Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Get real: an analysis of student preference for real food

  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Real Food Challenge is a national student movement in the United States (U.S.) that aims to shift $1 billion—roughly 20%—of college and university food budgets across the country towards local, ecologically sound, fair, and humane food sources—what they call “real” food—by 2020. The University of Vermont (UVM) was the fifth university in the U.S. to sign the Real Food Campus Commitment, pledging to shift at least 20% of its own food budget towards “real” food by 2020. In order to examine student preference for “real” food on the UVM campus, we analyzed a survey of 904 undergraduate students that used contingent valuation to evaluate students’ willingness-to-pay (WTP) for the “real” attribute. We found that a majority of students are willing to pay a positive premium for “real” food. Furthermore, we found that student characteristics and attitudes significantly influence WTP. Specifically, gender, residency, college, and attitudes about price and origin of food are significant predictors of WTP.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CALS:

College of agriculture and life sciences

CAS:

College of arts and sciences

CEMS:

College of engineering and mathematical sciences

CESS:

College of education and social services

CNHS:

College of nursing and health sciences

CV:

Contingent valuation

IRB:

Institutional review board

RFC:

Real food challenge

RFWG:

Real food working group

RUB:

Rubenstein school of environment and natural resources

SBA:

School of business administration

USA:

United States of America

UVM:

University of vermont

WTP:

Willingness to pay

References

  • Barlett, P.F. 2011. Campus sustainable food projects: critique and engagement. American Anthropologist 113 (1): 101–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, S. 2004. Are we all environmentalists now? Rhetoric and reality in environmental action. Geoforum 35 (2): 231–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breidert, C., Hahsler, M., and Reutterer, T. 2006. A review of methods for measuring willingness-to-pay. Innovative Marketing 2 (4): 8–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, T. A., and Huppert, D. D. 1989. OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values with payment card interval data. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 17 (3): 230–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J., Dipietro, R. B., and Remar, D. 2014. Local foods in a university setting: price consciousness, product involvement, price/quality inference and consumer’s willingness-to-pay. International Journal of Hospitality Management 42: 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpio, C. E., and Isengildina-Massa, O. 2009. Consumer willingness to pay for locally grown products: the case of South Carolina. Agribusiness 25 (3): 412–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark University. 2010. The Sustainable University [class report]. http://www.clarku.edu/offices/campussustainability/pdfs/SustainableUFinal_Report_Dec2010.pdf. Accessed 25 Apr 2014.

  • Feenstra, G., Allen, P., Hardesty, S., Ohmart, J., and Perez, J. 2011. Using a supply chain analysis to assess the sustainability of farm-to-Institution programs. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development 1 (4): 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giraud, K. L., Bond, C. A., and Bond, J. J. 2005. Consumer preferences for locally made specialty food products across northern New England. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 34 (2): 204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halstead, J. M., Luloff, A. E., and Stevens, T. H. 1992. Protest bidders in contingent valuation. Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 21 (2): 160–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jekanowski, M. D., Williams, D. R., and Schiek, W. A. 2000. Consumers’ willingness to purchase locally produced agricultural products: an analysis of an Indiana survey. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 29 (1): 43–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, K. J. 1966. A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy 74 (2): 132–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, M., Wang, Q., and Kolodinsky, J. M. 2012. Estimating the optimal premium rates for credential food attributes: a case study in the Northeast United States. Journal of Food Distribution Research 43 (2): 51–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loureiro, M. L., and Hine, S. E. 2002. Discovering niche markets: a comparison of consumer willingness to pay for local (Colorado grown), organic, and GMO-free products. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 34(03).

  • Loureiro, M. L., and Lotade, J. 2005. Do fair trade and eco-labels in coffee wake up the consumer conscience? Ecological Economics 53 (1): 129–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loureiro, M. L., McCluskey, J. J., and Mittelhammer, R. C. 2003. Are stated preferences good predictors of market behavior? Land Economics 79 (1): 44–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lusk, J. L., Nilsson, T., and Foster, K. 2007. Public preferences and private choices: effect of altruism and free riding on demand for environmentally certified pork. Environmental and Resource Economics, 36(4).

  • Mahé, T. 2010. Are stated preferences confirmed by purchasing behaviors? The case of fair trade-certified bananas in Switzerland. Journal of Business Ethics 92 (2): 301–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. C., and Carson, R. T. 1989. Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method. New York, NY: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moser, R., Raffaelli, R., and Thilmany-McFadden, D. 2011. Consumer preference for fruit and vegetables with credence-based attributes: a review. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 14 (2): 121–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naald, B. V., and Cameron, T. A. 2011. Willingness to pay for other species’ well being. Ecological Economics 70 (7): 1325–1335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onianwa, O., Wheelock, G., and Mojica, M. 2005. An analysis of the determinants of farmer-to-consumer direct-market shoppers. Journal of Food Distribution Research 36 (1): 130–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onozaka, Y., and McFadden, D. T. 2011. Does local labeling complement or compete with other sustainable labels? A conjoint analysis of direct and joint values for fresh produce claim. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 93 (3): 689–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steel, A. 2012. A critical mass for real food. Yes! Magazine. http://www.yesmagazine.org/people-power/a-critical-mass-for-real-food. Accessed 16 Jan 2015.

  • The Real Food Challenge. n.d. http://www.realfoodchallenge.org. Accessed 16 Jan 2015.

  • The University of Vermont. n.d. Real food calculator. http://www.uvm.edu/foodsystems/?Page=realfoodcalculator.html&SM=realfoodmenu.html. Accessed 27 Jan 2015.

  • Thilmany, D., Bond, C. A., and Bond, J. K. 2008. Going local: exploring consumer behavior and motivations for direct food purchases. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90 (5): 1303–1309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tonsor, G. T., Olynk, N., and Wolf, C. 2009. Consumer preferences for animal welfare attributes: the case of gestation crates. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 41 (3): 713–730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trudel, R., and Cotte, J. 2009. Does it pay to be good? MIT Sloan Management Review 50 (2): 61–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2007. Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold Including Direct Sales: 2007 and 2002. http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_2_US_State_Level/. Accessed 16 Jan 2015.

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2008. Farms, Land Use, and Sales of Organically Produced Commodities on Certified and Exempt Organic Farms: 2008. http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Online_Highlights/Organics/. Accessed 16 Jan 2015.

  • Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund. 2013. Farm to Plate Strategic Plan. http://www.vtfoodatlas.com/plan/. Accessed 16 Jan 2015.

  • Zepeda, L., and Li, J. 2006. Who buys local food? Journal of Food Distribution Research 37 (3): 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Community Development and Applied Economics, The University of Vermont, 207 Morrill Hall, Burlington, VT, 05401, USA

    Jennifer Porter, David Conner & Jane Kolodinsky

  2. Department of Nutrition & Food Sciences, 109 Carrigan Drive, Burlington, VT, 05401, USA

    Amy Trubek

Authors
  1. Jennifer Porter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Conner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jane Kolodinsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Amy Trubek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer Porter.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Porter, J., Conner, D., Kolodinsky, J. et al. Get real: an analysis of student preference for real food. Agric Hum Values 34, 921–932 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-017-9785-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-017-9785-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation