Consumer willingness to pay for in-flight service and comfort levels: A choice experiment

In the competitive aviation market as a result of the emergence of low cost carriers, charter airlines have had to reconsider their approach to service provision. Specifically, the reduction in service and comfort levels offered by the low cost airlines provides charter carriers with an opportunity to differentiate their product based on the quality of the offering. To consider this strategic option we employ an on-line choice experiment to examine consumer choices with respect to the bundle of services on offer when deciding to purchase a flight, With these data we use the Bayesian methods to estimate a mixed logit specification. Our results reveal that in principle passengers are willing to pay a relatively large amount for enhanced service quality. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Consumer attitudes towards and willingness to pay for pesticide residue limit compliant 'safe' vegetables in Northeast Thailand

Pesticide residue in vegetables is a major food safety issue in Thailand. A range of vegetable products (organic/pesticide-free/ hydroponic) has emerged in Thai markets that guarantee compliance with maximum residue limits. The Government of Thailand is eager to extend the benefits of this suite of alternative vegetables to the entire population, particularly the semi-urban/rural segments that are often bypassed by such speciality products. However, little information is available to guide such an effort, particularly with regard to up-country consumer attitudes, shopping and consumption habits and willingness to pay premiums for such produce. This research aims to fill this gap in knowledge. It reports the results of a survey of vegetable consumption and shopping habits and attitudes of 608 consumers in northeast Thailand. Willingness to pay premiums for pesticide residue limit compliant vegetables is also assessed by using a contingent valuation method, and determinants of willingness to pay are examined using an ordered probit empirical model. Results indicate that, given adequate awareness of relative risks, even up-country consumers are willing to pay market premium levels for these products, and that inadequate availability, rather than lack of demand is the constraining factor. Willingness to pay is found to increase with income, age and supermarket sourcing of vegetables. We also discuss the challenge of improving availability at mainstream outlets.

Consumers' willingness-to-pay for organic conversion-grade food: Evidence from five EU countries

In recent years, in overall value, the EU has become a net importer of organic food to supply increasing demand. Financial support for farmers during the conversion period has been made to help expand organic production as this was seen as a barrier to conversion. Meanwhile, farmers have been marketing products produced in this conversion period and labelled as such, the extent to which is described here for the UK, Portugal, Denmark, Ireland and Italy. Consumers' attitudes towards, and willingness-to-pay for, conversion-grade food in these countries is examined. It was found that consumers would be prepared to pay a premium for conversion-grade produce of around half the premium for organic produce with vegetables attracting a higher premium than meat. Finally, the potential of policies for marketing conversion-grade products to encourage more conversion is examined, together with barriers to achieving this. It is concluded that barriers to marketing such products, particularly from retailers, will be formidable. Thus, alternative policies are suggested. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Should kids pay their own way?

Children are expensive to raise. Ensuring that they are raised such that they are able to lead a minimally decent life costs time and money, and lots of both. Who is responsible for bearing the costs of the things that children are undoubtedly owed? This is a question that has received comparatively little scrutiny from political philosophers, despite children being such a drain on public and private finances alike. To the extent that there is a debate, two main views can be identified. The Parents Pay view says that parents, responsible for the existence of the costs, must foot the bill. The Society Pays view says that a next generation is a benefit to all, and so to allow parents to foot the bill alone is the worst kind of free-riding. In this paper, I introduce a third potentially liable party currently missing from the debate: children themselves. On my backward-looking view, we are entitled to ask people to contribute to the raising of children on the basis that they have benefited from being raised themselves.