Fair farming: Preferences for fair labor certification using four elicitation methods

Drichoutis, Andreas C. and Vassilopoulos, Achilleas and Lusk, Jayson and Nayga, Rodolfo M. (2015): Fair farming: Preferences for fair labor certification using four elicitation methods.

Abstract

High profile cases of exploitative labor practices have increased concerns over agricultural working conditions. However, it is unclear whether and to what extent the public is willing to trade-off fair working conditions for higher prices and food imports. We implement a large-scale survey to uncover Greek consumer preferences for a food labeling system that certifies fair working conditions for the workers employed at all production stages of agricultural production. Empirical findings from several disciplines suggest that results from contingent valuation surveys can be susceptible to hypothetical bias, social desirability bias, and lack of consequentiality. To test these issues, we use the 'cheap talk' method (Kling et al., 2012), Lusk and Norwood's (2009) Inferred Valuation (IV) method and the consequentiality scripts employed in Vossler and Evans (2009) and Vossler and Watson (2013). We also test predictions of reference dependent theory by testing whether framing the valuation question as an 'Equivalent Loss' (EL) differs from classical 'Willingness-to-pay elicitation' (WTP). We collected responses from more than 3,800 consumers in the cities of Athens and Ioannina in Greece. Our results show that neither the cheap talk nor the consequentiality script had any effect on elicited valuations. In contrast, the IV method appears to mitigate social desirability bias. We also find that values elicited under WTP are larger than values elicited under EL, which rejects neoclassical preferences. When social desirability is taken out of our estimates, we find that consumers are willing to pay an average premium of 72 cents/Kg for strawberries with fair labor certification, which is equivalent to 49% of current market prices.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: fair labor label; willingness to pay; equivalent loss; contingent valuation; inferred valuation; consequentiality; cheap talk; uncertainty scale
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C8 - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology ; Computer Programs > C83 - Survey Methods ; Sampling Methods; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C93 - Field Experiments; D - Microeconomics > D1 - Household Behavior and Family Economics > D12 - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q1 - Agriculture > Q13 - Agricultural Markets and Marketing ; Cooperatives ; Agribusiness

References

Arrow, K., R. Solow, P. R. Portney, E. E. Leamer, R. Radner, and H. Schuman (1993). Report of the NOAA panel of contingent valuation. Federal Register 58 (4601-4614).

Bateman, I., D. Kahneman, A. Munro, C. Starmer, and R. Sugden (2005). Testing competing models of loss aversion: an adversarial collaboration. Journal of Public Economics 89 (8), 1561-1580.

Bateman, I., A. Munro, B. Rhodes, C. Starmer, and R. Sugden (1997). A test of the theory of reference-dependent preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 112 (2), 479-505.

Bateman, I. J., I. H. Langford, A. Munro, C. Starmer, and R. Sugden (2000). Estimating four Hicksian welfare measures for a public good: A contingent valuation investigation. Land Economics 76 (3), 355-373.

Bulte, E., S. Gerking, J. A. List, and A. de Zeeuw (2005). The effect of varying the causes of environmental problems on stated wtp values: Evidence from a field study. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 49 (2), 330-342.

Buzby, J. C., J. A. Fox, R. C. Ready, and S. R. Crutchφιeld (1998). Measuring consumer benefits of food safety risk reductions. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 30 (1), 69-82.

Carson, R. T. (2012). Contingent valuation: A practical alternative when prices aren't available. Journal of Economic Perspectives 26 (4), 27-42.

Carson, R. T., N. E. Flores, and N. F. Meade (2001). Contingent valuation: Controversies and evidence. Environmental and Resource Economics 19 (2), 173-210.

Carson, R. T. and T. Groves (2007). Incentive and informational properties of preference questions. Environmental and Resource Economics 37 (1), 181-210.

Carson, R. T., T. Groves, and J. A. List (2014). Consequentiality: A theoretical and experimental exploration of a single binary choice. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists 1 (1), 171-207.

Carson, R. T., T. Groves, and M. J. Machina (1997). Stated preference questions: Context and optimal response. Paper presented at the National science foundation preference elicitation symposium, University of California, Berkeley.

Champ, P. A., R. C. Bishop, T. C. Brown, and D. W. McCollum (1997). Using donation mechanisms to value non-use benefits from public goods. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 33 (2), 151-162.

Charness, G., U. Gneezy, and M. A. Kuhn (2012). Experimental methods: Between-subject and within-subject design. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 81 (1), 1-8.

Corsi, A. (2007). Ambiguity of measured wtp for quality improvements when quantity is unconstrained: a note. European Review of Agricultural Economics 34 (4), 501-515.

Dragusanu, R., D. Giovannucci, and N. Nunn (2014). The economics of fair trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives 28 (3), 217-236.

Dummett, M. and R. Farquharson (1961). Stability in voting. Econometrica 29 (1), 33-43.

Dupont, D. P. and I. J. Bateman (2012). Political affiliation and willingness to pay: An examination of the nature of benefits and means of provision. Ecological Economics 75(0), 43-51.

Frederick, S. (2012). Overestimating others willingness to pay. Journal of Consumer Research 39 (1), 1-21.

Gibbard, A. (1973). Manipulation of voting schemes: A general result. Econometrica 41(4), 587-601.

Haab, T. C., M. G. Interis, D. R. Petrolia, and J. C. Whitehead (2013). From hopeless to curious? Thoughts on Hausman's dubious to hopeless critique of contingent valuation. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 35 (4), 593-612.

Herriges, J., C. Kling, C.-C. Liu, and J. Tobias (2010). What are the consequences of consequentiality? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 59 (1), 67-81.

Howard, P. H. and P. Allen (2006). Beyond organic: Consumer interest in new labelling schemes in the central coast of California. International Journal of Consumer Studies 30 (5), 439-451.

Howard, P. H. and P. Allen (2010). Beyond organic and fair trade? An analysis of ecolabel preferences in the united states. Rural Sociology 75 (2), 244-269.

Hustvedt, G. and J. C. Bernard (2010). Effects of social responsibility labelling and brand on willingness to pay for apparel. International Journal of Consumer Studies 34 (6), 619-626.

Kahneman, D., J. L. Knetsch, and R. H. Thaler (1990). Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem. 98 (6), 1325-1348.

Kling, C. L., D. J. Phaneuf, and J. Zhao (2012). From EXXON to BP: Has some number become better than no number? Journal of Economic Perspectives 26(4), 3-26.

Kurt, D. and J. J. Inman (2013). Mispredicting others' valuations: Self-other difference in the context of endowment. Journal of Consumer Research 40 (1), 78-89.

Levitt, S. D. and J. A. List (2007). What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world? Journal of Economic Perspectives 21 (2), 153-174.

List, J. A. and M. K. Price (2013). Using field experiments in environmental and resource economics. NBER Working Paper No. 19289.

Loewenstein, G. and D. Adler (1995). A bias in the prediction of tastes. The Economic Journal 105 (431), 929-937.

Lusk, J. and B. F. Norwood (2009a). Bridging the gap between laboratory experiments and naturally occurring markets:an inferred valuation method. Journal of Environmental Economic and Management 58 (2), 236-250.

Lusk, J. L. (2003). Effects of cheap talk on consumer willingness-to-pay for golden rice. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85 (4), 840-856.

Lusk, J. L. and B. F. Norwood (2009b). An inferred valuation method. Land Economics 85 (3), 500-514.

Mediamark Research and Intelligence (2009). Despite decades of gains in the workforce, women still the predominant household shoppers. http://www.gfkmri.com/PDF/MRIPR_111209_HouseholdShoppers.pdf. Last accessed on December 10, 2014.

Mitani, Y. and N. E. Flores (2013). Hypothetical bias reconsidered: Payment and provision uncertainties in a threshold provision mechanism. Environmental and Resource Economics, 1-22.

Morrison, M. and T. C. Brown (2009). Testing the effectiveness of certainty scales, cheap talk, and dissonance-minimization in reducing hypothetical bias in contingent valuation studies. Environmental and Resource Economics 44 (3), 307-326.

Munro, A. and R. Sugden (2003). On the theory of reference-dependent preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 50 (4), 407-428.

Novemsky, N. and D. Kahneman (2005). The boundaries of loss aversion. Journal of Marketing Research 42 (2), 119-128.

Ozdemir, S., F. R. Johnson, and A. B. Hauber (2009). Hypothetical bias, cheap talk, and stated willingness to pay for health care. Journal of Health Economics 28 (4), 894-901.

Poe, G. L. and C. A. Vossler (2011). Consequentiality and contingent values: An emerging paradigm. The international handbook on non-market environmental valuation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Poinssot, A. (2013, June). The migrant workers trapped in slave-like conditions in Greece. http://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/230613/migrant-workers-trapped-slave-conditions-greece. Last accessed on December 10, 2014.

Pronin, E. (2007). Perception and misperception of bias in human judgment. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11 (1), 37-43.

Satterthwaite, M. A. (1975). Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions. Journal of Economic Theory 10 (2), 187-217.

Stober, J. (2001). The social desirability scale-17 (sds-17): Convergent validity, discriminant validity, and relationship with age. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 17(3), 222-232.

Svensson, L.-G. and A. Reffgen (2014). The proof of the Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem revisited. Journal of Mathematical Economics 55(0), 11-14.

Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. 106 (4), 1039-1061.

Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5 (4), 297-323.

van Boven, L., D. Dunning, and G. Loewenstein (2000). Egocentric empathy gaps between owners and buyers: Misperceptions of the endowment effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (1), 66-76.

van Boven, L., G. Loewenstein, and D. Dunning (2003). Mispredicting the endowment effect: Underestimation of owners selling prices by buyers agents. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 51 (3), 351-365.

Vossler, C. A., M. Doyon, and D. Rondeau (2012). Truth in consequentiality: Theory and field evidence on discrete choice experiments. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 4 (4), 145-171.

Vossler, C. A. and M. F. Evans (2009). Bridging the gap between the field and the lab: Environmental goods, policy maker input, and consequentiality. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 58 (3), 338-345.

Vossler, C. A. and S. B. Watson (2013). Understanding the consequences of consequentiality: Testing the validity of stated preferences in the field. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 86, 137-147.