Estimating the Values of Cattle Characteristics Using an Ordered Probit Model

Abstract

In this study we evaluate the preferences of cattle producers in Manitoba, Canada, for different cattle characteristics using the conjoint analysis methodology. Preferences are estimated for three different segments of the cattle production system: purebred breeders, commercial cow-calf producers, and cattle feeders. Data were collected for steers and bulls via a mail survey in 1993. Here we provide relative valuation for the different characteristics by segment of the cattle sector. Evidence is provided that different segments of the cattle sector do not value characteristics the same. For example, purebred breeders have higher preferences for reproduction traits, while feedlot operators give higher values to commercial attributes such as heavy slaughter weight and carcass yield. The different valuations of characteristics across segments of the cattle sector suggest that signals regarding preferences may be noisy. As a result, it might be difficult to design some breed improvement programs to be broadly acceptable, if they have differential benefits to the different segments of producers, when using standard profit-oriented selection indices. Copyright 1997, Oxford University Press.

A preference-based approach to deriving breeding objectives: applied to sheep breeding

“…Comparison of the expert pEVs for traits Sy et al (1997) propose that utility is a function of various factors including the characteristics of the product (in general terms), the participant's socio-economic background and the interaction between these two groups of variables. Hence it might be expected that part-worth utilities, and therefore pEVs, for traits would differ when the surveyed experts responded either as lowland or hill farmers.…”

“…As with this study, Toubia et al (2003) customised each choice task using adaptive conjoint analysis, with the aim of reducing the number of potential choice decisions. As well as being the simplest type of measurement possible (Stevens, 1946), the advantage of choosing between just two alternatives at a time (hypothetical sheep flocks in this study) relative to other elicitation methods, which usually rely on scaling or ratio measurements of participants' preferences (Sy et al, 1997), is that the decision-maker is required to confront explicit trade-offs between alternatives and make choices.…”

“…Scarpa et al (2003) estimated preference values for genetic traits in pastoralists' cattle populations in Kenya that would be desirable for future breeding or conservation programmes. Sy et al (1997) evaluated the preferences of parts of the Canadian beef production system for beef cattle characteristics, and von Rohr et al (1999) surveyed meat quality experts in Switzerland to derive estimates of price changes attributable to quality difference in pig carcasses. Common to all of these studies -and the present one -is the involvement of farmers and producers, thereby increasing industry engagement in the development of breeding programmes and better meeting farmers' needs.…”

Analysis of Cardinal and Ordinal Assumptions in Conjoint Analysis

“…Most of these studies have analyzed consumer preferences for new food products or resource usage and willingness to pay for recreational services. Studies evaluating new food products include Gineo (1990), Prentice and Benell (1992), Halbrendt, Wirth, and Vaughn (1991), Halbrendt, Bacon, and Pesek (1992), Yoo and Ohta (1995), Hobbs (1996), Sylvia and Larkin (1995), Sy et al (1997), Harrison, Ozayan, and Meyers (1998), Gillespie et al (1998), and Holland and Wessells (1998). New product acceptance studies typically assume that a respondent's total utility for a hypothetical product is a function of various product attributes.…”

“…The censored nature of the scale can be accounted for with a two-limit tobit (TLT) model, which corrects for censoring and retains metric information between the bounds. Alternatively, some argue that the ordered probit (OP) model is more suitable since interval-rating scales are typically measured as discrete variables and ordinal preferences are more appealing theoretically (Mackenzie 1990(Mackenzie , 1993Sy et al 1997;Holland and Wessells 1998). This paper examines the cardinal versus ordinal assumptions in conjoint analysis when an interval-rating scale is used.…”