Consumers’ willingness to pay for packaged chicken eggs in Lagos State, Nigeria

Olubunmi Lawrence Balogun; Martha Dupe Olumide; Opemipo Oloruntosin Gbaiye; Taofeek Ayodeji Ayo-Bello; Oladele Timothy Akinwole; Kayode Ayantoye; Olubunmi Lawrence Balogun; Martha Dupe Olumide; Opemipo Oloruntosin Gbaiye; Taofeek Ayodeji Ayo-Bello; Oladele Timothy Akinwole; Kayode Ayantoye

doi:10.3934/agrfood.2020.2.204

AIMS Agriculture and Food

2020, Volume 5, Issue 2: 204-217. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2020.2.204

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Consumers’ willingness to pay for packaged chicken eggs in Lagos State, Nigeria

1.
Department of Agriculture & Industrial Technology, School of Science & Technology, Babcock University, Ilisan-Remo, Ogun State
2.
Department of Agricultural Economics & Extension, College of Agriculture & Veterinary Medicine, Kwara State University, Malete, Kwara State

Received: 13 November 2019 Accepted: 03 March 2020 Published: 26 April 2020

Chicken egg packaging and labeling are considered attributes of enhancement of the product and a lot of effort is put into adding value for certain attributes that attract consumers and assure their satisfaction. Hence, consumer’s willingness to pay for packaged chicken eggs in Lagos state, Nigeria was investigated. A multistage sampling was employed for the study to obtain relevant information from consumers of packaged chicken egg. Three divisions were purposively selected because of the popularity of packaged chicken eggs in their stores. In the second stage of sampling, a local government area (LGA) was selected from each division. In the last stage, 50 consumers of chicken egg were randomly selected from each LGA. Contingent valuation method was used to elicit information from selected 134 egg consumers which were used for analysis. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and probit regression model. Mean age and monthly income of egg consumers were 38.51 ±11.75 years and ₦96,179.10 respectively. Household size was 4 members. The mean willingness to pay (WTP) for packaged eggs were ₦968, the premium accounts for 7% in the WTP estimate. The WTP for packaged eggs decreased as the consumers’ grew older (p < 0.1). Being male increased the WTP by 13.4% and respondent being married increased WTP by 15.8%. Additional naira to consumers’ income increased WTP by 0.8% while respondents that patronized supermarkets WTP increased by 15.8%. The study recommends a multiple streams of income and a closer retail stores for better accessibility for packaged chicken egg consumers.
- Willingness to pay,
- packaged eggs,
- consumers,
- premium,
- contingent valuation method,
- Lagos State
Citation: Olubunmi Lawrence Balogun, Martha Dupe Olumide, Opemipo Oloruntosin Gbaiye, Taofeek Ayodeji Ayo-Bello, Oladele Timothy Akinwole, Kayode Ayantoye. Consumers’ willingness to pay for packaged chicken eggs in Lagos State, Nigeria[J]. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 2020, 5(2): 204-217. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2020.2.204

Related Papers:

Abstract

Chicken egg packaging and labeling are considered attributes of enhancement of the product and a lot of effort is put into adding value for certain attributes that attract consumers and assure their satisfaction. Hence, consumer’s willingness to pay for packaged chicken eggs in Lagos state, Nigeria was investigated. A multistage sampling was employed for the study to obtain relevant information from consumers of packaged chicken egg. Three divisions were purposively selected because of the popularity of packaged chicken eggs in their stores. In the second stage of sampling, a local government area (LGA) was selected from each division. In the last stage, 50 consumers of chicken egg were randomly selected from each LGA. Contingent valuation method was used to elicit information from selected 134 egg consumers which were used for analysis. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and probit regression model. Mean age and monthly income of egg consumers were 38.51 ±11.75 years and ₦96,179.10 respectively. Household size was 4 members. The mean willingness to pay (WTP) for packaged eggs were ₦968, the premium accounts for 7% in the WTP estimate. The WTP for packaged eggs decreased as the consumers’ grew older (p < 0.1). Being male increased the WTP by 13.4% and respondent being married increased WTP by 15.8%. Additional naira to consumers’ income increased WTP by 0.8% while respondents that patronized supermarkets WTP increased by 15.8%. The study recommends a multiple streams of income and a closer retail stores for better accessibility for packaged chicken egg consumers.

References

[1]	Ajibefun IA, Daramola AG (2001) Measurement and sources of technical inefficiency in poultry egg production in Ondo State, Nigeria. J Econ Rural Dev 14: 85-93.
[2]	Aklilu HA, Udo HMJ, Almekinders CJM, et al. (2008) How resource poor households value and access poultry: Village poultry keeping in Tigray, Ethiopia. Agric Syst 96: 175-180. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2007.07.008
[3]	Pereira PM, Vicente AF (2013) Meat nutritional composition and nutritive role in the human diet. Meat Sci 9: 586-592.
[4]	Huang LC (2013) Factors affecting consumers preferences for specialty eggs in Canada. A thesis submitted to the college of graduate studies and research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of master of science in the Department of Bio Resource Policy, Business and Economics University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon.
[5]	Food and Agriculture Organization (2000) Statistical database, food and agriculture organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
[6]	USDA (2013) International egg and poultry review: Africa. Available from: http://search.ams.usda.gov/MNDMS/2013/03/PY20130312WIntlPoultryandEgg.pdf.
[7]	Essay UK (2018) Poultry industry in Nigeria. Available from: http://www.essay.uk.com/freeessays/economics/poultryindustry-nigeria.php.
[8]	Sahel (2015) An assessment of the Nigerian poultry sector. Available from: http://sahelcp.com/an-assessment-of-the-nigerian-poultry-sector/ Accessed on 10/04/2018.
[9]	Deila G (2011) Agriculture-associated diseases research at ILRI: Safe foods in informal markets. International livestock research institute, livestock exchange. Issue Brief, 2011.
[10]	Van Triip HCM, Kleef E, Luning P (2005) Consumer research in the early stages of a new product development: A critical review of methods and techniques. Food Qual Preference 16: 181-201. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2004.05.012
[11]	Habib ST (2016) Consumers' awareness level, perception, preferences and willingness to pay for safe and quality chicken and table eggs in South-West Nigeria. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, Babcock University, Ilishan Remo, Nigeria.
[12]	Lancaster KJ (1996) A new approach to consumer theory. J Political Econ 74: 132-157.
[13]	Martinez LM, Anders S, Wismer WV (2011) Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for value-added chicken product attributes. J Food Sci 76: 469-477. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2011.02354.x
[14]	Kuhnert H, Feindt PH, Wragge S, et al. (2002) Datensammlung zur Repra ̈sentativbefragung zur Nachfrage nachLebensmitteln und zur Wahrnehmung der 'Agrarwende'. BIO-GUM-Forschungsbericht/BIOGUM-Research Paper FG Land-wirtschaft, 2/2002. Universita ̈t Hamburg Germany.
[15]	Krystallis A, Chryssohoidis G (2005) Consumers' willingness to pay for organic food: Factors that affect it and variation per organic product type. Br Food J 107: 320-343. doi: 10.1108/00070700510596901
[16]	Roosen J (2003) Marketing of safe food through labeling. J Food Distrib Res 34: 77-82.
[17]	Council for agricultural science and technology (CAST) (2015) Process labeling of food: Consumer behavior, the agricultural sector, and policy recommendations. CAST, Ames, Iowa, 56.
[18]	Aryal KP, Chaudhary P, Pandit S, et al. (2009) Consumers' willingness to pay for organic products: A case from Kathmandu valley. J Agric Environ 10: 15-26. doi: 10.3126/aej.v10i0.2126
[19]	Lee JD, Repinke A, Hwang SW, et al. (2004) Estimating consumers' willingness to pay for individual quality attributes with DEA. J Oper Res Soc 55: 1064-1070. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601797
[20]	Halbrendt C, Pesek J, Parsons A, et al. (1995) Using conjoint analysis to assess consumers' acceptance of pst-supplemented pork, In: Caswell JA, Valuing food safety and nutrition. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 129.
[21]	Yusuf RP (2011) Consumer willingness to pay for poultry products from bio-secure farms in Bali. Paper presented at 55th national conference of the Australian agricultural and resource economics society Melbourne, Australia.
[22]	Goldberg I, Roosen J (2005) Measuring consumer willingness to pay for a health risk reduction of salmonellosis and campylobacterosis. Paper prepared for presentation at the 11th congress of the European association of agricultural economist, Copenhagen, Denmark.
[23]	Obayelu OA, Agboyinu OM, Awotide BA (2014). Consumers' perception and willingness to pay for organic leafy vegetables in urban Oyo State, Nigeria. Eur J Nutr Food Saf 4: 127-136. doi: 10.9734/EJNFS/2014/6498
[24]	Adeyonu AG, Oyawoye EO, Fabiyi EF, et al. (2016) Factors influencing consumers' willingness to pay for Nigeria processed chicken in Kwara State. Am J Exp Agric 10: 1-7.
[25]	Obayelu OA, Adeoti AI, Akinlade AA (2015) Consumers' willingness to pay for labeled and certified moringa products in Ogun State, Nigeria. Int Food Res J 22: 122-130.
[26]	Akerele D, Akinbode SO, Dipeolu AO (2010). Willingness to pay for the safety of kilishi in Sokoto, Nigeria. J Agric Food Inf 11: 330-339. doi: 10.1080/10496505.2010.512260
[27]	Alimi BA, Oyeyinka, AT, Olohugbebe LO (2015) Socio-economic characteristics and willingness to pay for the safety of Fura de nunu in Ilorin, Nigeria. Qual Assur Saf Crops Foods 8: 81-86.
[28]	Oyekale TO, Ayegbokiki AO, Oyekale AO (2013) Awareness of IFSERAR's pasteurized milk, perception and willingness to pay in Odeda local government area of Ogun State, Nigeria. J Hum Ecol 44: 195-201. doi: 10.1080/09709274.2013.11906658
[29]	Adesope AAA, Awoyemi TT, Falusi AO, et al. (2010) Willingness to pay for safety label on sugar and vegetable oil among households in South Western Nigeria J Agric Soc Res (JASR) 10: 156-166.
[30]	National Bureau of Statistics (2013) Demographic statistics bulletin, national bureau of statistics Abuja Nigeria.
[31]	Hanemann W (1984) Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. Am J Agric Econ 66: 332-341. doi: 10.2307/1240800
[32]	Uzunoz M, Akcay Y (2012) A case study of probit model analysis of factors affecting consumption of packed and unpacked milk in Turkey. Econ Res Int 2012: 732583.
[33]	Greene WH (2011) Econometric analysis, Prentice Hall, 7th Edition edition, 2011.
[34]	Ortega RM, Pérez-Rodrigo C, López-Sobaler AM (2015) Dietary assessment methods: Dietary records. Nutr Hosp 31: 38-45.
[35]	Liu R, Pieniak Z, Verbeke W (2013) Consumers' attitudes and behaviour towards safe food in China: A review. Food Control 33: 93-104. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2013.01.051
[36]	Angulo AM, Gil JM, Tamburo L (2005) Food safety and consumers' willingness to pay for labelled beef in Spain. J Food Prod Mark 11: 89-105. doi: 10.1300/J038v11n03_06
[37]	Goldsmith PD, Gungal K, Ndarishikanye B (2004) Rural-urban migration and agricultural productivity: The case of Senegal. Agric Econ 31: 33-45.
[38]	Wang L (2018) Willingness to pay for certified fresh fruits in China: A double-hurdle approach 30^th international conference of agricultural economists (ICAE 2018) in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2020 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)