ارزش‌گذاری بهبود کیفیت گوشت مرغ از دیدگاه مصرف‌کنندگان در شیراز

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

2 استاد بخش اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

3 استاد گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشکدة کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

چکیده

هدف پژوهش حاضر برآورد تمایل به پرداخت اضافه مصرف‌کنندگان گوشت مرغ سلامت‌محور و بررسی عوامل مؤثر بر آن در شهر شیراز بود. در مطالعه حاضر، ابتدا گوشت مرغ سلامت‌محور بر اساس سه ویژگی عدم مصرف آنتی‌بیوتیک در دوره پرورش، تخلیه کامل اندرونه‌ها در زمان کشتار و وزن متوسط لاشه (مرغ سایز) در محل عرضه، به شهروندان شیرازی معرفی شد. به‌منظور استخراج تمایل به پرداخت مصرف‌کنندگان، از روش ارزش‌گذاری مشروط دوگانه با سؤال‌های یک‌طرفه و دوطرفه و تکمیل 601 پرسشنامه به‌صورت حضوری در پاییز سال 1396 استفاده شد. با انجام پیش‌آزمون، پارامترهای توزیع تمایل به پرداخت جامعه هدف تعیین و بر اساس روش کوپر، انتخاب بهینة بردار پیشنهاد قیمت صورت گرفت. نتایج تخمین مدل‌های اقتصادسنجی، برتری کارآیی روش دوطرفه نسبت به یک ‌طرفه را نشان داد. بر اساس یافته‌ها، تحصیلات (به‌ویژه در بین زنان) و درآمد خانوار به‌طور مثبت و سن و بعد خانوار به‌صورت منفی بر تمایل به پرداخت اضافه اثرگذار بودند. متوسط تمایل به پرداخت اضافه مصرف‌کنندگان برای هر کیلوگرم گوشت مرغ سلامت‌محور در مدل‌های یک‌ طرفه و دوطرفه، به‏ترتیب، 26420 و 24240 ریال برآورد شد، که معادل 35 و 32 درصد بیش از قیمت بازاری گوشت مرغ معمولی است. تمایل به پرداخت اضافه از سوی مصرف ‌کنندگان نشان داد که تقاضای بالقوه‌ای برای گوشت مرغ سلامت‌محور وجود دارد و از این‏رو، تولیدکنندگان می‌توانند با بهره‏گیری از این فرصت، از طریق تولید و عرضه این محصول منتفع شوند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Valuing the Quality of Chicken Meat from Consumers' Viewpoint in Shiraz City of Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Samad Erfanifar 1
  • M. Bakhshoodeh 2
  • M. Zibaei 3
1 PhD Student in Agricultural Economics, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
2 Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
3 Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
چکیده [English]

This study aimed at estimating the consumers' willingness to pay (WTP) a premium price and examining the factors influencing them for health-oriented chicken meat in Shiraz city of Iran. For this purpose, the health-oriented chicken meat with three attributes (including antibiotics free production process, full emptying of chicken abdominal contents during slaughtering and average carcass weight, i.e. size chicken, at the place of supply) was primarily introduced to the consumers. Contingent valuation method with single and double bounded questionnaires was used to assess the consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) by completing 601 face to face questionnaires during autumn 2017. By performing a pretest, the parameters of the WTP distribution of target statistical population were determined and based on the methodology of Cooper (1993), the bid price vector was selected optimally. The results of the econometric models estimation showed an efficiency superiority of the double-bounded model over the single-bounded model. In addition, the household head’s educational level and the household income indicated positive effects on WTP while age and household dimension represented significantly negative effects. The extra consumers' WTP for health-oriented chicken meat was estimated to be averagely 26420 and 24240 IR Rial/Kg for single and double bounded models, respectively, that is, 35 and 32 percent of the conventional chicken meat price. Willing to pay an extra price implicitly implies a potential demand, suggesting an opportunity for the producers to gain from the health-oriented chicken meat in the market.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Health-oriented chicken
  • Contingent valuation
  • Vector of bid values
  • Willingness to pay
  • Shiraz

مراجع

  1. Amiyan, S., Kavoosi Kalashami, M., Amir, Z. and Gheibi, S. (2017). Assessment of factors influencing consumers’ willingness to pay for organic chicken in Urmia. Agricultural Economics Research, 9(35): 75-96. (Persian)
  2. Barimnejad, V. and Hooshmandan, A. (2013). Determining consumers’ willingness to pay in purchasing safe vegetables in Tehran. Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, 5(2): 131-150. (Persian)
  3. Bishop, R.C. and Heberlein, T.A. (1979). Measuring values of extramarket goods: are indirect measures biased? American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 61(5): 926-930.
  4. Boyle, K.J., Johnson, F.R., McCollum, D.W., Desvousges, W.H., Dunford, R.W. and Hudson, S.P. (1996). Valuing public goods: discrete versus continuous contingent-valuation responses. Land Economics, 72(3): 381-396.
  5. Boyle, K.J., Welsh, M.P. and Bishop, R.C. (1988). Validation of empirical measures of welfare change: comment. Land Economics, 64(1): 94-98.
  6. Calia, P. and Strazzera, E. (2000). Bias and efficiency of single versus double bound models for contingent valuation studies: a Monte Carlo analysis. Applied Economics, 32(10): 1329-1336.
  7. Cameron, T.A. (1991). Interval estimates of non-market resource values from referendum contingent valuation surveys. Land Economics, 67(4): 413-421.
  8. Cameron, T.A. and Quiggin, J. (1994). Estimation using contingent valuation data from a "dichotomous choice with follow-up" questionnaire. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 27(3): 218-234.
  9. Castanon, J.I.R. (2007). History of the use of antibiotic as growth promoters in European poultry feeds. Poultry Science, 86(11): 2466-2471.
  10. Chien, Y.-L., Huang, C.J. and Shaw, D. (2005). A general model of starting point bias in double-bounded dichotomous contingent valuation surveys. Journal of Environmental Economics Management, 50(2): 362-377.
  11. Cicia, G., Caracciolo, F., Cembalo, L., Del Giudice, T., Grunert, K.G., Krystallis, A., . . . Zhou, Y. (2016). Food safety concerns in urban China: consumer preferences for pig process attributes. Food Control, 60, 166-173.
  12. Cooper, J.C. (1993). Optimal bid selection for dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 24(1): 25-40.
  13. Cox Jr, L.A. and Ricci, P.F. (2008). Causal regulations vs. political will: why human zoonotic infections increase despite precautionary bans on animal antibiotics. Environment International, 34(4): 459-475.
  14. Dabbagh Moghaddam, A., Bashashati, M., Hosseini-Shokouh, S.J. and Hashemi, S.R. (2017). Antibiotic residues in chicken meat and table eggs consumed in Islamic Republic of Iran Army. Food Hygiene, 7(1): 69-81. (Persian)
  15. Dettmann, R.L. and Dimitri, C. (2009). Who's buying organic vegetables? Demographic characteristics of US consumers. Journal of Food Products Marketing,16(1): 79-91.
  16. Dianat, R. and Taali, A. (2013). Broiler chicken’s production without antibiotic during production process. Available at: http://www.makidam.ir/fa/news/421. Retrieved at 2 Jan. 2018. (Persian)
  17. Donaghy, P., Rolfe, J. and Bennett, J. (2003). Consumer demands for organic and genetically modified foods. Paper Presented at the 47th Annual Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  18. Duffield, J.W. and Patterson, D.A. (1991). Inference and optimal design for a welfare measure in dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Land Economics, 67(2): 225-239.
  19. Gunduz, O. and Bayramoglu, Z. (2011). Consumer’s willingness to pay for organic chicken meat in Samsun province of Turkey. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 10(3): 334-340.
  20. Haab, T.C. and McConnell, K.E. (1998). Referendum models and economic values: theoretical, intuitive and practical bounds on willingness to pay. Land Economics, 74(2): 216-229.
  21. Hanemann, W.M. (1984). Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66(3): 332-341.
  22. Hanemann, W.M. (1989). Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete response data: reply. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 71(4): 1057-1061.
  23. Hu, W., Woods, T., Bastin, S., Cox, L. and You, W. (2011). Assessing consumer willingness to pay for value-added blueberry products using a payment card survey. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 43(2): 243-258.
  24. Kavoosi Kalasham, M., Tahamipour Zarandi, M. and Heydari Shalmani, M. (2014). Estimating consumers’ willingness to pay for organic broiler by Heckman two-stage approach. Journal of Economics and Modeling, 4(16): 115-130. (Persian)
  25. Knapp, T., Kovacs, K., Huang, Q., Henry, C., Nayga, R., Popp, J. and Dixon, B. (2018). Willingness to pay for irrigation water when groundwater is scarce. Agricultural Water Management, 195, 133-141.
  26. Liu, C.C. (2008). Three essays on contingent valuation method. Doctoral Dissertation, Iowa State University.
  27. Lusk, J.L. (2003). Effects of cheap talk on consumer willingness-to-pay for golden rice. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 85(4): 840-856.
  28. Nikoukar, A. and Bazzi, R. (2016). Analyzing consumer willingness to pay for chicken without antibiotics in Mashhad. Agricultural Economics, 10(3): 65-87. (Persian)
  29. Production and Distribution Plan for Chicken within 42 Days (2015). Management and planning workgroup of production and regulation of chicken meat in Isfahan province. Available at www.agri-golpayegan.ir/portals/14/omooredam.doc-size.pdf. Retrieved at 5 Jan 2018. (Persian)
  30. Romano, K.R., Dias Bartolomeu Abadio Finco, F., Rosenthal, A., Vinicius Alves Finco, M. and Deliza, R. (2016). Willingness to pay more for value-added pomegranate juice (Punica granatum L.): an open-ended contingent valuation. Food Research International, 89: 359-364.
  31. Sakagami, M. and Haas, R. (2012). Consumer preferences for organic products in Austria using stated preference methods. Current Nutrition and Food Science, 8(2): 122-125.
  32. Sandoghi, A., Amini, A.M. and Yousefi, A. (2015). Determination of consumers' preferences for conventional, healthy and organic cucumbers in Isfahan city using choice experiment method. Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development, 29(2): 139-149. (Persian)
  33. Scheaffer, R.L., Mendenhall, W., Ott, R.L. and Gerow, K.G. (2011). Elementary survey sampling: Cengage Learning.
  34. Shi. L., Gao, Z. and Chen, X. (2014). The cross-price effect on willingness-to-pay estimates in open-ended contingent valuation. Food Policy, 46: 13-21.
  35. Thompson, G.D. and Kidwell, J. (1998). Explaining the choice of organic produce: cosmetic defects, prices and consumer preferences. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 80(2): 277-287.
  36. Venkatachalam, L. (2004). The contingent valuation method: a review. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24(1): 89-124.
  37. Zaikin, A.A. and McCluskey, J.J. (2013). Consumer preferences for new technology: apples enriched with antioxidant coatings in Uzbekistan. Agricultural Economics, 44(4-5): 513-521.
  38. Zhang, B., Fu, Z., Huang, J., Wang, J., Xu, S. and Zhang, L. (2018). Consumers' perceptions, purchase intention and willingness to pay a premium price for safe vegetables: a case study of Beijing, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197: 1498-1507.

 

اقتصاد کشاورزی و توسعه
دوره 28، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 109
اردیبهشت 1399
صفحه 143-169

فایل ها

اشتراک گذاری

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار