The interaction relationships among agricultural certification labels or brands: evidence from Chinese consumer preference for fresh produce

Abstract

China uses a multilevel agricultural certification system; however, its implications are not well understood. In this study, we used tomatoes as an example in a series of Becker-DeGroot-Marschak auction experiments to determine consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) toward three safety certification labels and two kinds of brands. Then, based on the auction experiment results, we designed a menu-based choice experiment to assess the interaction relationships between the safety certification labels and brands. The results showed that consumers were generally willing to pay a premium for tomatoes with safety-certified labels (especially for organic labels) and brands (especially for the enterprise brand). Providing consumers with additional information regarding the certification remarkably improved their WTP for tomatoes with organic and green labels. The menu-based choice experiment suggested that the organic and green labels were found to be substitutes. In addition, organic and green labels could not substitute the enterprise brand, whereas the converse of this relationship was true. Finally, a mutual substitution relationship was observed between hazard-free label and enterprise brand. Our research enables producers to consider the interaction between certification strategies and brand strategies. Therefore, marketers and policymakers should take steps to promote and expand consumers’ knowledge on certification, as it could benefit the development of certified food.

Do Past Experience and Group Heterogeneity Matter to Consumer Preferences? Evidence From a Choice Experiment in Urban China

“…First, the study did not take into account other attributes of Fuji apples, such as color, freshness, taste, brand, and labeling. However, studies have shown that these attributes also influence consumers’ preference and WTP for fresh products (e.g., Wang and Huo, 2016 ; He et al, 2020 , 2021 ; DeLong et al, 2021 ; Tanemura and Hamadate, 2022 ; Wang et al, 2022 ). Second, our sample was limited to consumers only in six cities in China, so a future study may cover a wider range of urban consumers nationwide to conduct more robust tests.…”

“…However, currently, there is no widely accepted way to test and control the impact and presence of experience and learning on WTP. This is particularly important for non-market valuation methods, such as conditional valuation and the Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) ( Caputo et al, 2020 ; Fang et al, 2021 ; Wang et al, 2022 ), because the products being valued may not be familiar to many respondents ( Bateman et al, 2004 ; Carson and Louviere, 2011 ; Czajkowski et al, 2014 ).…”

Is Environmental Sustainability Also “Economically Efficient”? The Case of the “SOStain” Certification for Sicilian Sparkling Wines

“…For these companies, in fact, in addition to renouncing the use of synthetic products, paying attention to reducing water use and CO 2 emissions from transportation, recycling materials, or any of the other 10 indicators in the specification are equally important. This means that there are entrepreneurs who care not only about profit but also about the environment [57,58]. These M-L companies are integrated and propulsive parts of the area in which they are located, so the way they operate is conscious of and in tune with all territorial components (i.e., social, environmental, economic).…”

“…Indeed, certainly producers of small and micro wine enterprises are aware of the importance of applying agro-ecological practices. However, the risk of not being competitive due to the high costs to be incurred for the greening transition is very high [58]. For this reason, SOStain indicators are approached differently from larger vs. smaller enterprises.…”

“…When involving other companies in the project there may be differences in understanding the value of sharing of efforts made (in the early years to achieve the actual goals) and the desire to go further. However, the importance and value of this environmental certification to increase the prestige of the brand name in the eyes of consumers [57,58] is common to both small and big producers, as is the intention to add value to the wines with the SOStain logo, which are commercial interests. It was also noted that for larger companies that would like to join the Foundation, the problem turns into "How much is it worth for me to change my image in the market in relation to the position I hold now?".…”