Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T16:20:48.823Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quality Perceptions and Willingness-to-Pay for Imported Rice in Japan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Hikaru Hanawa Peterson  and
Kentaro Yoshida
Hikaru Hanawa Peterson
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS
Kentaro Yoshida
Affiliation:
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Attitudes of Japanese consumers toward domestic and foreign varieties of rice were analyzed on the basis of a survey. We found that the current retail prices for imported rice are higher than the average consumers' willingness-to-pay (WTP), whereas most domestic rice was priced below the average WTP. Unfamiliarity or negative perceptions of the safety and flavor of foreign rice lowered WTP substantially. The WTP for U.S. rice was limited more by negative perceptions of flavor than from concerns about food safety.

Keywords

choice experimentfood safetyJapanquality perceptionsriceU.S. exportwillingness-to-payQ13
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , April 2004 , pp. 123 - 141
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akai, M., and Itaoka, K.. “A Study on Methodology to Estimate Value of Statistical Life by Contingent Valuation Method.” Proceedings of Annual Meetings of Society for Environmental Economics and Policy, 2001, pp. 240–1.Google Scholar
Baker, G.A. “Consumer Preferences for Food Safety Attributes in Fresh Apples: Market Segments, Consumer Characteristics, and Marketing Opportunities.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 24(July 1999):80–97.Google Scholar
Bonino, E. Speech by the Commissioner in Charge of Consumer Policy and Health Protection, Consumer Protection in E-commerce Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue, Brussels, April 22-23, 1999, EU Background Papers, Department of Food Science and Technology, the University of Reading, UK. Internet site: http://www.foodlaw.edg.ac.uk/eu/doc-12.htm (Accessed May 21, 2003).Google Scholar
Burton, M., Rigby, D., Young, T., and James, S.. “Consumer Attitudes to Genetically Modified Organisms in Food in the U.K.” European Review of Agricultural Economics 28(December 2001):479–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Food Agency. Rice and Wheat Databook, 2001. Tokyo, Japan: Mizuho Kyokai, 2001.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H.NLOGIT Version 3.0. Reference Guide. Plainview, NY: Econometric Software, Inc., 2002.Google Scholar
Hausman, J., and McFadden, D.. “Specification Tests for the Multinomial Logit Model.” Econometrica 52(September 1984):1219–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ito, S., Fujii, Y., and Higuchi, H.. “Quantitative Evaluation of Foreign Produced Japónica Rice.” Sogo Nogaku 40(March 1993):66–72. [In Japanese with English abstract]Google Scholar
Johnson, E. “Viva la Difference.” The Japan Times, February 17, 2002, in the Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe database. Internet site: http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe (Accessed October 22, 2002).Google Scholar
Kawai, K.A Dreadful Strategy of ‘Rice Importing’: In Order to Protect Rice and Rice Paddies from WTO Agreements. (Osorubeki Yunyu-mai Sen-ryaku). Tokyo, Japan: Godo Shuppan, Inc., 2000. [In Japanese]Google Scholar
Kuperis, P.A., Veeman, M.M., and Adamowicz, W.L.. “consumers' Responses to the Potential Use of Bovine Somatotrophin in Canadian Dairy Production.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 47(July 1999):151–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J. “Tailoring Rice to Suit Consumers.” Agricultural Research 46(August 1998):18–21.Google Scholar
Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A., and Swait, J.D.. State Choice Methods. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mainichi Shimbun. “Food Safety:81 Percent of Housewives Are Concerned.” December 27, 2002. Internet site: http://www.mainichi.co.jp/women/news/200212/28-02.html (Accessed May 5, 2003). [In Japanese]Google Scholar
Mitchell, R.C., and Carson, R.T.. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future, 1989.Google Scholar
Nougyou Shimbun. “Looking Back on 2002, Part 3: Food Scares Rock the Country.” December 31, 2002. Internet site: http://www.nougyou-shimbun.ne.jp/column/021231/ (Accessed May 5, 2003). [In Japanese]Google Scholar
Quagrainie, K.K., Unterschultz, J., and Veeman, M.M.. “Effects of Product Origin and Selected Demographics on Consumer Choice of Red Meats.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 46(July 1998):201–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swait, J.D., and Louviere, J.J.. “The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Use of Multinomial Logit Models.” Journal of Marketing Research 30(August 1993):305–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. “Consumer Food Safety Behavior: Consumer Concerns.” Briefing Room, May 2002. Internet site: http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/ConsumerFoodSafety/consumercon-cerns/ (Accessed May 21, 2003).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service. “Trade Promotion and Agriculture: What's at Stake for Arkansas.” October 2001. Internet site: http://www.fas.usda.gov/info/factsheets/TPA/ar.html (Accessed July 5, 2002).Google Scholar
West, G.E., Larue, B., Gendron, C., and Scott, S.L.. “Consumer Confusion Over the Significance of Meat Attributes: The Case of Veal.” Journal of Consumer Policy 25(March 2002):65–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar