New Developments in Experiments for Agricultural Economics: Discussion

Abstract

Huffman et al. provide an excellent illustration of how a laboratory experiment can assess both the impact and value of information. Using auctions to elicit willingness-to-pay (WTP) for GMand standard-labeled foods the experiment compares the effects of positive information about GM from agribusinesses in two settings-one in which consumers received only negative GM information and the other in which they received both negative and independently verifiable (third party) information. The results show that the value of agribusiness information is reduced in the presence of third party information. The extension to calculating public good value is novel but in doing so, the authors assume that information has value only if it results in a change in purchases. This may be overly restrictive since it ignores any value to people already purchasing GM product, and it also brings up the question about the possible value of negative information since it, too, can presumably lead to changes in behavior. If positive and negative information were introduced simultaneously and resulted in no change in purchases, would this assumption force one to conclude that neither had any value?