Interaction Between Food Attributes in Markets: The Case of Environmental Labeling

Some consumers derive utility from using products produced with specific processes, such as environmentally friendly practices. Means of verifying these credence attributes, such as certification, are necessary for the market to function effectively. A substitute or complementary solution may exist when consumers perceive a relationship between a process attribute and other verifiable product attributes. We present a model where the level of search and experience attributes influences the likelihood of production of eco-friendly products. Our results suggest that the market success of eco-friendly food products requires a mix of environmental and other verifiable attributes that together signal credibility.environmental labeling, food attributes, food marketing, quality perception, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety,

Why some countries adopt ecolabeling schemes in their regulatory arsenal and others do not?

We use data to investigate econometrically the determinants of the adoption of ecolabeling schemes among countries. Our findings show that economic and political freedoms, innovation capacities and experience with other environmental voluntary approaches play a major, sometimes counter-intuitive, role to explain the diffusion of governmental ecolabeling programs.Ecolabels Diffusion Environmental policy.

The characteristics of chemical firms registering for ISO 14001 or Responsible Care

We use survey data to investigate the determinants of chemical firms' registration for the ISO 14001 standard or the Responsible Care program. We show that most determinants are different for the two systems analyzed: while firm size, previous experience with similar standards, information disclosure requirements and customers'' location are major determinants of ISO 14001 standard registration, regulatory pressure, past environmental problems, and future risks are the main drivers of Responsible Care registration.

Contracting for Environmental Property Rights: The Case of Vittel

Based on an authentic case of contracting for environmental property rights, our paper shows several implications of applying the Coases propositions. The case study adds empirical content to basic transaction costs concepts by analyzing the design and implementation of a contractual arrangement between a pollutee a bottler of mineral water Vittel and several polluting farmers. We analyze the bargaining between land and water rights owners and the bottler Vittel to determine how transaction cost issues (valuation disputes, bi-lateral monopoly conditions, and third-party effects) were overcome and how they succeeded in contracting for environmental property rights. We provide several comparisons of the Vittel case with other similar cases, leading to generalizations and testable propositions for environmental rights negotiations.case study, contracting, environmental property rights, environmental-related transactions, private arrangement, Vittel, Environmental Economics and Policy, H23, K23, Q15, Q25,

Buy local, pollute less: What drives households to join a community supported farm?

This paper examines which factors determine the participation of households in long term contracting with local farmers. Are households motivated by reducing the environmental impacts of their food consumption? A discrete-choice model of community supported agriculture (CSA) participation is applied to a sample of 264 French households. The findings suggest that difficult-to-measure attributes, notably environmental considerations play a major role in explaining CSA participation.community supported agriculture; food supply; transaction cost economics

Dealing with the aversion to the sucker’s payoff in public goods game

A usual explanation to low levels of contribution to public goods is the fear of getting the sucker’s payoff (cooperation by the participant and defection by the other players). In order to disentangle the effect of this fear from other motives, we design a public good game where people have an insurance against getting the sucker’s payoff. We show that contributions to the public good under this ‘protective’ design are significantly higher and interact with expectations on other individuals' contribution to the public good. Some policy implications and extensions are suggested.

Can Positional Concerns Enhance the Private provision of Public Goods?

The social welfare effect of positional concerns over public goods is composed of two parts, a positional outcome and an outcome in terms of public goods provision. When agents have homogenous positional preferences over the public good, they overinvest in the positional public good, resulting in a zero-sum positional race with a higher provision of the public good. When agents differ in their positional preferences, the overall impact on social welfare is positive when endowments are homogenous and uncertain when endowments are heterogeneous. Given that the social loss from position-seeking is lower than the social gain from rank seeking, there is an increase of social welfare. If agents have different initial endowments, positional preferences might still be welfare enhancing as long as the positional loss does not exceed the gain in terms of public good provision.

Dealing with aversion to the sucker's payoff in public goods games

A usual explanation to low levels of contribution to public goods is the fear of getting the sucker's payoff (cooperation by the participant and defection by the other players). In order to disentangle the effect of this fear from other motives, we design a public good game where people have an insurance against getting the sucker's payoff. We show that contributions to the public good under this ‘protective' design are significantly higher and interact with expectations on other individuals' contribution to the public good. Some policy implications and extensions are suggested.Experiments, Public good, Sucker's payoff, Assurance

Does aversion to the sucker's payoff matter in public goods games?

A usual explanation to low levels of contribution to public goods is the fear of getting the sucker’s payoff (cooperation by the participant and defection by the other players). In order to disentangle the effect of this fear from other motives, we design a public good game where people have an assurance against getting the sucker’s payoff. We show that contributions to the public good under this ‘protective’ design are significantly higher and interact with expectations on other individuals' contribution to the public good. Some policy implications and extensions are suggested.Experiments, Public good, Sucker’s payoff, Assurance