Are consumers “green” enthusiasts or skeptics? Evidence from nontimber forest products

IF 4 2区 农林科学 Q1 ECONOMICS Forest Policy and Economics Pub Date : 2024-08-25 DOI:10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103302
Bindu Paudel, Mo Zhou
{"title":"Are consumers “green” enthusiasts or skeptics? Evidence from nontimber forest products","authors":"Bindu Paudel,&nbsp;Mo Zhou","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In recent years, in response to consumers' increasing demand for “greener” products due to growing environmental awareness, more and more businesses have turned to eco-labels to assert the environmental benefits of their products or services. However, it remains unclear how consumers' willingness to pay (WTP) varies with different types of eco-labeling, especially concerning food products harvested from forests. In this study, we employ discrete choice modeling to uncover consumers' preferences for “green” maple syrup—syrup made with sap tapped from sustainably managed forests—under four eco-labels: self-claimed, bird-friendly, verified by a voluntary conservation program, and certified by a third-party. Our findings reveal that the WTPs for “green” maple syrup under eco-labels are higher than that for organic maple syrup, except for the third-party certified label. One plausible explanation is that some consumers may perceive sustainability certification as greenwashing, leading them to be skeptical of the claimed benefits.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":"168 ","pages":"Article 103302"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001564","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent years, in response to consumers' increasing demand for “greener” products due to growing environmental awareness, more and more businesses have turned to eco-labels to assert the environmental benefits of their products or services. However, it remains unclear how consumers' willingness to pay (WTP) varies with different types of eco-labeling, especially concerning food products harvested from forests. In this study, we employ discrete choice modeling to uncover consumers' preferences for “green” maple syrup—syrup made with sap tapped from sustainably managed forests—under four eco-labels: self-claimed, bird-friendly, verified by a voluntary conservation program, and certified by a third-party. Our findings reveal that the WTPs for “green” maple syrup under eco-labels are higher than that for organic maple syrup, except for the third-party certified label. One plausible explanation is that some consumers may perceive sustainability certification as greenwashing, leading them to be skeptical of the claimed benefits.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
消费者是 "绿色 "爱好者还是怀疑论者?来自非木材林产品的证据
近年来,随着环保意识的增强,消费者对 "绿色 "产品的需求不断增加,越来越多的企业开始使用生态标签来宣传其产品或服务的环境效益。然而,消费者的支付意愿(WTP)如何随不同类型的生态标签而变化,尤其是关于从森林中采伐的食品,目前仍不清楚。在本研究中,我们采用离散选择模型来揭示消费者对四种生态标签下的 "绿色 "枫糖浆的偏好,这四种标签分别是:自我声明、鸟类友好、自愿保护计划验证和第三方认证。我们的研究结果表明,除第三方认证标签外,生态标签下 "绿色 "枫糖浆的购买意愿高于有机枫糖浆。一个合理的解释是,一些消费者可能认为可持续发展认证是在 "洗绿",从而对其宣称的好处持怀疑态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Forest Policy and Economics
Forest Policy and Economics 农林科学-林学
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
7.50%
发文量
148
审稿时长
21.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Forest Policy and Economics is a leading scientific journal that publishes peer-reviewed policy and economics research relating to forests, forested landscapes, forest-related industries, and other forest-relevant land uses. It also welcomes contributions from other social sciences and humanities perspectives that make clear theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions to the existing state-of-the-art literature on forests and related land use systems. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, sociology, anthropology, human geography, history, jurisprudence, planning, development studies, and psychology research on forests. Forest Policy and Economics is global in scope and publishes multiple article types of high scientific standard. Acceptance for publication is subject to a double-blind peer-review process.
期刊最新文献
A generalized Faustmann model with multiple carbon pools Enhancing the economic feasibility of fuel treatments: Market and policy pathways for US Federal Lands The oil palm replanting imperative: Are smallholder farmers willing to participate? Reviewing factors that influence voluntary participation in conservation programs in Latin America Preliminary evidence of softwood shortage and hardwood availability in EU regions: A spatial analysis using the European Forest Industry Database
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1