MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Do Ethical Consumers Care About Price? A Revealed Preference Analysis of Fair Trade Coffee Purchases

2006· article· en· W2143231006 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Chris Arnot, Peter C. Boxall, Sean B. Cash

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicOrganic Food and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsAgriculture Food and Rural Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPurchasingFair tradeEconomicsVendorOrder (exchange)PreferenceHumanitiesMicroeconomicsWelfare economicsBusinessMarketingPhilosophyInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The existing literature on socially responsible purchasing relies heavily on stated preference measures elicited through surveys that utilize hypothetical market choices. This paper explores consumers' revealed purchasing behavior with regard to fair trade coffee and is apparently the first to do so in an actual market setting. In a series of experiments, we investigated differences in consumer responsiveness to relative price changes in fair trade and non‐fair trade brewed coffees. In order to minimize the hypothetical bias that may be present in some experimental settings, we conducted our experiments in cooperation with a vendor who allowed us to vary prices in an actual coffee shop. Using a choice model, we found that purchasers of fair trade coffee were much less price responsive than those of other coffee products. The demonstration of low sensitivity to price suggests that the market premiums identified by stated preference studies do indeed exist and are not merely artifacts of hypothetical settings. La littérature existante sur la consommation responsable repose fortement sur les mesures des préférences déclarées recueillies lors d'enquêtes utilisant des choix hypothétiques. Le présent article examine le comportement d'achat révélé des consommateurs concernant le cafééquitable et constitue apparemment le premier article du genre à le faire dans le contexte d'un marché réel. Au cours d'une série d'expériences, nous avons examiné les différentes réactions des consommateurs concernant les changements du prix relatif des cafés infusés équitables et classiques (non équitables). Pour minimiser le biais hypothétique qui pourrait exister dans certaines situations expérimentales, nous avons effectué nos expériences en collaboration avec un fournisseur qui nous a donné la permission de modifier les prix dans un véritable café‐restaurant. À l'aide d'un modèle de choix, nos résultats ont montré que les consommateurs de cafééquitable réagissaient beaucoup moins au prix que les consommateurs de café classique. Cette faible sensibilité au prix donne à penser que les primes de marché identifiées dans les études sur les préférences déclarées existent effectivement et qu'elles ne sont pas de simples phénomènes de situations hypothétiques.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.148 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations237
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicOrganic Food and AgricultureFrench-language works237,207