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lars, J. Hazards of heavy metal contamination. Br. Med. Bull. 2003, 1, 167–182. [Google Scholar]
- Zeng, F.; Ali, S.; Zhang, H.; Ouyang, Y.; Qiu, B.; Wu, F.; Zhang, G. The influence of pH and organic matter content in paddy soil on heavy metal availability and their uptake by rice plants. Environ. Pollut. 2011, 159, 84–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Octavia, N.; Caninsti, R.; Arlinkasari, F. The Role of Willingness to Sacrifice towards Pro-environmental Behavior in Jakarta Citizens; SCITEPRESS—Science and Technology Publications: Setúbal, Portugal, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Tandon, D.; Kumari, A.; Sharma, A.; Mehta, V. Comparison of Organic Fertilizer vs. Inorganic Fertilizer on the Growth of Cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.). BIOTICA 2022, 4, 82–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, S.; Zhang, Y.; Xu, Y. Amount of Information and the Willingness of Consumers to Pay for Food Traceability in China; Elsevier Ltd.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; Volume 77, pp. 163–170. [Google Scholar]
- Ajzen, I. The theory ofplanned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Claret, A.; Guerrero, L.; Aguirre, E.; Rincón, L.; Hernández, M.D.; Martínez, I.; Benito Peleteiro, J.; Grau, A.; Rodríguez-Rodríguez, C. Consumer preferences for sea fish using conjoint analysis: Exploratory study of the importance of country of origin, obtaining method, storage conditions and purchasing price. Food Qual. Prefer. 2012, 26, 259–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kendall, H.; Naughton, P.; Kuznesof, S.; Raley, M.; Dean, M.; Clark, B.; Stolz, H.; Home, R.; Chan, M.Y.; Zhong, Q.; et al. Food fraud and the perceived integrity of European food imports into China. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0195817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wongprawmas, R.; Padilla Bravo, C.A.; Lazo, A.; Canavari, M.; Spiller, A. Practitioners’ perceptions of the credibility of food quality assurance schemes: Exploring the effect of country of origin. Qual. Assur. Saf. Crops Foods 2015, 7, 789–799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zbib, I.J.; Wooldridge, B.R.; Ahmed, Z.U.; Benlian, S. Selection criteria of Lebanese consumers in the global snack food industry: Country of origin perceptions. J. Consum. Mark. 2010, 27, 139–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsakiridou, E.; Mattas, K.; Bazoche, P. Consumers’ response on the labels of fresh fruits and related implications on pesticide use. Food Econ. 2012, 9, 129–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kendall, H.; Clark, B.; Rhymer, C.; Kuznesof, S.; Hajslova, J.; Tomaniova, M.; Brereton, P.; Frewer, L. A systematic review of consumer perceptions of food fraud and authenticity: A European perspective. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 94, 79–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kendall, H.; Kuznesof, S.; Dean, M.; Chan, M.-Y.; Clark, B.; Home, R.; Stolz, H.; Zhong, Q.; Liu, C.; Brereton, P.; et al. Chinese consumer’s attitudes, perceptions and behavioural responses towards food fraud. Food Control 2019, 95, 339–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; Xu, L.; Zhu, D.; Wu, L. Consumers’ WTP for certified traceable tea in China. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 1440–1452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loureiro, M.L.; Umberger, W.J. A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability. Food Policy 2007, 32, 496–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ubilava, D.; Foster, K. Quality certification vs. product traceability: Consumer preferences for informational attributes of pork in Georgia. Food Policy 2009, 34, 305–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, Z.; Zhou, J.-H.; Li, K. Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: Choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities. In Proceedings of the AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, California Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, San Francisco, CA, USA, 26–28 July 2005; California Agricultural and Applied Economics Association: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2005. Available online: https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae15/212609.html (accessed on 15 March 2023).
- Zhou, H.; Nanseki, T.; Hotta, K.; Shinkai, S.; Xu, Y. Analysis of consumers’ attitudes toward traceability system on dairy products in China. J. Fac. Agric. Kyushu Univ. 2010, 55, 167–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, J.; Luo, J.; Zhang, C. Consumers’ willingness to pay for traceable milk: A choice experiment based on attribute absence. Chin. J. Food Nutr. 2019, 25, 57–62. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, C.; Bai, J.; Jiang, J. The impact of certification on consumers’ willingness to pay: A case study of traceable milk. China Rural Econ. 2014, 8, 76–85. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Liu, C.; Li, J.; Steele, W.; Fang, X. A study on Chinese consumer preferences for food traceability information using best-worst scaling. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0206793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daugbjerg, C.; Smed, S.; Andersen, L.M.; Schvartzman, Y. Improving Eco-labelling as an Environmental Policy Instrument: Knowledge, Trust and Organic Consumption. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2014, 16, 559–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ejvl, A.; Vc, B.; Rmn, C.; Jfm, A.; Scr, A. Consumers’ willingness to pay for organic chicken breast: Evidence from choice experiment. Food Qual. Prefer. 2011, 22, 603–613. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, Z.; Juan, Q.; Huang, S. Research on consumers’ preference behavior of food safety attributes based on heterogeneity. Agric. Technol. Econ. 2013, 5, 95–104. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Krystallis, A.; Chryssohoidis, G. Consumers’ willingness to pay for organic food. Br. Food J. 2005, 107, 320–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, X.; Gao, Z.; Zeng, Y. Willingness to pay for the “Green Food” in China. Food Policy 2014, 45, 80–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, R.; Pieniak, Z.; Verbeke, W. Consumers’ attitudes and behavior towards safe food in China: A review. Food Control 2013, 33, 93–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lusk, J.L.; Tonsor, G.T.; Schroeder, T.C.; Hayes, D.J. Effect of government quality grade labels on consumer demand for pork chops in the short and long run. Food Policy 2018, 77, 91–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, L.; Wang, H.; Liu, X. Traceable pork: Information combination and consumer willingness to pay. Chin. Popul. Resour. Environ. 2014, 24, 34–45. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Yin, S.; Xu, Y.; Chen, Y. How food quality information labels affect consumer preferences: A selection experiment based on 843 samples in Shandong Province. China Rural Obs. 2015, 1, 39–49. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Ma, X. Research on Standardized Production Behavior of Apple Planters. Ph.D. Thesis, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J.; Huo, X. Analysis of the Joint Choice Behavior and Influencing Factors of Orchard Fine Management Technology: A Case Study of Apple Growers in Luochuan, Shaanxi. J. Nanjing Agric. Univ. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2012, 12, 58–67. [Google Scholar]
- Song, J. Analysis of Pesticide Application Behavior and Influencing Factors among Apple Growers in Wafangdian City. Ph.D. Thesis, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang, China, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lancaster, K.J. A New Approach to Consumer Theory. J. Political Econ. 1996, 74, 132–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McFadden, D.L. Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior. Front. Econom. 1974. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239478197_Conditional_Logit_Analysis_of_Qualitative_Choice_Analysis (accessed on 15 March 2023).
- Balcombe, K.; Fraser, I.; Lowe, B.; Souza Monteiro, D. Information Customization and Food Choice. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2016, 98, 54–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meenakshi, J.V.; Banerji, A.; Manyong, V.; Tomlins, K.; Mittal, N.; Hamukwala, P. Using a discrete choice experiment to elicit the demand for a nutritious food: Willingness-to-pay for orange maize in rural Zambia. J. Health Econ. 2012, 31, 62–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarantoulias, C. Exploring Consumers’ Use of Nutritional Cues in Food Choices: A Discrete Choice Experiment; University of Guelph: Guelph, ON, Canada, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J.; Ge, J.; Ma, Y. Urban Chinese consumers’ willingness to pay for pork with certified labels: A discrete choice experiment. Sustainability 2018, 10, 603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tonsor, G.T. Consumer inferences of food safety and quality. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2011, 38, 213–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morkbak, M.R.; Christensen, T.; Gyrd-Hansen, D. Consumer preferences for safety characteristics in pork. Br. Food J. 2010, 112, 775–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bazzani, C.; Caputo, V.; Nayga, R.M.; Canavari, M. Revisiting consumers’ valuation for local versus organic food using a non-hypothetical choice experiment: Does personality matter? Food Qual. Prefer. 2017, 62, 144–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Botelho, A.; Dinis, I.; Gomes, L.L.; Moreira, J.; Pinto, L. The Importance of the Origin of Apple Varieties: Results from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Portugal; IDEAS Working Paper Series from RePEc; Universidade do Minho: Braga, Portugal, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Ceschi, S.; Canavari, M.; Castellini, A. Consumer’s Preference and Willingness to Pay for Apple Attributes: A Choice Experiment in Large Retail Outlets in Bologna (Italy). J. Int. Food Agribus. Mark. 2018, 30, 305–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costanigro, M.; Mcfadden, D.T.; Kroll, S.; Nurse, G. An in-store valuation of local and organic apples: The role of social desirability. Agribusiness 2011, 27, 465–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Marchi, E.; Cavaliere, A.; Bacenetti, J.; Milani, F.; Pigliafreddo, S.; Banterle, A. Can consumer food choices contribute to reduce environmental impact? The case of cisgenic apples. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 681, 155–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Denver, S.; Jensen, J.D. Consumer preferences for organically and locally produced apples. Food Qual. Prefer. 2014, 31, 129–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cerroni, S.; Notaro, S.; Shaw, W.D. How many bad apples are in a bunch? An experimental investigation of perceived pesticide residue risks. Food Policy 2013, 41, 112–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baker, G.A. Consumer Preferences for Food Safety Attributes in Fresh Apples: Market Segments, Consumer Characteristics, and Marketing Opportunities. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 1999, 24, 80–97. [Google Scholar]
- Allenby, G.M.; Rossi, P.E. Marketing models of consumer heterogeneity. J. Econom. 1998, 89, 57–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janssen, M.; Hamm, U. Product labelling in the market for organic food: Consumer preferences and willingness-to-pay for different organic certification logos. Food Qual. Prefer. 2012, 25, 9–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tempesta, T.; Vecchiato, D. An analysis of the territorial factors affecting milk purchase in Italy. Food Qual. Prefer. 2013, 27, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nawi, N.M.; Basri, H.N.; Kamarulzaman, N.H.; Shamsudin, M.N. Factors influencing consumers’ preferences towards meat and meat products with traceability systems in Malaysia. Int. Food Res. J. 2018, 25, S157–S164. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J. The Effect of Bagging Fuji Apple in Ningxia Yellow River Irrigation Area on Fruit Quality. Ph.D. Thesis, Ningxia University, Ningxia, China, 2017; pp. 15–20. [Google Scholar]
- Qiaorong, M.; Kaixiang, Z.; Fuli, X. Comparative analysis of apple bagging and non bagging cultivation. Anhui Agric. Bull. 2021, 27, 69–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, W.; Veeman, M.M.; Adamowicz, W.L. Labeling genetically modified food: Heterogeneous consumer preferences and the value of information. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 2005, 53, 83–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McFadden, D.; Train, K. Mixed MNL models for discrete response. J. Appl. Econom. 2000, 15, 447–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Hu, J.; Luo, N.; Zhao, Y. Evaluation of non use value of Guilin open park based on CVM. China Urban For. 2020, 18, 94–98. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Cui, F.; Ding, F.; He, Y. Evaluation of non use value of recreational resources in urban parks: A case study of Xuanwu Lake Park in Nanjing. Resour. Sci. 2012, 34, 1988–1996. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Boxall, P.C.; Adamowicz, W.L. Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: A latent class approach. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2002, 23, 421–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allenby, G.M. Hypothesis Testing with Scanner Data: The Advantage of Bayesian Methods. J. Mark. Res. 1990, 27, 379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, S.; Li, W.; Cao, Y.; Jones, G.; Chen, J.; Li, Z.; Chang, Q.; Yang, G. Identifying Barriers to Sustainable Apple Production: A Stakeholder Perspective. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 302, 114082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Moor, U.; Moor, A.; Põldma, P.; Heinmaa, L. Consumer preferences of apples in Estonia and changes in attitudes over five years. Agric. Food Sci. 2014, 23, 135–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carrillo-Rodriguez, L.; Gallardo, K.; Yue, C.; Mccracken, V.; Luby, J.; Mcferson, J. Consumer Preferences for Apple Quality Traits; IDEAS Working Paper Series from RePEc; Universidade do Minho: Braga, Portugal, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Cronje, A.; Crouch, E.M.; Muller, M.; Theron, K.I.; van der Rijst, M.; Steyn, W.J. Canopy position and cold storage duration affects mealiness incidence and consumer preference for the appearance and eating quality of “Forelle” pears. Sci. Hortic. 2015, 194, 327–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gamble, J.; Jaeger, S.R.; Harker, F.R. Preferences in pear appearance and response to novelty among Australian and New Zealand consumers. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2006, 41, 38–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliver, P.; Cicerale, S.; Pang, E.; Keast, R. Identifying Key Flavors in Strawberries Driving Liking via Internal and External Preference Mapping. J. Food Sci. 2018, 83, 1073–1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rocha, M.D.C.; Deliza, R.; Corrêa, F.M.; Carmo, M.G.F.D.; Abboud, A.C.S. A study to guide breeding of new cultivars of organic cherry tomato following a consumer-driven approach. Food Res. Int. 2013, 51, 265–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, X.; Gao, Z.; Swisher, M.; House, L.; Zhao, X. Eco-labeling in the fresh produce market: Not all environmentally friendly labels are equally valued. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 154, 201–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, J.; Liu, Q.; Mao, R.; Yu, X. Habit spillovers or induced awareness: Willingness to pay for eco-labels of rice in China. Food Policy 2017, 71, 62–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Attribute | Level | Description |
---|---|---|
Traceability | 4 |
|
Pesticide use | 3 |
|
Fertilizer | 2 |
|
Bags | 2 |
|
Price paid by the consumer for apples | 3 |
|
Category | Number | Percentage | Category | Number | Percentage |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Male | 281 | 40% | City | ||
Female | 423 | 60% | Beijing | 384 | 55% |
Age (years) | Shanghai | 320 | 45% | ||
<25 | 288 | 41% | Education | ||
25–40 | 273 | 39% | Junior high or under | 188 | 27% |
40–55 | 101 | 14% | High school | 51 | 7% |
50–70 | 34 | 5% | Bachelor or equivalent | 273 | 39% |
>70 | 8 | 1% | Undergraduate and above | 192 | 27% |
Income (CNY) | Family | ||||
<5000 | 121 | 17% | Children | 447 | 63% |
5000–20,000 | 327 | 46% | Pregnant | 15 | 2% |
20,001–35,000 | 138 | 20% | Parents | 388 | 55% |
35,001–50,000 | 66 | 9% | Alone | 206 | 29% |
>50,000 | 52 | 7% | |||
Total | 704 | 100% | Total | 704 | 100% |
Variables | CL Model | RPL Model | SD |
---|---|---|---|
Blockchain traceability | 0.874 *** (0.060) | 0.755 *** (0.103) | −0.072 (0.097) |
High traceability | 0.757 *** (0.065) | 0.640 *** (0.114) | 0.155 (0.127) |
Medium traceability | 0.895 *** (0.069) | 0.716 *** (0.071) | −0.014 (0.223) |
High pesticide | −0.352 *** (0.053) | −0.551 *** (0.066) | 0.468 *** (0.120) |
Low pesticide | 1.056 *** (0.166) | 0.644 * (0.263) | 0.300 * (0.121) |
Organic | 0.284 *** (0.042) | 0.277 *** (0.050) | −0.111 (0.153) |
No-bag | −0.477 *** (0.043) | −0.436 *** (0.047) | 0.513 *** (0.079) |
Price | −0.131 *** (0.005) | −0.165 *** (0.010) | 0.206 *** (0.011) |
ASC (opt-out) | −3.177 *** (0.181) | −5.192 *** (0.216) | 3.403 *** (0.167) |
Low pesticide × age | 0.296 *** (0.040) | 0.236 *** (0.065) | −0.189 ** (0.076) |
Low pesticide × gender | −0.265 *** (0.072) | −0.259 * (0.116) | 0.133 (0.223) |
Low pesticide × income | −0.028 (0.033) | 0.015 (0.053) | −0.028 (0.091) |
Low pesticide × education | 0.072 *** (0.009) | 0.040 *** (0.013) | 0.037 *** (0.009) |
Low pesticide × children | 0.148 * (0.075) | 0.143 (0.115) | −0.129 (0.198) |
Low pesticide × pregnant | 0.017 (0.242) | 0.044 (0.417) | −0.289 (0.444) |
Low pesticide × parent | −0.051 (0.071) | 0.125 (0.107) | −0.202 (0.168) |
Log likelihood | −8291.7578 | −4240.3167 | −4240.3167 |
LR chi2 | 2436.1 | 2187.64 | 2187.64 |
Prob > chi2 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
Total | 16,896 | 16,896 | 16,896 |
Variables | Category 1 (Price-Insensitive) | Category 2 (Pesticide-Sensitive) | Category 3 (Price-Sensitive) |
---|---|---|---|
Blockchain traceability | 0.674 *** (0.141) | 0.207 (0.185) | 0.268 (0.481) |
High traceability | 0.511 ** (0.154) | 0.191 (0.215) | 0.783 (0.631) |
Medium traceability | 0.655 *** (0.075) | 0.191 (0.180) | 1.239 * (0.571) |
High pesticide | −0.502 *** (0.070) | −0.886 *** (0.199) | −0.469 (0.296) |
Low pesticide | 0.361 *** (0.074) | 0.398 ** (0.153) | −0.435 (0.370) |
Organic | 0.258 *** (0.058) | 0.178 (0.144) | 0.536 (0.294) |
No-bag | −0.320 *** (0.047) | −0.347 ** (0.133) | −0.823 ** (0.286) |
Price | −0.013 (0.008) | −0.112 *** (0.019) | −0.494 *** (0.059) |
ASC (opt-out) | −3.446 *** (0.163) | −0.184 (0.227) | −6.620 *** (0.701) |
Class share | 53.5% | 21.7% | 24.8% |
Variable | CL Model | RPL Model | Price-Insensitive | Pesticide-Sensitive | Price-Sensitive |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Blockchain traceability | 6.675 *** | 1.471 | 51.074 | 1.842 | 0.542 |
High traceability | 5.778 *** | −0.057 | 38.705 | 1.7 | 1.584 |
Medium traceability | 6.831 *** | 3.383 *** | 49.607 | 1.697 | 2.506 ** |
High pesticide | −2.685 *** | −2.987 *** | −38.001 | −7.879 *** | −0.95 |
Low pesticide | 8.059 *** | 4.520 *** | 27.321 | 3.539 ** | −0.88 |
Organic | 2.165 ** | 0.093 | 19.529 | 1.584 | 1.085 ** |
No-bag | −3.644 *** | −2.705 *** | −24.253 | −3.088 ** | −1.665 *** |
ASC (opt-out) | −24.249 *** | −37.655 *** | −260.968 | −1.64 | −13.395 *** |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Qu, R.; Chen, J.; Li, W.; Jin, S.; Jones, G.D.; Frewer, L.J. Consumers’ Preferences for Apple Production Attributes: Results of a Choice Experiment. Foods 2023, 12, 1917. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12091917
Qu R, Chen J, Li W, Jin S, Jones GD, Frewer LJ. Consumers’ Preferences for Apple Production Attributes: Results of a Choice Experiment. Foods. 2023; 12(9):1917. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12091917
Chicago/Turabian StyleQu, Ruopin, Jing Chen, Wenjing Li, Shan Jin, Glyn D. Jones, and Lynn J. Frewer. 2023. "Consumers’ Preferences for Apple Production Attributes: Results of a Choice Experiment" Foods 12, no. 9: 1917. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12091917
APA StyleQu, R., Chen, J., Li, W., Jin, S., Jones, G. D., & Frewer, L. J. (2023). Consumers’ Preferences for Apple Production Attributes: Results of a Choice Experiment. Foods, 12(9), 1917. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12091917