Search results

The primary purpose of this paper is to take an in-depth look at the question of whether liberalizing trade in agriculture can generate dynamic productivity gains comparable to those in the manufacturing sector.

In contrast to the manufacturing sector that has generated firm/plant-level trade data, there is a lack of farm-level trade data that are needed for empirical measurement of dynamic productivity gains. Therefore, the authors use thought experiments to analyze the sequence of events that would occur when trade is liberalized for agriculture; delineate the expected behaviors of the actors involved in the trade and draw inferences about whether there would be dynamic productivity gains from agricultural trade.

The central finding is that there would be little dynamic gain from agricultural trade at the farm level due to the limited role of producers in shaping their international competitiveness. Yet, agricultural trade may generate dynamic gains if states or input supply corporations respond to the freer trade environment by making more investments for research and development (R&D). Further, when intraindustry prevails, there can be productivity gains at the industry level due to the transfer of resources from less to more efficient farm producers.

The findings of the paper are expected to present insights into value for researchers working in the area of agricultural trade; for agricultural trade policymakers in developing countries and for trade negotiators engaged in reforming or designing World Trade Organization (WTO)’s trade rules for agriculture.

There are two main objectives of this paper. The first is to analyze household consumption pattern of soyfood products. The second is to investigate effect of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allowed health claims on consumption of soyfoods.

The objectives were accomplished in two stages. In the first stage, the role of consumers' perceived attributes of soy‐based foods such as convenience of preparation and consumption, health benefits, and taste in consumers' decisions to consume soy‐based food products was investigated. In the second stage, the study analyzed whether the decision of the Food and Drug Administration to allow food manufacturers to use health claims had influenced consumers' willingness to participate in soy‐based food market or willingness to increase consumption, if they are currently consuming such foods. Lancaster's characteristics model was combined with Fishbein's multi‐attribute model to develop a soybean demand function that included perceived attributes of soyfood. Zero‐inflated negative binomial model (ZINB) was used as an empirical specification to address zero consumption of soyfood products. Data were collected using a convenience sample drawn from a Midwest college town in the United States. Two questionnaires (i.e. one with information about the FDA's decision and the other without it) were given to students taking introductory marketing courses. In total 400 questionnaires were distributed and 315 respondents returned completed questionnaires.

Attributes of soy‐based food products such as convenience and tastefulness had statistically significant effect on the consumption pattern. Consumers who perceived beneficial health attributes in soyfood products were more likely to participate in the soyfood market as well as increase consumption frequency. The results indicated that frequent users of soyfood products who were exposed to the decision of the FDA would be more inclined to increase their consumption of soy‐based foods as compared to those who were not exposed to such information. Yet the information about FDA's decision did not influence the behavioral intentions of infrequent consumers or non‐consumers.

Research evaluating the impact of government allowed health claims on food consumption pattern is scarce. This paper sets up a platform for carrying out the evaluation of such health claims by other food products.

The objective of this paper is to evaluate the role of consumers’ perceived risks and benefits of agro‐biotechnology in shaping the purchase pattern for organic food among UK consumers.

An on‐line household survey of UK consumers was conducted using household panels maintained by the National Panel Diary (NPD) group. The data included organic food purchase pattern, perceived risks and benefits of agro‐biotechnology, and socio‐demographic information about the respondents. A regression model was used to examine the impact of consumers’ general purchase behavior, perceived risks and benefits of GM technology, and socio‐demographic on organic food purchase.

Only 4 percent of the respondents purchased organic foods all the time, while 26 percent never purchased. Perceived risks of agro‐biotechnology played a dominant role in influencing organic food purchase decisions. As the risk perception increased consumers were likely to buy organic food more often. Although premium prices of organic foods were of concern to many consumers, food safety was the most important consideration when making organic food purchase decisions. Household income positively influenced consumers’ likelihood of buying organic food. Female respondents were likely to purchase organic foods more often than their male counter parts. Older respondents were less likely to buy organic foods compared to younger respondents.

The results of this study provide valuable information in formulating short and long‐term marketing programs for organic producers. Following the study results, food safety concern and perceived risks of GM food products need to be the overall theme of marketing programs for organic products.

The study uses a large sample size in examining the relationship between perceived risks of agro‐biotechnology and organic food purchase. The results are more robust and representative.