How do U.S. and Canadian consumers value credence attributes associated with beef labels after the North American BSE crisis of 2003?

Abstract

Type of publicationArticle ( Abstract A consumer survey conducted in 2006 (n = 419), and therefore after the rst conrmed BSE cases in North America in 2003, employs attribute-based choice experiments for a cross-country comparison of consumers' valuation of credence attributes associated with beef steak labels; specically a guarantee that beef was tested for BSE, a guarantee that the steaks were produced without genetically modied organisms (GMO), and a guarantee that beef steaks were produced without growth hormones and antibiotics. Considering consumers' socio-economic characteristics, the results suggest that consumers in Montana (U.S.) and Alberta (Canada) are signicantly heterogeneous in their valuation of the above attributes, although consumers' relative valuation of these process attributes does not appear to have changed since the 2003 BSE crisis in each region. Alberta consumers place a signicant valuation on beef tested for BSE, which is striking because Canada's current legal environment does not permit testing and labeling of such beef by private industry participants. Montana consumers' valuation was found highest for a guarantee that the steaks were produced without GMO. Effective supply-chain responses to consumers' valuation of credence attributes, for example in the form of labeling, should therefore take consumers' heterogeneity into account.

The Influence of Trust and Attitudes on the Purchase Frequency of Organic Produce

“…Third, we find no evidence that trust in the institution involved in the certification process, i.e., third-parties and government, is important to the purchase frequency decision. This is in contrast to recent research suggested that trust may be an important factor in influencing beliefs, attitudes, and purchase decisions, and that external certifiers are necessary in the market for organic food to reduce fraud (McCluskey, 2000;Schumacher, 2010;Steiner and Yag, 2010;Ding et al, 2012). Our findings may be related to the current labeling and certification process in the United States.…”

“…In the presence of unobservable attributes, consumers face the risk of making an unsatisfying purchase or being exposed to food safety issues (Lobb et al, 2007;de Jonge et al, 2008a). Recent consumer studies incorporate trust as an important factor that influences beliefs, attitudes, and purchasing decisions (Allen et al, 2008;Walter and Schmidt, 2008;Schumacher, 2010;Steiner and Yag, 2010;Ding et al, 2012). Previous literature suggests that trust is a function of credible information, e.g., signals of quality or safety.…”

The roles of human values and generalized trust on stated preferences when food is labeled with environmental footprints: Insights from Germany

“…As we indicate ( Figure 1 and Appendix Table 1), the role of trust has increasingly been recognized in consumer studies (e.g., Allen et al 2008;Steiner and Yang 2010;Baddeley et al 2012;Ding, Veeman and Adamowicz 2012). A study by Gulev (2012) finds positive associations between specific cultural attitudes, including trust, and views of business practices that enable social and environmental sustainability.…”

Supply chain management in times of crisis: a systematic review

“…• quality assurance schemes, audits and labelling (compulsory and voluntary) regulations to address misperceptions about food risks (Fearne 1998 ; Schröder and Mceachern 2002 ; Mora and Menozzi 2005 ; Steiner and Yang 2010 ; Kassahun et al 2014 ; Ferrer-Pérez et al 2019 )…”

“…Other viewpoints for strategy involve real-time transparency (Burgos and Ivanov 2021 ), using third-party transparency service providers (Kassahun et al 2014 ), and traceability capabilities based on trade and governance structures (Gereffi and Lee 2012 ; Pinior et al 2012a ). Asymmetric, inaccurate, and incomplete information within supply chains in times of crisis (Gorton et al 2006 ; Steiner and Yang 2010 ; Zhang 2020 ) also motivates prioritisation of supply chain mapping (Desoutter and Lavissière 2018 ) and supply chain records (Gessner et al 2007 ). Although these technologies and capabilities support other priorities by fostering decisiveness through industry statistics on operational control metrics (Rong and Grunow 2010 ), particular benefits for traceability with transparency remain a driving force for specific SCM strategies.…”