MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

U.S. Consumers’ Preference and Willingness to Pay for Country‐of‐Origin‐Labeled Beef Steak and Food Safety Enhancements

2012· article· en· W2152289132 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Kar Ho Lim, Wuyang Hu, Leigh J. Maynard, Ellen Goddard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultural scienceWillingness to payWelfare economicsGeographyBusinessAgricultural economicsEconomicsBiologyMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While previous studies have investigated country‐of‐origin effect from various angles, the extent to which Country‐of‐Origin Labelling (COOL) affects U.S. beef imports from specific countries remains unexplored. Using data from 1,079 consumers from the United States, we examined consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for Canadian and Australian beefsteaks. We also estimated WTP for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)–tested traceability‐enabled, tenderness‐assured, and natural beef. The results from both a mixed logit model and a latent class model (LCM) revealed unobserved taste heterogeneity and important differences in the WTP between the imported and domestic steak. The LCM, for instance, estimated the range of discount needed for consumers to switch from U.S. to Canadian steak as $1.09 to $35.12 per pound. This strongly suggested that U.S. consumers prefer domestic‐originated beef to imported beef. In addition, consumers were found to be willing to pay significant amount for BSE‐tested, traceability‐enabled, and tenderness‐assured beef. Bien que des études antérieures aient examiné les répercussions de l’étiquetage du pays d’origine sous différents angles, les répercussions de cet étiquetage obligatoire sur les importations étatsuniennes de bœuf en provenance de pays spécifiques ne l’ont pas été. À l’aide de données tirées d’un échantillon de 1079 consommateurs étatsuniens, nous avons examiné le consentement à payer (CAP) pour du bifteck en provenance du Canada et de l’Australie. Nous avons également examiné le CAP des consommateurs pour du bœuf provenant d’un animal ayant subi un test de dépistage de l’ESB, traçable, de tendreté assurée et naturel. Les résultats obtenus à l’aide d’un modèle logit mixte et d’un modèle à classes latentes ont révélé une hétérogénéité non observée du goût et des écarts importants dans le CAP pour du bifteck provenant des États‐Unis et de l’extérieur du pays. Le modèle à classes latentes, par exemple, a révélé que les écarts de rabais nécessaires pour que les consommateurs délaissent le bifteck américain pour le bifteck canadien variaient de 1,09 $à 35,12 $ la livre. Ces résultats montrent clairement que les consommateurs étatsuniens préfèrent le bœuf des États‐Unis plutôt que le bœuf importé. Les résultats montrent également que les consommateurs sont prêts à payer plus cher pour du bœuf provenant d’un animal ayant subi un test de dépistage de l’ESB, traçable et de tendreté assurée.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.092 · 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

Citations140
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207