Product quality in organic and conventional produce: Is there a difference?

Neilson C. Conklin, Gary D Thompson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Economists studying markets for organic produce and proponents of organic agriculture have often assumed that organic produce has more defects than conventional produce and that consumers buying organics are exchanging visual quality for perceived food safety and environmental benefits. Analysis of primary retail‐level data on quality for eight organic and conventional produce items found no statistically significant difference in quality for most products. The results provide evidence that the assumption that organic produce is necessarily of inferior visual quality is unwarranted. © 1993 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)295-307
Number of pages13
JournalAgribusiness
Volume9
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1993

Fingerprint

Organic Food
economists
food safety
purchasing
organic production
ecosystem services
product quality
defect
markets
agriculture
market
Organic Agriculture
Food Safety
economist
food
analysis
product
Product quality
evidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Food Science
  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Animal Science and Zoology
  • Agronomy and Crop Science
  • Economics and Econometrics

Cite this

Product quality in organic and conventional produce : Is there a difference? / Conklin, Neilson C.; Thompson, Gary D.

In: Agribusiness, Vol. 9, No. 3, 1993, p. 295-307.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b9ad28c9722d46b48ff36ad7a7e3c78f,
title = "Product quality in organic and conventional produce: Is there a difference?",
abstract = "Economists studying markets for organic produce and proponents of organic agriculture have often assumed that organic produce has more defects than conventional produce and that consumers buying organics are exchanging visual quality for perceived food safety and environmental benefits. Analysis of primary retail‐level data on quality for eight organic and conventional produce items found no statistically significant difference in quality for most products. The results provide evidence that the assumption that organic produce is necessarily of inferior visual quality is unwarranted. {\circledC} 1993 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.",
author = "Conklin, {Neilson C.} and Thompson, {Gary D}",
year = "1993",
doi = "10.1002/1520-6297(199305)9:3<295::AID-AGR2720090309>3.0.CO;2-N",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
pages = "295--307",
journal = "Agribusiness",
issn = "0742-4477",
publisher = "Wiley-VCH Verlag",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Product quality in organic and conventional produce

T2 - Is there a difference?

AU - Conklin, Neilson C.

AU - Thompson, Gary D

PY - 1993

Y1 - 1993

N2 - Economists studying markets for organic produce and proponents of organic agriculture have often assumed that organic produce has more defects than conventional produce and that consumers buying organics are exchanging visual quality for perceived food safety and environmental benefits. Analysis of primary retail‐level data on quality for eight organic and conventional produce items found no statistically significant difference in quality for most products. The results provide evidence that the assumption that organic produce is necessarily of inferior visual quality is unwarranted. © 1993 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

AB - Economists studying markets for organic produce and proponents of organic agriculture have often assumed that organic produce has more defects than conventional produce and that consumers buying organics are exchanging visual quality for perceived food safety and environmental benefits. Analysis of primary retail‐level data on quality for eight organic and conventional produce items found no statistically significant difference in quality for most products. The results provide evidence that the assumption that organic produce is necessarily of inferior visual quality is unwarranted. © 1993 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995205447&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84995205447&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/1520-6297(199305)9:3<295::AID-AGR2720090309>3.0.CO;2-N

DO - 10.1002/1520-6297(199305)9:3<295::AID-AGR2720090309>3.0.CO;2-N

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84995205447

VL - 9

SP - 295

EP - 307

JO - Agribusiness

JF - Agribusiness

SN - 0742-4477

IS - 3

ER -