Market demand for and producer profits of certified safe cabbage: Evidence from test sales in traditional food markets in Northern Ghana

• Certified safe cabbage is not a niche product that only the better-off can afford. • A monopolistic farmer should charge a price premium of GHS 1.48 for maximising his additional returns and profits from introducing certified safe cabbage. • Based on his maximum additional revenues from marketing certified safe cabbage, an average farmer would be able to pay annual certification fees of GHS 1,776 without making losses. • Alternative supply scenarios show that the profitability of safe cabbage certification is highest for a geographically concentrated farmer cooperative. Vendors in traditional urban food markets in West Africa offer locally produced vegetables. These may be unsafe, carrying pathogens and posing potential risks to consumers’ health; or safe, being free from pathogens. Safe produce is rarely differentiated from unsafe produce through certification or price differentiation. Consequently, there is no market data on consumers’ actual payments for certified safe vegetables. Therefore, we aimed to find out whether there is a demand for certified safe vegetables and whether such safety certification is profitable for small-scale farmers. Previous studies have used experiments to elicit price premia consumers’ state to be willing to pay . In contrast, we offered pathogen-free cabbage certified as safe on traditional food markets in Tamale, Ghana, and observed what consumers actually paid. We noted consumer’s actual purchases, who – at the same market stalls – chose between ordinary cabbage of unknown safety status and certified safe cabbage, which carried a price premium to be paid in addition to the price of ordinary cabbage. Our results show that 176 consumers purchased certified safe cabbage and 123 bought ordinary cabbage during the test sales. Consumers’ probability to buy certified safe cabbage is explained by the size of the price premium charged, households’ characteristics and perceptions of local production modes. Estimating customers’ demand function for certified safe cabbage revealed that a pioneer farmer should charge a monopolistic price premium of GHS 1.48 (+46 % on top of the average price for ordinary cabbage valid during the test sales) to maximise the profits from introducing certified safe cabbage into the market. We find that the most promising certification option is for groups of geographically concentrated farmers to jointly apply for safe vegetable certification.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
World Development
Published
2024-08-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2024.106739
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Organic Food and Agriculture
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.20

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Market demand for and producer profits of certified safe cabbage: Evidence from test sales in traditional food markets in Northern Ghana

Ibrahim Mustapha, Wilhelm Löwenstein, Abdul‐Halim Abubakari, Pay Drechsel et al.
2 citations
World Development
Organic Food and Agriculture
1.20
article

Market demand for and producer profits of certified safe cabbage: Evidence from test sales in traditional food markets in Northern Ghana

Ibrahim Mustapha, Wilhelm Löwenstein, Abdul‐Halim Abubakari, Pay Drechsel, Christina Wetzel
article en
2 citations

Abstract

• Certified safe cabbage is not a niche product that only the better-off can afford. • A monopolistic farmer should charge a price premium of GHS 1.48 for maximising his additional returns and profits from introducing certified safe cabbage. • Based on his maximum additional revenues from marketing certified safe cabbage, an average farmer would be able to pay annual certification fees of GHS 1,776 without making losses. • Alternative supply scenarios show that the profitability of safe cabbage certification is highest for a geographically concentrated farmer cooperative. Vendors in traditional urban food markets in West Africa offer locally produced vegetables. These may be unsafe, carrying pathogens and posing potential risks to consumers’ health; or safe, being free from pathogens. Safe produce is rarely differentiated from unsafe produce through certification or price differentiation. Consequently, there is no market data on consumers’ actual payments for certified safe vegetables. Therefore, we aimed to find out whether there is a demand for certified safe vegetables and whether such safety certification is profitable for small-scale farmers. Previous studies have used experiments to elicit price premia consumers’ state to be willing to pay . In contrast, we offered pathogen-free cabbage certified as safe on traditional food markets in Tamale, Ghana, and observed what consumers actually paid. We noted consumer’s actual purchases, who – at the same market stalls – chose between ordinary cabbage of unknown safety status and certified safe cabbage, which carried a price premium to be paid in addition to the price of ordinary cabbage. Our results show that 176 consumers purchased certified safe cabbage and 123 bought ordinary cabbage during the test sales. Consumers’ probability to buy certified safe cabbage is explained by the size of the price premium charged, households’ characteristics and perceptions of local production modes. Estimating customers’ demand function for certified safe cabbage revealed that a pioneer farmer should charge a monopolistic price premium of GHS 1.48 (+46 % on top of the average price for ordinary cabbage valid during the test sales) to maximise the profits from introducing certified safe cabbage into the market. We find that the most promising certification option is for groups of geographically concentrated farmers to jointly apply for safe vegetable certification.

World DevelopmentVol. 183
International Water Management Institute (IWMI) (LK), University for Development Studies (GH), Ruhr University Bochum (DE)
Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Organic Food and Agriculture
1.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.