Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR ALTERNATIVE MILK PACKAGING: THE CASE OF AN INFERRED ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTE

  • CLINTON L. NEILL (a1) (a2) and RYAN B. WILLIAMS (a1)

Abstract

Ecolabeling allows firms to segment a market by informing consumers about unobservable attributes of a product. Previous studies evaluate consumer preferences for products explicitly labeled as possessing positive environmental attributes. This research evaluates consumers’ willingness to pay for a product that is perceived by the consumer as having environmentally friendly attributes. We explore glass packaging for fluid milk as a case study. Data were collected through a contingent valuation survey, and a bound-and-a-half logit model was employed. The estimated premium is 59.78 cents with a premium between $0.73 and $0.92 for consumers more likely to prefer the glass alternative.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR ALTERNATIVE MILK PACKAGING: THE CASE OF AN INFERRED ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTE
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR ALTERNATIVE MILK PACKAGING: THE CASE OF AN INFERRED ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTE
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR ALTERNATIVE MILK PACKAGING: THE CASE OF AN INFERRED ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTE
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

*Corresponding author e-mail: clinton.neill@okstate.edu

References

Hide All
Bajari, P., and Benkard, C.L.. “Demand Estimation with Heterogeneous Consumers and Unobserved Product Characteristics: A Hedonic Approach.” National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) technical working paper 272, Cambridge, MA: NBER, 2001.
Cooper, J.C., Hanemann, M., and Signorello, G.. “One-and-One-Half-Bound Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation.” Review of Economics and Statistics 84,4(2002):742–50.
DeShazo, J.R.Designing Transactions without Framing Effects in Iterative Question Formats.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 43,3(2002):360–85.
Gallardo, R.K., and Wang, Q.. “Willingness to Pay for Pesticides’ Environmental Features and Social Desirability Bias: The Case of Apple and Pear Growers.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 38,1(2013):124–39.
Ghenai, C.Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Materials for Milk and Dairy Products.” International Journal of Thermal & Environmental Engineering 4,2(2012): 117–28.
Greene, C. Organic Market Overview. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Internet site: http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/natural-resources-environment/organic-agriculture/organic-market-overview.aspx (Accessed August 1, 2016).
Hanemann, W.M.Comments.” A Contingent Valuation Survey of the Kakadu Conservation Zone. Imber, D., Stevenson, G., and Wilks, L.. Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service, Resource Assessment Commission research paper 3, 1991, pp. 187–92.
Hollywood, L., Wells, L., Armstrong, G., and Farley, H.. “Thinking Outside the Carton: Attitudes towards Milk Packaging.” British Food Journal 115,6(2013):899912.
Johannson-Stenman, O., and Martinsson, P.. “Honestly, Why Are You Driving a BMW?Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 60,2(2006):129–46.
Lopez-Feldman, A. “Introduction to Contingent Valuation using Stata.” Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA) paper 41018, Munich, Germany: MPRA, 2012.
Loureiro, M.L., and Hine, S.. “Discovering Niche Markets: A Comparison of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Local (Colorado Grown), Organic, and GMO-Free Products.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 34,3(2002):477–87.
Loureiro, M.L., McCluskey, J.J., and Mittelhammer, R.C.. “Assessing Consumer Preferences for Organic, Eco-labeled, and Regular Apples.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 26,2(2001):404–16.
Lusk, J.L., and Norwood, F.B.. “Bridging the Gap between Laboratory Experiments and Naturally Occurring Markets: An Inferred Valuation Method.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 58,2(2009a):236–50.
Lusk, J.L.. “An Inferred Valuation Method.” Land Economics 85,3(2009b):500514.
Lusk, J.L., Schroeder, T.C., and Tonsor, G.T.. “Distinguishing Beliefs from Preferences in Food Choice.” European Review of Agricultural Economics 41,4(2014):627–55.
McFadden, D.L., and Leonard, G.K.. “Issues in Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods: Methodologies for Data Collection and Analysis.” Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. Hausman, J.A., ed. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland, 1993, pp. 165216.
Merrill, L. “Phoenix Dairy Goes Retro with Glass Bottles.” Arizona Republic, April 20, 2015. Internet site: http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2015/04/18/phoenix-dairy-goes-retro-glass-bottles/25975067/ (Accessed July 20, 2016).
Neill, C.L., and Williams, R.B.. “An Economic Valuation on the External Cost of Alternative Milk Packaging.” Journal of Food Distribution Research 46,3(2015):6880.
Norwood, F.B., and Lusk, J.L.. “Social Desirability Bias in Real, Hypothetical, and Inferred Valuation Experiments.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 93,2(2011):528–34.
Thistlethwaite, R. Straus Family Creamery & Dairy: Marshall, California. Innovative Business Models and Case Studies Series no. 6, Santa Cruz: Center for Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, University of California Santa Cruz, 2010. Internet site: http://casfs.ucsc.edu/documents/business-models/CaseStudy_no6_Straus.pdf (Accessed May 4, 2016).
Toro-González, D., Gallardo, R.K., Yan, J., and McCluskey, J.J.. “Quality Differentiation with Flavors: Demand Estimation of Unobserved Attributes.” Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization 11,1(2013):101–11.
Transparency Market Research. Glass Packaging Market for Food & Beverages, Pharmaceuticals, Beer and Other Alcoholic Beverages - Global Industry Analysis, Size, Share, Growth, Trends and Forecast 2014–2020. Albany, NY: Transparency Market Research, 2014.
Census Bureau, U.S.. “QuickFacts: Lubbock County, Texas.” Internet site: http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/48303 (Accessed May 10, 2014).
Zaleski, W.R. “Plastic Bottle.” US Patent 3,086,671, filed August 17, 1962, and issued April 23, 1963.

Keywords

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR ALTERNATIVE MILK PACKAGING: THE CASE OF AN INFERRED ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTE

  • CLINTON L. NEILL (a1) (a2) and RYAN B. WILLIAMS (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.