Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T02:23:47.213Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Conjoint/Logit Analysis of Nursery Stock Purchases

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Wayne M. Gineo
Wayne M. Gineo*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut
Get access

Abstract

Product attributes that determine nursery-stock sales from wholesalers to retail garden centers and landscapers were studied. Conjoint analysis was used to obtain data on buyer preferences. The data were analyzed using ordinary least squares and logit procedures to determine the attributes that are preferred by buyers. It was determined that good- to excellent-quality stock, offerings with a full line of additional plants, taller plants, and cash discounts are desirable attributes. Quality is the dominant attribute affecting preferences. Packaging the preferred attributes together significantly increases the probability of a plant being purchased by buyers.

Type
Articles
Information
Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , April 1990 , pp. 49 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 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.)

Footnotes

This work was supported by the Storrs Agricultural Experiment Station, Storrs, CT. The helpful comments of R. L. Leonard, two of the Journal's reviewers, and several other individuals are greatly appreciated.

References

Addelman, Sidney. “Orthogonal Main-Effect Plans for Asymmetrical Factorial Experiments.” Technometrics 4 (1962): 21–46.Google Scholar
American Association of Nurserymen. September 1985. “Nursery Industry Research Needs.” Washington, DC. Mimeo.Google Scholar
Gineo, Wayne M., and Omamo, S. Were “An Analysis of Household Expenditures on Nursery Products in the United States.” Paper presented at the 1988 Northeast Agricultural and Resource Economics Association Meeting, Orono, ME, June 1988.Google Scholar
Green, Paul E. “On the Design of Choice Experiments Involving Multifactor Alternatives.” Journal of Consumer Research 1 (1974): 61–68.Google Scholar
Green, P. E., Helsen, K., and Shandler, B. “Conjoint Internal Validity Under Alternative Profile Presentations.” Journal of Consumer Research 15 (1988): 392–97.Google Scholar
Green, Paul E., and Rao, Vithala R. “Conjoint Measurement for Qualifying Judgmental Data.” Journal of Marketing Research 8 (1971): 355–63.Google Scholar
Green, Paul E., and Srinivasan, V. “Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook.” Journal of Consumer Research 5 (1978): 103–23.Google Scholar
Green, Paul E., and Wind, Yorum. “New Way to Measure Consumers' Judgement.” Harvard Business Review 53 (1975): 107–15.Google Scholar
Hambi, P., Chilko, D. M., and Hobbs, G. “The JACKREG Procedure.” In SAS Supplemental Library Users Guide. Version 5. SAS Institute, 1986.Google Scholar
Johnson, Richard M. “Trade-Off Analysis of Consumer Values.” Journal of Marketing Research 11 (1974): 121–27.Google Scholar
Judge, G. G., Hill, R. C., Griffiths, W. E., Lutkepohl, H., and Lee, T. C. Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Econometrics. John Wiley & Sons, 1982.Google Scholar
Lancaster, Kelvin. “A New Approach to Consumer Theory.” Journal of Political Economy 74 (1966): 132–57.Google Scholar
Pindyck, R. S., and Rubinfeld, D. L. Economic Models and Economic Forecasts. McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1976.Google Scholar
Teas, R. K., and Perr, A. L. “A Test of a Decompositional Method of Multiattribute Measurement.” Journal of Consumer Research 16 (1989): 384–91.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. “Ornamental Horticulture Industry is Blooming.” Agricultural Outlook (July 1988): 12–15.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. “Economic Indicators of the Farm Sector: State Financial Summary, 1988.” October 1989.Google Scholar