Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-b4m5d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-16T16:16:32.990Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use of Spike Models in Measuring Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Non-GM Oil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Wuyang Hu
Wuyang Hu*
Affiliation:
Department of Resource Economics, University of Nevada, Reno. He was a Ph.D. graduate student and postdoctoral research fellow at the Department of Rural Economy at the University of Alberta while completing this manuscript.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, Chinese consumers' preferences and their willingness to pay (WTP) for non-genetically modified (GM) vegetable oil were elicited by a payment card approach. In addition to the conventional model, spike models, which were originally developed to evaluate public goods, were adopted in this paper. These spike models recognize the possibility of zero WTP and provide opportunities to analyze two correlated decision stages: whether to pay a premium for non-GM oil and how much the premium is. Results show that consumers behaved consistently in the two decision stages and there is a premium associated with non-GM oil.

Keywords

Chinese consumersnon-genetically modified oilspike modelswillingness to payQ13D12C25
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 38 , Issue 3 , December 2006 , pp. 525 - 538
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2006

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.)

References

Aadland, D., and Caplan, A.. “Incentive Incompatibility and Starting-Point Bias in Iterative Valuation Questions: Comment.” Land Economics 80(2004):312-15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
An, Y.M., and Ayala, A.R.. “A Mixture Model of Willingness to Pay Distributions.” Working Paper, Department of Economics, Duke University, 1996.Google Scholar
Beijing Statistical Yearbook 2002, China Statistics Press.Google Scholar
Brox, J.A., Kumar, R.C., and Stollery, K.R.. “Estimating Willingness to Pay for Improved Water Quality in the Presence of Item Nonresponse Bias.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85(2003):414-28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calia, P., and Strazzera, E.. “Bias and Efficiency of Single versus Double Bound Models for Contingent Valuation Studies: a Monte Carlo Analysis.” Applied Economics 32(2000): 1329-36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, J.C., Hanemann, W.M., and Signorello, G.. “One-And-One-Half-Bound Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation.” CUD ARE Working Paper, University of California, Berkeley, 2001.Google Scholar
Haab, T.C. “Nonparticipation or Misspecification? The Impacts of Nonparticipation on Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 14(1999):443-61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haab, T.C., and McConnell, K.E.. “Referendum Models and Negative Willingness to Pay: Alternative Solutions.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32(1997):251-70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hackl, E., and Pruckner, G.J.. “On the Gap Between Payment Card and Closed-Ended CVM-An-swers.” Applied Economics 31(1999):733-42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanemann, M., and Kanninen, B.. “The Statistical Analysis of Discrete Response CV Data.” Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the US, EU, and Developing Countries. Bateman, I. and Willies, K., eds. London: Oxford University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Health Canada. “Guidelines for the Safety Assessment of Novel Foods.” Internet site: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/food-aliment/mh-dm/ofb-bba/nfi-ani/e_nvvliiel7.html (Accessed February 22, 2004).Google Scholar
Holmes, T.P., and Kramer, R.A.. “An Independent Sample Test of Yea-Saying and Starting Point Bias in Dichotomous-Choice Contingent Valuation.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 29(1995):121-32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, W. “Exploring Heterogeneity in Consumers' Meat Store Choice in an Emerging Market.” Journal of Agribusiness 24(2006): 155–170.Google Scholar
Hu, W., and Chen, K.. “Can Chinese Consumers be Persuaded? The Case of Genetically Modified Vegetable Oil.” AgBioForum 7(2004): 124-32.Google Scholar
Hu, W., Veeman, M.M., and Adamowicz, W.L.. “Labeling Genetically Modified Food: Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences and the Value of Information.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 53(2005):83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, J., and Wang, Q.. “Agricultural Biotechnology Development and Policy in China.” AgBioForum 5(2002): 122-35.Google Scholar
International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications. ”CropBiotech Update February 11, 2005” Global Knowledge Centre on Crop Biotechnology. Internet site: http://www.isaaa.org/kc/ (Accessed February 15, 2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krinsky, I., and Robb, A.. “On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities.” Review of Economics and Statistics 68(1986):715-19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristrom, B. “Spike Models in Contingent Valuation.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79(1997): 1013-23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A., and Swait, J.D.. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFadden, D. “The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research.” Marketing Sciences 5(1986):275-97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFadden, D. “Contingent Valuation and Social Choice” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76(1994):689–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFadden, D., and Leonard, G.. “Issues in the Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods: Methodologies for Data Collection and Analysis.” Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. Hausman, J., ed. North Holland: Amsterdam, 1993.Google Scholar
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Natural Resource Damage Assessments under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, Fed. Reg. 58(10): 4601–14, 1993.Google Scholar
Rousu, M.C., Huffman, W.E., Shogren, J.F., and Tegene, A.. “Estimating the Public Value of Conflicting Information: The Case of Genetically Modified Foods.” Land Economics 80(2004): 125-35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowe, R.D., Schulze, W.D., and Breffle, W.S.. “A Test for Payment Card Biases.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 31(1996):178-85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strazzera, E., Scarpa, R., Calia, P., Garrod, G.D., and Willis, K.G.. “Modeling Zero Values and Protest Response in Contingent Valuation Surveys.” Applied Economics 35(2003a): 133-38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strazzera, E., Genius, M., Scarpa, R., and Hutchinson, G.. “The Effect of Protest Votes on the Estimates of WTP for Use Values of Recreational Sites.” Environmental and Resource Economics 25(2003b):461-76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werner, M. “Allowing for Zeros in Dichotomous-Choice Contingent-Valuation Models.” Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 17(1999): 479-86.Google Scholar
Werner, M. “The Effects of Extreme Design Points on Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Estimates.” Paper Presented at the World Congress of Environmental and resource Economists, Monterey, California, June 24-27, 2002.Google Scholar
Yoo, S., and Kwak, S.. “Using a Spike Model to Deal with Zero Response Data from Double Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Surveys.” Applied Economics Letters 9(2002):929-32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar