Preferences for quality stamps and information impact on UHT milk purchase
Latent class analysis: preferences toward UHT milk with different quality stamps
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22167/2675-441X-2023646Keywords:
best-worst discrete choice experiment, latent class model, quality attributes, commercialization share, DracenaAbstract
The objective of this research was to study consumer preference heterogeneity in Dracena (state of Sao Paulo) toward UHT milk quality stamps: Sipaf, Quilombo do Brasil stamp, Brazil Organic Product, Fairtrade and commercialization price received by farmer. Due low level of these attribute knowledge among population, the research evaluated the information impact about these attributes on consumer preferences. Thus, interviews were conducted with people in the city public places, from April to June 2018. Consumers expressed their preferences through a Best-Worst Discrete Choice Experiment of case 3 and data were analysed by Latent Class Model. In total, 257 consumers participated in the study. The results show that there are two market segments, both before and after consumers receive information about quality attributes. The information did not have significant influence on preferences of 175 consumers, but 81 consumers started to value Quilombo do Brasil and Fairtrade stamp more and 35 consumers started to be more satisfied with the Sipaf certification and when farmers started to obtain higher percentage of UHT milk retail price.
References
Manarini, T. 2017. A redenção do leite. Saúde é Vital 412: 21-29. Disponível em: <https://ablv.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Materia-Leite-Revista-Saude5.pdf>.
Regis, N.S.; Barreto, D.V.S.; Jesus, S.S.; Santos, C.O.; Garcia, R.V.; Santos V.S. 2019. Perfil do consumidor de leite e preferência de consumo no município de Santa Inês, Bahia. Brazilian Journal of Food Research 10(2): 66-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.3895/rebrapa.v10n2.9209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3895/rebrapa.v10n2.9209
Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations (FAO). 2022. FAOSTAT: Livestock Primary. Disponível em: <https://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QCL>.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE). 2023a. Produção de leite 2021. Disponível em: <https://www.ibge.gov.br/explica/producao-agropecuaria/leite/br>.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE). 2017. Censo agropecuário 2017. Disponível em: <https://censos.ibge.gov.br/agro/2017>.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE). 2006. Censo Agropecuário 2006. Disponível em: <https://sidra.ibge.gov.br/pesquisa/censo-agropecuario/censo-agropecuario-2006/segunda-apuracao>.
Schrobback, P.; Zhang, A.; Loechel, B.; Ricketts, K.; Ingham, A. 2023. Food credence attributes: a conceptual framework of supply chain stakeholders, their motives, and mechanisms to address information asymmetry. Foods 12(3): 538. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12030538. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12030538
Aldanondo-Ochoa, A.M.; Almansa-Sáez, C. 2009. The private provision of public environment: consumer preferences for organic production systems. Land Use Policy 26: 669-682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.09.006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.09.006
Martins, A.P.O.; Bezerra, M.F.; Marques Júnior, S.; Brito, A.F.; Andrade Neto, J.C.; Galvão Júnior, J.G.B.; Lima Júnior, D.M.; Rangel, A.H.N. 2019. Consumer behavior of organic and functional foods in Brazil. Food Science and Technology, 40 (2): 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1590/fst.03519 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/fst.03519
Siqueira, K.B. 2019. O mercado consumidor de leite e derivados. Circular técnica 120. Embrapa, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brasil. Disponível em: <https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/item/199791/1/CT-120-MercadoConsumidorKennya.pdf>.
Secretaria de Políticas de Promoção da Igualdade Racial (SEPPIR). [s.d.]. Manual Selo Quilombos do Brasil. Disponível em: <https://www.mpma.mp.br/arquivos/CAOPDH/COMPLETO_Manual_Selo_Quilombos_WEB.pdf>.
Bossle, M.B.; Neutzling, D.M.; Wegner, D.; Bitencourt, C.C. 2017. Fair trade in Brazil: current status, constraints and opportunities. O&S 24(83): 655-673. https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-9240836 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-9240836
Conselho Nacional de Saúde (CNS). 2016. Resolução n. 510, de 07 de abril de 2016. Disponível em: <https://conselho.saude.gov.br/resolucoes/2016/Reso510.pdf>.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE). 2023b. IBGE Cidades. Disponível em: <https://cidades.ibge.gov.br/brasil/sp/dracena/panorama>.
Marley, A.A.J.; Pihlens, D. 2012. Models of best-worst choice and ranking among multiattribute options (profiles). Journal of Mathematical Psychology 56: 24-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2011.09.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2011.09.001
Aizaki, H. 2021. An illustrative example of case 3 Best-Worst Scaling. Disponível em: <http://lab.agr.hokudai.ac.jp/nmvr/05-bws3.html>.
Gracia, A.; de-Magistris, T. 2013. Preferences for lamb meat: A choice experiment for Spanish consumers. Meat Science 95: 396-402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.05.006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.05.006
Instituto de Economia Agrícola (IEA). 2018. Banco de dados. Disponível em: <http://www.iea.agricultura.sp.gov.br/out/Bancodedados.php>.
Fairtrade. 2023. Fairtrade producers overview. Disponível em: <https://www.fairtrade.net/impact/fairtrade-producers-overview>.
Siscomex. 2022. Certificação de orgânicos. Disponível em: < https://www.gov.br/siscomex/pt-br/servicos/aprendendo-a-exportarr/conhecendo-temas-importantes-1/certificacao-de-organicos>.
FiBL Statistics. 2023. Interactive online database. Disponível em: <https://statistics.fibl.org/data.html>.
Street, D.J.; Burgess, L. 2007. The construction of optimal stated choice experiments: Theory and methods. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470148563
Street, D.J.; Burgess, L.; Louviere, J.J. 2005. Quick and easy choice sets: Constructing optimal and nearly optimal stated experiments. International Journal of Research in Marketing 22(4): 459-470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.09.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.09.003
Kjær, T. 2005. A review of the Discrete choice experiment – with emphasis on its application in health care. Health Economic Paper 1. University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Finn, A.; Louviere, J.J. 1992. Determining the appropriate response to evidence of public concern: the case of food safety. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 11: 12-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/074391569201100202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/074391569201100202
Pitoglou, D.; Burge, P.; Flynn, T.; Netten, A.; Malley, J.; Forder, J.; Brasier, E.E. 2011. Best-Worst Scaling vs. Discrete Choice Experiments: An empirical comparison using Social Care Data. Social Science & Medicine 72(10): 1717-1727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.03.027. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.03.027
Marley, A.A.J.; Louviere, J. J. 2005. Some probabilistic models of best, worst, and best-worst choices. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 49(6): 464-480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2005.05.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2005.05.003
Guo, Q.; Shen, J. 2019. An empirical comparison between discrete choice experiment and best-worst scaling: a case study of mobile payment choice. In: Discussion paper series DP 2019-14, Research Institute for Economics and Business Administration, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan. Disponível em: <https://www.rieb.kobe-u.ac.jp/academic/ra/dp/English/DP2019-14.pdf>.
Greene, W.; Hensher, D.A. 2003. A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: Contrasts with mixed logit. Transport Research Part B: Methodological 37(8): 681-698. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-2615(02)00046-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-2615(02)00046-2
Singh, A.S.; Masuku, M.B. 2014. Sampling techniques & determination of sample size in applied statistics research: an overview. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management 2(11): 1-22. Disponível em: <https://ijecm.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/21131.pdf>.
Organização para a Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Econômico (OCDE). 2009. Consumer education: Policy recommendations of the OCDE’s Committee. Disponível em: <https://www.oecd.org/sti/consumer/44110333.pdf>.
Wu, X.; Hu, B.; Xiong, J. 2020. Understanding heterogeneous consumer preferences in Chinese Milk Markets: A Latent Class Approach. Journal of Agricultural Economics 71(1): 184-198. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12327. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12327
Tabacco, E.; Merlino, V.M.; Massagia, S.; Borreani, G. 2021. Analyses of consumers’ preferences and of the correspondence between direct and indirect label claims and the fatty acid profile of milk in large retail chains in north Italy. Journal of Dairy Science 104(12): 1226-1235. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2021-20191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2021-20191
Pereira, G.H.S.; Bankuti, F.I.; Brito, M.M.; Pozza, M.S.S.; Damaceno, J.C. 2018. Perfil do consumidor de leite e derivados no município de Maringá, PR. Scientia Agraria Paranaensis 17(1): 41-50. https://doi.org/10.18188/sap.v17i1.16254.
Louviere, J.J.; Hensher, D.A.; Swait, J.D. 2000. Stated choice methods: analysis and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511753831
Pindyck, R.S.; Rubinfeld, D.L. 2009. Microeconomía. 7ª Ed., Pearson Educación SA: Madrid.
Dugstad, A.; Grimsrud, K.M.; Kipperberg, G.; Lindhjem, H.; Navrud, S. 2021. Scope elasticity of willingness to pay in discrete choice experiments. Environmental and Resource Economics 80: 21-57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-021-00577-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-021-00577-7
Silva, J.S.; Melo, F.V.S.; Melo, S.R.S. 2016. Selo de certificação de produto orgânico: O consumidor se importa? Revista Alcance 23(4): 513-528. https://doi.org/alcance.v23n4.p513-528. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14210/alcance.v23n4(Out-Dez).p513-528
Carson, R.T.; Louviere, J.J. 2010. Experimental design and the estimation of willingness to pay in choice experiments for health policy evaluation. In: McIntosh, E.; Clarke, P.; Frew, E.J; Louviere, J.J. Applied Methods of Cost-Benefit Analysis in Health Care. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2010. Disponível em: <https://econweb.ucsd.edu/cee/papers/CarsonPapers/Carson_Louviere_April2010.pdf>.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Quaestum
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
