How Consumers Price Fresh Whole Milk Label?

Kanokwan CHANCHAROENCHAI

doi:10.14505//jemt.v8.1(17).14

Kanokwan CHANCHAROENCHAI Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14505//jemt.v8.1(17).14

Abstract

As it recently happens in the Thai market, the label or information on the UHT package is unclear whether it is made of fresh or powdered milk. In order to allow consumers to perceive the clear distinction between fresh and combined milk, the clear and government-certified label should be introduced. The questionnaires are constructed to draw consumers’ behavior and their utility from buying fresh milk with certified label. The 540 respondents, living in Bangkok and having experiences in buying or drinking UHT milk, are representatives in this investigation.

There are 171 respondents or 31.71% who show their unwillingness to pay even though most of them agree to the concept of market differentiation between fresh and combined milk. Based on the probity analysis, there are six factors that significantly explain the change in the possibility to pay for label. According to the finding, the weighted mean of MWTP is 1.96 Thai baht per 250 ml. Thai government must provide proactive strategies on the dissemination of information about milk nutrition and partial subsidy to keep consumers' demand for fresh milk. This increase in fresh milk demanded not only improves the consumers’ nutrition, but also implicitly supports the farmers’ welfare and trade balance.

References

[1] Berges, M., and Casellas, K. 2009. Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Milk Quality Attributes. Paper presented at the International Association of Agricultural Economists Conference, August 16-22, in Beijing, China. Available at: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/51746/2/Ref%20747%20WTPMilkQAttributes.pdf (accessed November 25, 2014)
[2] Calia, P., and Strazzera, E. 2000. Bias and Efficiency of Single vs. Double Bound Models for Contingent Valuation Studies: a Monte Carlo Analysis. Applied Economics, 10(32): 1329-36.
[3] Enneking, U. 2004. Willingness to Pay for Safety Improvements in the German Meat Sector: The Case of Q&S Label, European Review of Agricultural Economics, 2(31): 205-223.
[4] Forbes-Brown, S., Micheels E.T., and Hobbs, J.E. 2009. Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Milk and Ice Cream Products Containing the 100% Canadian Milk Symbol. Available at: http://www.ifama.org/files/824R%20 ForbesBrown,%20Micheels,%20and%20Hobbs%20%28IFAMA%29pdf (accessed December 1, 2014)
[5] Goldberg, I., and Roosen, J. 2005. Measuring Consumer Willingness to Pay for a Health Risk Reduction of Salmonellosis and Campylobacteriosis. Paper presented at 11th Congress of the EAAE (European Association of Agricultural Economists), The Future of Rural Europe in the Global Agri-Food System’, August 24-27, Copenhagen, Denmark.
[6] Haab, T.C., and McConnell, K.E. 2001. Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources: The Econometrics of Non-Market Valuation. Edward Elgar Publishing. Available at: http://s1.downloadmienphi.net/file/downloadfile 8/200/1375235.pdf
[7] Hanemann, W.M., Loomis, J., and Kanninen, B. 1991. Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 4(73): 1255-1263.
[8] Herriges, J.A., and Shogren, J.F. 1996. Starting Point Bias in Dichotomous Choice Valuation with Follow-Up Questioning, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 30: 112-131.
[9] Jerop, R., Kosgey, I.S., Owuor, G.O., and Chelanga, P.K. 2013. Consumer Willingness to Pay for Dairy Goat Milk in Siaya County, Kenya. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 25(125). Available at: http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd25/7/jero25123.htm (accessed November 25, 2014)
[10] Kimenju, S.C., and Groote, H.D. 2008. Consumer Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Food in Kenya. Agricultural Economics, 38: 35–46.
[11] Lancaster, K.J. 1966. A New Approach to Consumer Theory, The Journal of Political Economy, 2(74): 132-157.
[12] Loureiro, M.L., and Umberger, W.J. 2002. Estimating Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Country-of-Origin Labels for Beef Products. Paper presented at Selected Paper 2002 American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meetings, July 28-31, in Long Beach, California, USA.
[13] Loureiro, M.L., and Umberger, W.J. 2003. Estimating Consumer Willingness to Pay for Country-of-Origin Labeling. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 2(28): 287-301.
[14] Loureiro, M.L., and Umberger, W.J. 2005. Assessing Consumer Preferences for Country-of-Origin Labelling. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 1(37): 49-63.
[15] Loureiro, M.L., and Umberger, W.J. 2007. A Choice Experiment Model for Beef: What US Consumer Responses Tell Us about Relative Preference for Food Safety, Country-of-Origin Labelling and Traceability. Food Policy, 32: 496-514.
[16] McCluskey, J.J., and Loureio, M.L. 2003. Consumer Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Food Labelling: A Discussion of Empirical Studies. Journal of Food Distribution Research, 3(34): 95-102.
[17] Mitchell, R.C., and Carson, R.T. 1989. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, D.C., Johns Hopkins University Press.
[18] Oyekale, T.O., Ayegbokiki, A.O., and Oyekale, A.S. 2013. Awareness of IFSERAR’s Pasteurized Milk, Perception and Willingness to Pay in Odeda Local Government Area of Ogun State, Nigeria. J Hum Ecol, 2(44): 195-201.
[19] Salazar, H.A., and Oerlemans, L. 2016. Do We Follow the Leader or the Masses? Antecedents of the Willingness to Pay Extra for Eco-Products. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 2(50): 286–314. DOI:10.1111/joca.12074
[20] Saraithong, W. 2016. Estimating Willingness to Pay for Safe Beef. Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism, Volume VII, Spring, 1(13): 94-104. DOI:10.14505/jemt.v7.1(13).09
[21] Skuras, D., Vakrou, A. 2002. Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Origin Labelled Wine: A Greek Case Study. British Food Journal, 11(104): 898-912.
[22] Tonsor, G.T., Schroeder, T.C., and Lusk, J. L. 2013. Consumer Valuation of Alternative Meat Origin Labels. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 3(64): 676-692.