Skip Navigation

European Review of Agricultural Economics 2005 32(2):269-288; doi:10.1093/eurrag/jbi009
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rigby, D.
Right arrow Articles by Burton, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow Q18 - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy
Right arrow C25 - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice [...]
Right arrow D12 - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Oxford University Press and Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics 2005; all rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions{at}oupjournals.org

Preference heterogeneity and GM food in the UK

Dan Rigby

University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

Michael Burton

University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia

Corresponding author: Dan Rigby, Economic Studies, School of Social Science, Manchester University, Manchester M13 9PL, UK. Email: dan.rigby{at}man.ac.uk

Received June 2003; Revision received March 2005.

Summary

This study uses mixed logit models to reconsider the findings of choice experiment surveys with a focus on heterogeneity among consumers. The motivation is that these techniques allow the researcher to segment the market better. This is critical because it is not the average attitude or preference that is important, but the size of the groups who will be prepared to accept the product under certain circumstances. The causes of heterogeneity within the sample are investigated and the proportions of consumers willing to buy GM foods at various discounts are simulated.

Keywords: choice modelling, food safety, GM, mixed logit, random parameter, WTP, C25, D12, Q18


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 EUR REV AGRIC ECONHome page
F. Carlsson, P. Frykblom, and C. J. Lagerkvist
Consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare: mobile abattoirs versus transportation to slaughter
Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ., September 19, 2007; (2007) jbm025v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 EUR REV AGRIC ECONHome page
F. Alfnes and K. Rickertsen
Extrapolating experimental-auction results using a stated choice survey
Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ., September 18, 2007; (2007) jbm024v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 EUR REV AGRIC ECONHome page
N. Hanley, S. Colombo, D. Tinch, A. Black, and A. Aftab
Estimating the benefits of water quality improvements under the Water Framework Directive: are benefits transferable?
Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ., September 1, 2006; 33(3): 391 - 413.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 EUR REV AGRIC ECONHome page
M. L. Loureiro, A. Gracia, and R. M. Nayga Jr.
Do consumers value nutritional labels?
Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ., June 1, 2006; 33(2): 249 - 268.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.