scholarly journals Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Oil, Cornflakes, and Salmon: Evidence from a U.S. Telephone Survey

2005 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 701-719 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naoya Kaneko ◽  
Wen S. Chern

This paper reports results from a U.S. national telephone survey on genetically modified foods (vegetable oil, cornflakes, and salmon). The survey featured a contingent valuation in which respondents chose between the GM and non-GM alternatives with an option of indifference. The binomial and multinomial logit models yielded estimated willingness to pay (WTP) to avoid the GM alternatives. Respondents were willing to pay 20.9%, 14.8%, 28.4%, and 29.7% of the base prices to avoid GM vegetable oil, GM cornflakes, GM-fed salmon, and GM salmon, respectively. The inclusion of indifference option could increase the sample size and moderate the mean WTP.

Author(s):  
Dede Long ◽  
Grant H. West ◽  
Rodolfo M. Nayga

Abstract The agriculture and food sectors contribute significantly to greenhouse gas emissions. About 15 percent of food-related carbon emissions are channeled through restaurants. Using a contingent valuation (CV) method with double-bounded dichotomous choice (DBDC) questions, this article investigates U.S. consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for an optional restaurant surcharge in support of carbon emission reduction programs. The mean estimated WTP for a surcharge is 6.05 percent of an average restaurant check, while the median WTP is 3.64 percent. Our results show that individuals have a higher WTP when the surcharge is automatically added to restaurant checks. We also find that an information nudge—a short climate change script—significantly increases WTP. Additionally, our results demonstrate that there is heterogeneity in treatment effects across consumers’ age, environmental awareness, and economic views. Our findings suggest that a surcharge program could transfer a meaningful amount of the agricultural carbon reduction burden to consumers that farmers currently shoulder.


2021 ◽  
pp. 191-203
Author(s):  
Andrea Saayman ◽  
Melville Saayman

Abstract The research presented in this chapter determines the value that tourists on safari in protected areas in South Africa attach to elephant sightings and the relative importance of the elephant sighting compared with the other species in the Big Five. The study also determines whether tourists take the increased poaching of elephants - also in South Africa - into account when revealing their choice. Using information from five surveys conducted at different parks in South Africa from 2011 to 2013 and again in 2019, the elephant was found to be the fourth preferred species in the Big Five. The exception is Addo Elephant National Park, where the elephants are the second most preferred species. To determine the value that tourists attached to a sighting, contingent valuation was used. Although approximately a quarter to a third of respondents indicated positive amounts for a sighting across the years, the mean willingness to pay (WTP) reflects the scarcity of the species. The elephant is relatively abundant in all the parks and, in many instances, much easier to spot than the leopard or lion. It is therefore not surprising that the mean valuation of a sighting is much lower than that of the leopard and lion throughout all the years. Although tougher economic conditions in the country also influence WTP, it was found that tourists to South Africa's National Parks do not yet take the increased poaching of elephants into account when revealing their choice, nor in their valuation.


2000 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
pp. 1137-1144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Hsu ◽  
Ronald T. Wilcox

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document