Motivation, preference, and willingness of Chinese consumers to purchase carbon-labeled eggs

Abstract

Promoting carbon labels for agricultural products has crucial practical value in reducing carbon emissions. Based on the binary logit model, this paper studied the different motivations of consumers in eastern, central, and western China to purchase carbon-labeled eggs. Based on the choice experiment method and mixed logit model, this paper investigates the preferences and willingness of consumers in different regions to pay for different attributes of carbon-labeled eggs. The results show that the motives driving consumers in different regions to buy carbon-labeled eggs vary but are mainly taking a wait-and-see approach. Consumers in the eastern, central, and western regions all strongly prefer low-carbon labeled eggs. In contrast, consumers in the western region have no significant positive preference for medium-carbon labels. The combination of low-carbon labels and free-range labels has a complementary effect on consumer groups in the eastern, central, and western regions. Low-carbon labels and organic certification labels have a substitutive effect on consumer groups in the eastern region. Medium-carbon labels, organic certification labels, low-carbon labels, and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) -enriched egg labels have a complementary effect on consumer groups in eastern and central regions. In contrast, medium-carbon labels and DHA-enriched egg labels have a substitutive effect. The willingness to purchase carbon-labeled eggs is lower for older consumers in the eastern region and families with a heavier burden of elderly care and children in the central region.

Keywords

Carbon-labeled eggs / choice experiment / willingness to pay / motivation and preference

References

[1] Crippa M,Guizzardi D,Tubiello FN.Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions.Nat Food2021;2:198-209

[2] Rojas-Downing MM,Harrigan T.Climate change and livestock: impacts, adaptation, and mitigation.Clim Risk Manag2017;16:145-63

[3] Ghasempour A.Assessment of environment impacts of egg production chain using life cycle assessment.J Environ Manag2016;183:980-7

[4] Gerber PJ,Henderson B. Tackling climate change through livestock: a global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); 2013. Available from: https://www.fao.org/4/i3437e/i3437e00.htm [Last accessed on 25 Apr 2025]

[5] Grassauer F,Pelletier N.Towards a net-zero greenhouse gas emission egg industry: a review of relevant mitigation technologies and strategies, current emission reduction potential, and future research needs.Renew Sustain Energy Rev2023;181:113322

[6] Yang N.Egg production in China: current status and outlook.Front Agr Sci Eng2021;8:25

[7] Liu Y.Recent China's egg market situation and its future prospect.Agric Outlook2019;15:8-13

[8] Li Q,Chen H.Empirical study of the willingness of consumers to purchase low-carbon products by considering carbon labels: a case study.J Clean Prod2017;161:1237-50

[9] Upham P,Bleda M.Carbon labelling of grocery products: public perceptions and potential emissions reductions.J Clean Prod2011;19:348-55

[10] Elofsson K,Matsdotter E.The impact of climate information on milk demand: evidence from a field experiment.Food Policy2016;58:14-23

[11] Hartikainen H,Katajajuuri JM.Finnish consumer perceptions of carbon footprints and carbon labelling of food products.J Clean Prod2014;73:285-93

[12] Holenweger G,Brügger A.Carbon footprint labels involving traffic lights foster sustainable food choices.Food Qual Prefer2023;106:104813

[13] Liu C,Chen X.Consumer behavior patterns of carbon neutral label using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology.Chin J Popul Resour Environ2023;21:137-44

[14] Zhao R,Liu Y,Xue B.Consumers’ perception, purchase intention, and willingness to pay for carbon-labeled products: a case study of Chengdu in China.J Clean Prod2018;171:1664-71

[15] Edenbrandt AK,Nordström J.Impact of different carbon labels on consumer inference.J Clean Prod2025;494:145020

[16] Xu M.Towards low-carbon economy by carbon label?: survey evidence from first-tier cities in China.Environ Impact Assess Rev2022;97:106902

[17] Rondoni A.Consumers behaviour towards carbon footprint labels on food: a review of the literature and discussion of industry implications.J Clean Prod2021;301:127031

[18] Broeckhoven I,Tur-Cardona J,Hung Y.Consumer valuation of carbon labeled protein-enriched burgers in European older adults.Food Qual Prefer2021;89:104114

[19] Canavari M.Consumer stated preferences for dairy products with carbon footprint labels in Italy.Agric Econ2020;8:149

[20] Wong EYC,So S.Consumer perceptions on product carbon footprints and carbon labels of beverage merchandise in Hong Kong.J Clean Prod2020;242:118404

[21] Mostafa MM.Egyptian consumers' willingness to pay for carbon-labeled products: a contingent valuation analysis of socio-economic factors.J Clean Prod2016;135:821-8

[22] Zhao R,Liu J,Bao Z.University students’ purchase intention and willingness to pay for carbon-labeled food products: a purchase decision-making experiment.Int J Environ Res Public Health2020;17:7026 PMCID:PMC7579656

[23] Loo EJ, Caputo V, Nayga RM, Verbeke W. Consumers’ valuation of sustainability labels on meat.Food Policy2014;49:137-50

[24] Chen YS.Enhance green purchase intentions: the roles of green perceived value, green perceived risk, and green trust.Manag Decis2012;50:502-20

[25] Shuai CM,Zhang YK,Shuai J.How consumers are willing to pay for low-carbon products? – Results from a carbon-labeling scenario experiment in China.J Clean Prod2014;83:366-73

[26] Yao J,Wang L.An evolutionary game and system dynamics approach for the production and consumption of carbon-labeled products-based on a media monitoring perspective.J Environ Manag2024;360:121154

[27] Lizin S,Kessels R.The state of the art of discrete choice experiments in food research.Food Qual Prefer2022;102:104678

[28] Liu R,Nayga Jr RM,Ma H.Consumers’ valuation for food traceability in China: does trust matter?.Food Policy2019;88:101768

[29] Aoki K.A comparison between Spain and Japan with respect to the color, expected taste scale, and sustainability of strawberries: a choice experiment.Food Qual Prefer2023;103:104671

[30] Panzone LA,Comber R.The effect of traffic-light labels and time pressure on estimating kilocalories and carbon footprint of food.Appetite2020;155:104794

[31] Chen R,Li X.Research on Chinese consumers’ shell egg consumption preferences and the egg quality of functional eggs.Poult Sci2023;102:103007 PMCID:PMC10462883

[32] Chiumiento F,Ceci R.A new method for determining PFASs by UHPLC-HRMS (Q-Orbitrap): application to PFAS analysis of organic and conventional eggs sold in Italy.Food Chem2023;401:134135

[33] Garcia JS,Guard JY,Jones DR.Impact of paddock area stocking density of free-range laying hens on egg and environmental microbiology.J Appl Poult Res2023;32:100338

[34] Kaewsutas M,Nararatwanchai T,Patchanee P.Electroencephalographic study of microalgae DHA omega-3 egg consumption on cognitive function.J Funct Foods2017;29:46-52

[35] Cao Y,Chen C.Heterogeneous informational and attitudinal impacts on consumer preferences for eggs from welfare enhanced cage systems.Food Policy2021;99:101979

[36] Alkharusi H.Categorical variables in regression analysis: a comparison of dummy and effect coding.Int J Educ2012;4:202

[37] Brownstone D.Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns.J Econometrics1998;89:109-29

[38] Lancaster KJ.A new approach to consumer theory.J Polit Econ1966;74:132-57

[39] Hanemann WM.Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses.Am J Agric Econ1984;66:332-41

[40] Li J,Ma S.Inclusive finance and economic development in China: multidimensional connotation and empirical analysis.Econ Res J2020;55:37-52Available from: https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=RN_8baVbY4f4siLDVIccUAl34jmuqHfyaslvX-L45mKUBu32ov-Ul8YLw_hX76mMgGIvGgaHkn700c0zWRMVevEy44pOmSnVCa7YTbBxwW7qtOwmFt9-KPU1xLFJFofzv_z8uKtF4JSRaivCo6EQAC-gmcPa2drPV3xx_7dqmmzL-J_-_S6R_TLNIptsGyUuZC_Sbxi3YMsSSbjm_8PCYA==&uniplatform=NZKPT [Last accessed on 25 Apr 2025]

[41] Zheng Q,Xiu X,Chen Q.Can the part replace the whole? A choice experiment on organic and pesticide-free labels.Foods2022;11:2564 PMCID:PMC9455461

[42] CCPIT. Introduction to product carbon labelling system 2021. Available from: https://www.ccpit.org/a/20211104/20211104vprx.html [Last accessed on 23 Apr 2025]

[43] Rahmani D,Pappa M.Are consumers’ egg preferences influenced by animal-welfare conditions and environmental impacts?.Sustainability2019;11:6218

[44] Żakowska-Biemans S.Free range, organic? Polish Consumers Preferences Regarding Information on Farming System and Nutritional Enhancement of Eggs: A Discrete Choice Based Experiment.Sustainability2017;9:1999

[45] Zhu Z,Hu W.The accumulation and substitution effects of multi-nation certified organic and protected eco-origin food labels in China.Ecol Econ2023;203:107625

[46] Xu Y,Ren Y,Lang L.Do carbon labels increase Chinese consumers’ willingness to pay for carbon-labeled agricultural products?.J Clean Prod2024;434:140299

[47] Krinsky I.On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities.Rev Econ Stat1986;68:715-9

[48] Xiong H,Xu M.Revisiting heterogenous social desirability bias in consumer willingness to pay for food carbon label: social norms and environmental concerns.Food Policy2024;128:102690

[49] Aung MM.Traceability in a food supply chain: safety and quality perspectives.Food Control2014;39:172-84

[50] Janßen D.The bunch of sustainability labels - do consumers differentiate?.J Clean Prod2017;143:1233-45