This study investigates consumer preferences for two emerging food waste reduction technologies – gene editing and all-natural spray coating – applied to apples. Using a discrete choice experiment with a nationally representative sample of U.S. consumers (n = 413), we estimate willingness to pay for gene-edited apples, spray-coated apples, and untreated apples. A generalized mixed logit model in willingness to pay space reveals that consumers exhibit the highest WTP for gene-edited apples ($2.45/lb), followed by spray-coated apples ($2.37/lb), with untreated apples valued least ($1.79/lb). Latent Class Analysis identifies three consumer segments: Price-Sensitive Skeptics, Sustainability-Oriented Consumers, and Selective Technology Adopters. Sustainability-Oriented Consumers showed the strongest support for both technologies, while Selective Technology Adopters displayed a clear preference for gene editing. Behavioral attitudes, rather than demographic variables, were the main drivers of segmentation. These findings suggest that tailored marketing strategies and policy interventions, including sustainability messaging, pricing incentives, and educational outreach, can support the adoption of food waste-reducing technologies. Overall, consumers are receptive to both gene-edited and spray-coated apples, though concerns about biotechnology and price sensitivity remain. Results offer insights for producers, retailers, and regulators aiming to enhance fresh produce sustainability and reduce food waste along the supply chain.

People with disabilities face barriers to employment compared to people without disabilities, including the way in which employment opportunities are structured. The COVID-19 pandemic has opened up new ways of working (e.g. working from home), which have been trialled in a number of different locations, and these have the potential to widen employment opportunities for people with disabilities. It is therefore important to explore the extent to which job preferences differ between people with disabilities and people without disabilities, in particular for aspects such as teleworking. In total, 253 participants (62 male and 191 female) took part in a discrete choice experiment (DCE) that investigates participants’ preferences for various job aspects. These include discretionary medical leave, flexible scheduling, working from home, and the availability of part-time jobs. People with disabilities significantly prefer flexible scheduling and the availability of part-time jobs compared to people without disabilities. The results of a latent class analysis suggest it is older women with disabilities in particular, who most value increased flexible job design. An analysis of lexicographic preferences suggests that it is people who are most constrained by ‘traditional’ working conditions who benefit the most from increased flexibility, e.g. people who require teleworking or flexible scheduling. This suggests that wider adoption of these attributes by employers has the potential to go some way towards addressing the persistent disability employment gaps and related health inequalities observed in many countries around the world.

Lionfish, as an invasive species, significantly disrupts marine ecosystems. Promoting lionfish as eatable seafood among consumers may effectively reduce the lionfish population, alleviating its impact on marine ecosystems. The primary goal of this article is to assess lionfish’s market potential and determine an effective policy instrument to nudge consumers’ preference for lionfish. Discrete choice experiments are used to elicit consumer preferences for seafood dishes. In addition, we use a split-sample approach to test the effects of providing information about the ecological benefit of eating lionfish. Results indicate that consumer willingness-to-pays for other fish species were substantially higher than that of lionfish, even with the information treatment.

Corporate political engagement is increasingly noticeable at grocery stores; however, there is limited research evaluating the impact on consumer demand. Here, we investigate the case of Aunt Jemima (AJ), which responded to criticism that the branding was racist by removing the eponymous image and renaming the brand Pearl Milling Company. We evaluate the changes on demand for both the brand and their competitors and find that renaming the brand reduced both willingness to pay for and choice of AJ and increased choice of competitors. Finally, we show these effects are mitigated significantly by informing consumers of the reason for rebranding.

This study investigates whether wording a promotional marketing message as originating from the US government vs. the US president impacts consumers’ responsiveness to the message. Using a discrete choice experiment, it examines consumer responsiveness to President Biden’s order promoting domestic production. Results indicate that consumers are willing to pay a premium for domestically produced tomatoes, with variations based on political affiliations and product attributes like organic labeling and farm employment practices. However, findings on the significance of information treatment effects are mixed, suggesting that consumer responsiveness is unaffected by wording the message as originating from a broad political body vs. a specific politician.

Dairy farming in Europe faces profound environmental, social, and economic sustainability challenges, which are of significant policy interest. These challenges support the need for a transition toward the uptake of more sustainable dairy farming practices. This paper examines the effects of an advisory instrument “balanced sustainability information” on farmers’ preferences for more grass-based feeding systems using a between-subjects design and a discrete choice experiment among a sample of Swedish dairy farmers. Conceptually, we develop a state-dependent utility framework with Bayesian updating to motivate the impact pathway. Our results demonstrate that on average, balanced sustainability information has negligible effects on farmers’ feed choices, which could be a consequence of opposing responses to the information, among others. Considering farmer heterogeneity based on their identities and prior knowledge, we find support for some evidence of treatment effects. Our findings highlight important and policy-relevant critical reflections about overoptimistic expectations of information provision as an instrument to nudge behavioral change toward more sustainable farming practices.

This study employs a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) in the health-care sector to test the loss aversion theory that is derived from reference-dependent preferences: The absolute subjective value of a deviation from a reference point is generally greater when the deviation represents a loss than when the same-sized change is perceived as a gain. As far as is known, this paper is the first to use a DCE to test the loss aversion theory. A DCE is a highly suitable tool for such testing because it estimates the marginal valuations of attributes, based on deviations from a reference point (a constant scenario). Moreover, loss aversion can be examined for each attribute separately. Another advantage of a DCE is that is can be applied to non-traded goods with non-tangible attributes. A health-care event is used for empirical illustration: The loss aversion theory is tested within the context of preference structures for maternity-ward attributes, estimated using data gathered from 3850 observations made by a sample of 542 women who had recently given birth. Seven hypotheses are presented and tested. Overall, significant support for behavioral loss aversion theories was found.

In this paper, we use a discrete choice experiment conducted among pastoralists in four different semi-arid counties in Kenya characterized by different land tenure regimes to analyze how pastoralists make tradeoffs between tenure security and grazing flexibility – the so-called pastoralist paradox. Results show that there is one group of respondents who are desperate for change and seem to prefer either group or private title deeds to their current situation. A second, smaller group has strong preferences for the status quo, which could be driven by their relatively short migration distances. Concerning index-based livestock insurance, the basis risk suffered by insured pastoralists due to underprediction is high, but willingness to pay (WTP) for livestock insurance should still be high enough to ensure maximum uptake, leaving current low uptakes hard to explain. The worry about climate change is high but does not translate into increased WTP for more secure tenure or formal livestock insurance.

Schistosomiasis is caused by a vector-borne parasite, commonly found in low- and middle-income countries. People become infected by direct contact with contaminated water through activities such as collecting water, bathing and fishing. Water becomes contaminated when human waste is not adequately contained. We administered a discrete choice experiment to understand community preferences for interventions that would reduce individuals' risk of contracting, or transmitting, Schistosoma mansoni. These focused on water access, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions. We compared interventions that target behaviours that mainly put oneself at higher risk versus behaviours that mainly put others at risk. We used two payment vehicles to quantify what individuals are willing to give up in time and/or labour for interventions to be implemented. Key findings indicate that new sources of potable water and fines on open defecation are the highest valued interventions.

The use of bio-based fertilizers derived from dairy manure can provide a valuable source of fertility, improve soil health and provide an outlet for manure from dairy operations. We conducted a small-scale discrete choice survey of crop farmers and crop consultants in Washington State to determine the attributes that were important to them in the potential use of a bio-based fertilizer product derived from dairy manure. Of the attributes examined, distribution channel was not statistically significant. Respondents preferred air-dried or pelletized forms to wet forms, though there was no statistically significant difference between air-dried and pelletized forms. As expected, uptake increased as price decreased. Our results imply that respondents would be willing to pay 23 and 39% more for an air-dried or pelletized product, respectively, than for a ‘semi-wet’ product. Our results indicate that there are other important attributes beyond the ones in the survey that led respondents to stay with their current fertilizer regime. Qualitative responses in the survey pointed to the need for field trial results and data on nitrogen release from the bio-based fertilizer. Greater understanding of willingness-to-pay and attributes important to potential end users is important for the development of markets for bio-based fertilizers.

Despite a proliferation of articles focused on consumer willingness-to-pay for locally produced foods, few studies have systemically considered the role of food identity in the price premium of local foods. This article uses primary and secondary data to fill that gap. Using data from 9,329 U.S. households, we identify what foods each state considers a part of their collective food identity. We then compare each state's collective food identity to the actual production within the state. Finally, we utilize a discrete choice experiment (N = 484) focused on a state with one such collective food identity to test whether a consumer's preference for local foods is a function of the collective food identity within the state. Results from the open-ended survey suggest that each state connects with their food production in unique ways and that not all state identities are consistent with actual agricultural production. Results from the discrete choice experiment suggest that consumers are more willing to pay a premium for the local food that is a part of their local food identity than for a similar product that is not a part of their local food identity. Our findings imply that future research on consumer preferences for local food systems should consider the relationship between food culture and geography.

While many studies have evaluated consumer demand for local foods, fewer studies have focused on the mechanism that has created the positive willingness-to-pay for local foods. This article compares the role of geographic distance and attachment value in consumer preferences for locally produced hard cider. Consumer valuations are estimated via a “branded” discrete choice experiment where the respondents chose between an in-state hard cider, an out-of-state hard cider, and a no buy option. Our measure of travel distance is based on the optimal driving route between each consumer's GPS location and the locations of the cideries while our attachment value measure is based on social capital theory. This allows us to analyze individual-specific travel distance heterogeneity in consumer choice as it relates to attachment value. Based on a latent class logit model estimated from a discrete choice experiment with 441 participants, we show that attachment value is higher for a cider produced within the state than for a cider produced outside the state. Furthermore, we show that increases in attachment value increase demand for locally produced hard cider more than an equal increase in attachment value for non-locally produced hard cider. Our findings are consistent with “local” preferences based on geopolitical boundaries (e.g., the state of Michigan) and not distance. (JEL Classifications: B55, M3, Q13, C83)

This paper looks at how to measure the tradeoffs in monetary terms that the public is prepared to make with respect to adoption of different community policing options. The approach advanced is a discrete choice experiment in which survey respondents face different policing options which can be described by a set of attributes ranging from costs to outcomes. The main contribution of this paper is to show how to go beyond the usual characterization of the monetized benefits of reducing the level of a specific type of crime to asking the question of whether those benefits differ depending on how that outcome is achieved.

Despite its importance in benefit-cost analyses in the water supply, transportation, and health care sectors, there are relatively few empirical estimates of the value of travel time savings (VTT) in low-income countries, particularly in rural areas. Analysts instead often rely on a textbook “rule of thumb” of valuing time at 50% of prevailing unskilled wage rates, though these benchmarks have little empirical support in these settings. We estimate the value of travel time through the use of a repeated discrete choice stated preference exercise. We asked 325 rural households in Meru County, Kenya to rank two new hypothetical water sources against their current water source. The two new hypothetical sources were described as safe and reliable to use, but varied only in their distance from the household and the price charged per water container. Results from random-parameters logit models imply an average value of travel time of 18 Ksh/hr, and generally support the 50% rule. These models produce the first individual-level VTT estimates reported in a low-income setting, and indicate statistically-significant heterogeneity in VTTs, though the heterogeneity is not well correlated with observables. A latent-class approach identifies four classes of respondents: one class (about one third of respondents) values time very highly (49 Ksh/hr), one poorer group values time hardly at all (less than 1 Ksh/hr), and two groups value time at approximately 9 Ksh/hr.