Content uploaded by Mohammed Ziaul Hoque
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mohammed Ziaul Hoque on Jan 23, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
Available online 13 January 2022
0044-8486/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Consumer preference for sh safety inspection in Bangladesh
Mohammed Ziaul Hoque
a
,
b
,
*
, Øystein Myrland
a
School of Business and Economics (HHT), UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Norway
b
Department of Finance, University of Chittagong, Chittagong, Bangladesh
ARTICLE INFO
JEL classication:
Q22
Keywords:
Food safety
Willingness to pay
Consumer perception
Fisheries and aquaculture
Emerging economy
Bangladesh
ABSTRACT
Consumers are entitled to eat safe food, so authorities should ensure that this right is preserved by enacting
regulations and ensuring compliance through enforcement activities. Safety inspection is key to the enforcement
system. Therefore, this paper presents an analysis of consumer responses to a regulatory scheme for safe seafood.
The regulations consist of national and local authority enforcement and subsequent follow up activities to ensure
that all wild and farmed sh in all product formats are safe. We collected primary data from two major cities in
Bangladesh, Dhaka and Chittagong. The data were analysed using conditional and generic multinomial logit
models to identify different utility ratios. We nd that consumers expect safety control information at a low
mental cost or effort. They value sh safety inspection highly in their affective reaction, whereas this value is
lacking in their cognitive response. The individual parameter estimates show that consumers’ preferences for
both wild and farmed sh are signicantly positive. They are most likely to reject frozen sh and be willing to
pay less for it. Wild-caught sh creates utility for consumers without any food safety inspection, but this is not the
case for farmed, frozen sh. The lack of authorised food safety inspection signicantly decreases utility, sug-
gesting a positive market potential, particularly for farmed sh with local authority safety certication.
1. Introduction
The rapid growth of agro-farming has led to many unjust works
requiring signicant natural resources, including energy and water. In
this context of unsustainable growth, food security is a critical concern
for sustainable food consumption (Hoque and Alam, 2018; Roy et al.,
2019). The challenge of food security is to guarantee that people have
access to the food they require, free from chemical, physical and bio-
logical contaminants (Hanning et al., 2012). Without food safety, we
cannot have food security (King et al., 2017), and food safety thus needs
to be addressed and improved without delay (Lucia et al., 2013). Food
security can be ensured by tightening trading hygiene requirements
(FAO, 2018) or imposing additional charges and safety requirements on
imports (Ababouch, 2006). This might increase food or business costs
(Akinbode et al., 2012), some of which will be transferred to consumers
in the form of higher prices. Consequently, there is an urgent need to
assess consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) to control food safety
(Akinbode et al., 2012).
Consumers are concerned about the safety of their food intake.
Following various food-safety scandals (Trienekens and Zuurbier,
2008), customer’s perceptions of safety can also impact a country’s
image (Madichie and Yamoah, 2006). Consumers in developed countries
are aware of food safety and risk issues. In many developing countries,
food safety remains the responsibility of consumers (Tjaart and van
Veen, 2005). One of the signicant challenges for developing countries
is stricter food safety requirements (Henson et al., 2000). For many of
these countries, food price, taste, and buying convenience seem to play a
more signicant role than food safety issues (FAO, 2015). Although
developing countries have neglected food safety and the development of
food safety systems (Grace, 2015), consumers in these markets are likely
to become increasingly aware of such issues as incomes continue to grow
and if urbanisation continues at the current rate (Ortega and Tschirley,
2017). Seafood from sheries and aquaculture is crucial for ensuring
future food safety and security for households in emerging economies;
seafood is an essential source of proteins, vitamins, and micronutrients
for many families (Garcia and Rosenberg, 2010).
There has been a steady growth in the production, consumption, and
export of farmed sh, in developing countries, particularly in Asia
(Claret et al., 2014), and more specically in China and India, and
emerging markets such as Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam and Bangladesh
(Dey, 2000). This growth has mostly been driven by rising incomes and
urbanisation in South Asian countries such as Bangladesh (FAO, 2018).
* Corresponding author at: Room 01.307 at School of Business and Economics (HHT), UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
E-mail addresses: mohammed.z.hoque@uit.no (M.Z. Hoque), oystein.myrland@uit.no (Ø. Myrland).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Aquaculture
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/aquaculture
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2022.737911
Received 16 July 2021; Received in revised form 1 January 2022; Accepted 8 January 2022
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
2
Bangladesh has become the fourth largest sh producing economy
globally (FAO, 2016; OECD, 2020) and is ranked third in aquatic
biodiversity (Shamsuzzaman et al., 2017). It has an extensive coast, with
a rich delta feeding massive capture and culture sheries. From 2005 to
2016, the country’s per capita sh consumption increased by 49%,
reaching 22.85 kg in 2016 (HIES, 2016), higher than the average global
consumption of 20.5 kg per capita (FAO, 2020). Regrettably, these high
sh production and consumption levels are not accompanied by food
safety schemes or rigorous hygiene inspections (Rahman et al., 2012).
People classify foods to construct order in a complex food environ-
ment and use these classications to make everyday food choices (Furst
et al., 2000). Since 93% of Bangladeshi households buy and consume
sh frequently (Hoque, 2020), classifying sh into wild, inland farmed,
and coastal farmed is likely crucial to consumers’ sh choice. However,
Bangladesh’s highly fragmented sh supply chain comprises thousands
of small farmers and many traders, intermediaries, and retailers, most of
whom operate with little or no supervision. Together this poses a sig-
nicant challenge to implementing food safety regulations. As a result,
many sh safety problems may be found at the farm, preserving and
storage level. Many farmers have practised traditional sh farming using
toxic pesticides (Rahman et al., 2012).
Furthermore, producers and sh vendors unethically use formalde-
hyde to preserve the sh and seafood from microbial spoilage, as hap-
pens in various wet markets (Rahman et al., 2012). When food is not
safe, human development may not occur; therefore, the agenda of
emerging economies concerning peoples’ access to safe and sufcient
food all year round is essential for sustainable development (UN, 2015).
Therefore, sh food safety inspections as part of food control are critical
to ensure overall food safety and security in emerging markets such as
Bangladesh (FAO, 2004).
In an attempt to guarantee food safety, up until 2013, the Bangla-
deshi food authority had enacted 15 different types of rules and regu-
lations in the form of a penal code, ordinance, and acts (Ali, 2013).
However, these rules and regulations are not effective in dealing with
food safety problems (Islam and Hoque, 2013). To overcome such
problems, the Bangladeshi government has recently adopted the USAID-
funded Global Food Security Strategy (GFSS) plan to feed the future
involved in food safety and security. In addition, the Management of
Aquatic Ecosystems through Community Husbandry (MACH
1
) pro-
gramme was initiated to achieve safe and sustainable local sheries
management. Government authorities have also enacted mobile courts
to frequently intervene to implement the food safety scheme (Hoque,
2020). Although the Bangladeshi government has been attempting to
reform laws, establish effective monitoring systems, and strengthen food
safety regulations, the primary weak links in the implementation remain
(Chowdhury, 2011; Ali, 2013). Therefore, the rapid growth of Bangla-
desh’s sheries and aquaculture has occurred with less recognition or
global acceptance (Hoque, 2020). An effective national food control
system is required to protect domestic consumers’ safety (FAO and
WHO, 2003), and almost all food safety initiatives, government or pri-
vate, should be nationally centralised. However, these national/central
authorities could be delegated to the local level (Reilly et al., 2009), as
local authorities are more suitable for food control and can identify the
areas of highest risk for consumers and make effective use of resources
(Mari et al., 2013; FSA, 2019). Although publicised as a strict approach
to remedying food safety concerns, it is unclear whether these latest
efforts and sh safety inspections by national and local governments will
make sh food safer and improve the country’s image.
Consumer demand for food safety is likely to be an essential driver of
public policies and industry-led efforts to reduce information asymmetry
related to food attributes and improved food safety (Ragasa et al., 2019).
Although food safety is receiving increased attention from economists,
researchers and policymakers, the literature on the demand for food
safety inspections in food control in developing countries is scarce (Birol
et al., 2009; Ortega and Tschirley, 2017). Little attention is focused on
issues affecting sh quality and the inspection systems of shery product
exports or on consumers’ concerns over food safety inspections and their
preferences for authority over food control and sh products in
Bangladesh. Furthermore, sh consumption behaviour in Bangladesh
has not been assessed rigorously (Chowdhury, 2019). Since little is
known about this eld, its various issues and the clear knowledge gap
motivated us to conduct this study. The study’s main objective is to
support efforts to attain a potential market for sheries and aquaculture
products and formulate an effective policy for food control by predicting
consumer preferences and making useful estimates of demand for whole
sh.
Therefore, the targeted respondents in this study are households in
the two major cities of Dhaka and Chittagong, employing a between-
subject design. Respondents were interviewed in an experimental pro-
cedure; specically, we used a choice experiment approach to collect the
data and examine preference heterogeneity using descriptive analysis, a
conditional logit, and a generic multinomial logit (MNL) model. The
study will help predict the heterogeneity in overall sh preferences and
in organising a rational market structure in emerging markets that could
help identify potential policy implications for sheries and aquaculture
management and provide insights for further research. The study will
assist policymakers in drafting and implementing more effective food
safety regulations, restoring consumer condence and re-establishing
Bangladesh as a leading exporter of food-safe sh products worldwide.
The structure of the study is as follows. Section 2 contains the
literature review, and we then present the theoretical framework. Sec-
tion 4 details the data collection and methods, and the econometric
model is set out in Section 5. The model data are then discussed, and
subsequently, the research results are addressed, followed by the
concluding remarks and suggestions for further research directions.
2. Literature review
Food safety issues arise from the critical problem of asymmetric in-
formation between consumers and producers concerning product-
specic attributes (Ortega et al., 2011). Such issues can arise from in-
formation asymmetry pertaining to food safety requirements and the
deceptive claims of marketers. For instance, unsubstantiated ‘green’
claims cause reputational harm and make consumers suspicious of the
behaviour of suppliers (Peattie, 2001). Moreover, due to the absence of
authoritative attributes, consumers cannot determine a product’s rele-
vant qualities (e.g. sustainable sh production) even after consuming it;
balanced information is, therefore, essential (Monier-Dilhan and Berg`
es,
2016).
This information problem is even more severe in developing and
emerging markets due to their large populations and the lack of reliable
safety information. In developing markets, food safety information is
often neglected (Grace, 2015) but this information is almost entirely
lacking in emerging markets (Carlucci et al., 2015). Negligence and a
lack of food safety information lead to a reduction in consumer trust in
food safety (Lin et al., 2020) and an inaccurate perception or little
awareness of the level of risk. Despite the low awareness of food safety
risks, consumers demand food products of high and consistent quality at
competitive prices (Trienekens and Zuurbier, 2008; Lin et al., 2020). In
response to the proliferation of food values, many public and private
standards on food safety and quality have been developed (Trienekens
and Zuurbier, 2008), with credible third-party certication being an
essential factor in consumer’s demand for food safety (Birol et al., 2009).
The information gap between market players can be bridged, and the
increased inefciencies that arise from information asymmetry
addressed (Ortega et al., 2011) through quality certication (e.g. safety
1
In Bengali, sh is called mach. In this case, MACH is an USAID project
aimed at supporting the effective management of oodplain resources (e.g.,
sheries and aquaculture products) to ensure the sustainable supply of food to
the poor of Bangladesh.
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
3
labelling), the traceability of products origins (Ortega et al., 2011),
consumer access to food product attributes (Danso et al., 2017), and
increased trust in information and its sources (Hoque and Alam, 2018).
Hussain et al. (2017) suggest food safety measures full a useful man-
agement function and minimise the risks created by asymmetric
information.
Currently, the environment is a source of signicant risk associated
with seafood safety. Contamination of seafood can occur before harvest
or at any point from harvest through to nal preparation (Amagliani and
Brandi, 2012). Accordingly, aquatic food security and credibility are
achieved with a sufcient safe, sustainable, shockproof and sound sea-
food supply (Jennings et al., 2016). In response, governmental and
health authorities have become very concerned about the quality and
safety of seafood, increasing regulation, and adopting stringent hygiene
measures to stop contaminants (Vipham et al., 2018). Seafood con-
sumption has become an essential part of a balanced and healthy diet
(Trondsen et al., 2003), as it is signicantly related to public health
(Baki et al., 2018); health benets include lower instances of cardio-
vascular disease (Verbeke and Isabelle, 2005). In addition, sh is an
essential source of quality protein and is cheaper than other animal
protein sources for which there is an efcient market structure.
In sh markets, internal cues, such as the sensory characteristics of
sh, are critical determinants of sh consumption. These cues are also
vital to evaluate the freshness of a sh product (Carlucci et al., 2015).
However, sensory characteristics are product specic, and it is not easy
to establish that these are fundamental for all sh. For this reason,
several studies use attitudes toward sh as a proxy for sensory percep-
tion. This is because an attitude is a psychological tendency to evaluate
objects in degrees of, for example, good–bad or pleasant–unpleasant,
and this attitude can thus be positive (liking) or negative (disliking)
(Eagly and Chaiken, 1998). However, consumers’ attitudes toward sh
products are rapidly changing due to demographic and socioeconomic
changes. Therefore, conjoint analysis is widely used in psychometrics,
economics, and marketing to assess and estimate consumers’ prefer-
ences and demand for market and seafood products (Anderson and
Soa, 1993; Roheim et al., 2011).
The expansion in the consumption and commercialisation of sh
products have, in recent decades, been accompanied by a growing in-
terest in food safety, nutrition, and waste reduction. Therefore, con-
sumers prefer precise information when purchasing sh, including its
visual elements, origin, price, format, and freshness (Br´
ecard et al.,
2009). Additionally, consumer sh choice is strongly affected by habits
that emerge and are reinforced through experience (Scholderer and
Trondsen, 2008). Consumers’ perception of sh while purchasing also
depends on the convenience and availability of products. When
preferred sh products are not available, and the possible alternatives
appear to be weak substitutes, consumers decide not to buy anything
(Carlucci et al., 2015). Despite being a poor substitute for wild-caught
sh, aquaculture has gradually grown to meet the excess demand,
meaning that more than 220 species of nsh and shellsh are now
cultured (Naylor et al., 2000).
In addition to improving local food supply, aquaculture can also
improve food security and nutrition through the availability of low-cost
sh and increasing employment opportunities and income (FAO, 2013).
Countries must be accountable for what seafood consumers consume
rather than what they produce to ensure food security and nutritional
quality for a growing world population despite stagnant production in
capture sheries and in light of increasing aquaculture production
(Guillen et al., 2019). The demand for and consumption of cultured sh
depends on not only credible information but food security and safety
systems, and communication of the safety performance requirements of
farms, their sustainability indicators, exports of farmed sh, consumer
knowledge and perceptions of farmed sh, WTP and equitable distri-
bution of sh to the population (Dey, 2000; Trienekens and Zuurbier,
2008; Dey et al., 2011; Johan et al., 2013; Hussain et al., 2017; Hoque
and Alam, 2020; Hoque, 2020).
Although there is extensive literature on consumer behaviour in
developed economies in relation to sheries and aquaculture (Carlucci
et al., 2015) and on food safety systems (Grace, 2015), there is little for
developing and emerging economies. Although the level of sh con-
sumption is low for people in developing economies, they consume a
higher share of sh protein in their diet (FAO, 2018). The domestic sh
farms and sh markets of developing and emerging countries in Asia are
important, with the dominant market being for whole sh traded as
fresh, iced and frozen. However, the inuence of the production method
and price on the consumer perception of such sh has been little studied
in developing countries (Carlucci et al., 2015) and South Asian markets,
including Bangladesh (Alam and Alfnes, 2020; Hoque, 2020). No study
focuses on the impact on consumers’ sh preferences of food safety in-
spections in sh control. This study attends to these gaps and analyses
the segmentation of the Bangladeshi retail nsh market.
In the local Bangladeshi markets, the price of wild sh is higher than
that of inland-farmed sh, with the price of coastal-farmed sh lower
than that of inland-farmed sh. The literature shows that households
with a high level of income buy more fresh sh than those with lower
levels of income (Nauman et al., 1995). Therefore, it is logical to assume
that high-, medium- and low-income consumers are most likely to buy
wild, inland-farmed, and coastal-farmed sh, respectively. In addition,
in local Bangladeshi markets, consumers with an average level of
knowledge regarding farmed sh are most likely to prefer safe sh; this
farmed sh is lower in quality than the organic version (Hoque et al.,
2021b). Accordingly, it would be reasonable to assume that a consumer
with little knowledge would prefer conventionally farmed sh.
The literature also indicates that low-income consumers are most
likely to choose conventional or unlabelled farmed sh (Hoque, 2020).
Therefore, high, medium, and low-income consumers are likely to prefer
whole sh that has been subject to a national-level food safety inspec-
tion (NFSI), local-level food safety inspection (LFSI), or with no
authorised food safety inspection (NoFSI), respectively. Based on the
similarity to our just-stated hypotheses, we also propose the same
explanation for the association between the rate of sh consumption
(high, medium, or low) and the level of authority of food safety in-
spections (NFSI, LFSI, or NoFSI). Accordingly, the value consumers give
to food safety inspection authorities can be assessed by their frequency
or level of sh consumption.
3. Bangladeshi sh markets and food safety inspections
Consumers in emerging middle-class markets, including Bangladesh,
focus more on food safety (Xu et al., 2012; Sudhir et al., 2015). A series
of globally- and locally-known food safety scandals has increased
awareness of Bangladesh’s inefcient food safety measures and inspec-
tion systems. Most foodstuffs in its economy are less safe than in other
places, and this problem persists at every level of the food chain, from
preparation to consumption (Ali, 2013). The food security system re-
mains vulnerable because of the limited coverage of safety schemes,
vulnerability to natural disasters, and uctuation in prices (Roksana and
Alam, 2014). Additionally, impure, rotten and perishable food waste is
turned into toxic foods and stored, sold and served to consumers in an
unhygienic atmosphere (Ali, 2013). The same conditions are true, and to
a greater extent, for aquaculture and sheries products (Rahman et al.,
2012).
Fisheries and aquaculture products are key dietary components for
the population (Raknuzzaman et al., 2016) and are ranked third among
Bangladesh’s export commodities (IMED (Implementation Monitoring
and Evaluation Division), 2013). In the growth of the sheries and
aquaculture sector in Bangladesh, there has been extensive product
differentiation between wild, inland-, coastal, and marine-farmed sh,
and in some cases, these products have been marketed with rice or
vegetables (FAO, 2016; Hernandez et al., 2018). Globally, 15% of the
total animal protein in people’s diet comes from sh; this gure is 50%
in developing countries and 60% in Bangladesh (Van der Pijl, 2012; DoF,
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
4
2018). Although sh is an essential source of food and provides nutrition
security and income for many people in Bangladesh (Saiful Islam, 2016),
the safety standards in the sh supply chain are inadequate (Van der Pijl,
2012) and complex due to its many stakeholders. In the extended value
chain, sh is traded in the primary market (involving sh farmers and
local collectors), secondary market (involving wholesalers and local
suppliers) and retail market (involving sellers and ultimate consumers).
In the retail market, sh are traded in both open or wet markets and
hyper- or supermarkets. Due to the product’s importance, in terms of
market volume, and its signicant role in the socioeconomic condition
of millions of people in Bangladesh, authorities need to pay proper
attention to the retail sector to ensure the quality and safety of the sh
and sh-products produced and marketed (Paul et al., 2018; Dey and
Surathkal, 2020). The Bangladeshi Fish Inspection and Quality Control
wing of the sheries department have been working since 1997 to sus-
tain a sh-product safety system.
Numerous measures might be required to control food adulteration
and ensure the marketing system is effective and strategic. The
Bangladesh Food Safety Network is a privately formed network of or-
ganisations that implements several educative programmes and
communication campaigns for food safety advocacy and awareness; the
network aims to increase public consciousness of food safety and foster a
safe food movement. Recently, the Bangladesh Safe Food Authority
began collecting domestic market data regarding food adulteration to
manage the food safety programme effectively. To minimise the risks of
the existing system of food safety control, the Bangladeshi government
has set food standards and risk assessment procedures in consultation
with the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
Following this process, twenty food analysis laboratories formed the
National Food Safety Laboratory Network to improve the testing of food
samples. An Information, Education and Communications action plan
has also been adopted to enhance the food hygiene and safety awareness
of households, schoolchildren, food vendors, and advocacy groups.
Furthermore, a Food Safety Unit has been formed to develop effective
policies and to institutionalise and ensure the good governance of the
existing food safety control system. Finally, a pathogen-specic sur-
veillance system tracks food-borne illnesses following the food safety
guidelines introduced for the farmed nsh supply chain.
Bangladesh has perhaps the highest number of food safety laws,
regulations and initiatives in the world to regulate the safe delivery to
consumers of food, including sh and sh products. These diverse reg-
ulations and inspections show multi-sectoral responsibility for food
control (FAO, 2004), which entirely excludes the HACCP and Codex
standards (Banglapedia, 2015). Increasing safety standards formulation
capacity based on risk will contribute to the institutionalisation and
good governance of food control systems and food safety practices in
value chains. Increasing these standards will also change household
attitudes, resulting in demand in Bangladesh for safe sh (FAO, 2017).
However, the existing control frameworks suffer from abysmal imple-
mentation (Chowdhury, 2011), stemming from regulatory failures, a
lack of information to consumers (Ali, 2013), and a lack of consumer
verication. Therefore, this study explores how consumers value food
safety and what their preferences are for sh safety inspections to help
design an effective food regulation policy.
4. Data collection and measures
One of the most common carp species, Rui (Labeo rohita), is a widely
produced, popular and extensively consumed sh in Bangladesh. It is
both wild-caught and farm-raised, produced in both inland freshwater
and brackish water, and contributes to around half of total sh con-
sumption (Khan et al., 2020). Since our main interest is to investigate
how seafood safety inspection as part of sh control affects consumers’
choices and their WTP, we focus on Rui to isolate the effect of a specic
consumer choice. We use an experimental research design to collect
data, with direct interviews with randomly selected households. The
data were collected in Dhaka and Chittagong (see Fig. 1), which are
chosen because their per capita sh consumption is higher than that of
other cities in the country (Needham and Funge-Smith, 2014).
Furthermore, as the capital city, Dhaka makes a signicant contribution
to the country’s economy and is characterised as the ‘Business Hub of
Bangladesh,’ and the commercial and port city of Chittagong makes a
crucial contribution to foreign trade. Furthermore, people living in these
cities are relatively wealthy compared to those in the rest of the country.
These cities are thus suitable for our attempt to explore the growing
consciousness of food safety control in emerging markets (HIES, 2016).
To construct a representative sample, we employ stratied cluster
sampling processes. The eldwork in the two study areas was under-
taken from 12 January to 27 March 2019. Before the nal version of the
survey was completed, we conducted a pre-test survey of 42 subjects
from Dhaka and 36 from Chittagong to conrm that they understood the
questions and that there were no semantic or measurement problems.
We found no signicant obstacles, and the same settings were employed
for the nal version.
The primary respondents are household members older than 21 in
charge of what other household members eat; these householders are
more likely to be responsible for sh buying than others in the family.
The purpose of the research was specied in a motivational letter to the
participants, who were interviewed in the local language, Bengali, and
answered a set of questions and responded to the survey. On average,
each interview took 20 min. Before beginning the survey, the survey’s
contents were reviewed and approved by the Ethical Review Board,
University of Chittagong, Bangladesh.
The rst section of the questionnaire (see Appendix A) centred on
sh choice based on sh attributes focused on sh safety control. Six sets
of choices were presented in a table, and the respondents were requested
to choose one from each (see Fig. 2). In each set, three sh options with
four attributes were presented to assess consumers’ choices. Further-
more, we included an additional ‘opt-out’ choice in each selection to
allow for none of the other choices being found suitable. The choices in
the experimental design were affected by the sh production method
(wild, inland farmed, coastal farmed); the product form (fresh, frozen,
iced); type of food safety inspection (national authority, local authority,
no authorised safety inspection); and price per kg of the Rui (BDT 360,
Black shading indicates the study area
Bay of Bengal
Fig. 1. The study area.
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
5
BDT 280, BDT 200) (see Table 1). A focus group discussion was arranged
to ensure the estimated values were logical and relevant to the local
economy to accurately estimate the sh attributes and alternatives.
Based on time and budget constraints, 450 households were targeted as
respondents. Of these, we omit 28 as they provided partial or incomplete
information. Therefore, a total of 422 households are included in the
between-subject design. The sampling distribution is as follows: Dhaka
south (N =113); Dhaka north (N =100); Chittagong south (N =103);
and Chittagong north (N =106). Ultimately, we obtain a data set of n =
422 ×6 ×4 =10,128 observations.
With four factors and three levels, a total of 3
4
(81) hypothetical
products can be created by connecting the attributes listed above. For
useful analysis, the study employs an orthogonal fractional factorial
design. The computer program SPSS (Version 26) provides the minimum
number of six choice sets, with 18 product proles. Following Balcombe
et al. (2010), the participants were instructed to think about the choice
scenarios as if they were real. We used a text script in the questionnaire
to provide relevant information on sh attributes during the choice
experiment to reduce the bias that could result from a hypothetical
experiment (Murphy et al., 2005).
When buying sh, the attributes perceived by consumers affect their
preferences. When they value a product and judge the quality of its at-
tributes accurately, they will buy it (Caswell, 1998). Accordingly, how
consumers perceive sh attributes is assessed with a simple attitude
ranking survey, in which their valuing of sh attributes are assessed on a
seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly
agree), thus revealing their perceptions of what the attributes meaning.
Scores of four or ve are treated as a neutral perceived value, scores of
three or below are considered a negative perceived value and scores of
six or above represent a positive perceived value (Hoque, 2020). How-
ever, in the Likert-type statements, the respondents could rate all the
attributes as equally important (Phillips et al., 2002). Therefore, to gain
in-depth insights, their evaluations of sh attributes are assessed in an
attitude ranking survey (see Appendix A).
Hence, consumers ranked the sh attributes according to their
perceived role in their sh choice from 1 (most important) to 4 (least
important). Preference ranking can also effectively elicit consumer
valuation based on conjoint analysis (Millar and Millar, 1996; Phillips
et al., 2002). However, attitude and preference ranking involve different
theoretical frameworks and methods. Therefore, we then also compare
the outcomes of the two approaches to determine the relative impor-
tance of each sh attribute ranking. The relative importance of attri-
butes is measured by the ratio of the range of utility (e.g., Rank 1)
change for different attribute levels to the sum of such elds for all sh
attributes.
5. Econometric model
In economics and marketing, conjoint analysis is widely used to
assess and estimate consumers’ preferences and demand for market
goods (Anderson and Soa, 1993). In this study, we consider consumers’
perceived value of food safety inspection and sh attributes, together
with their sh-shopping experiences in a conjoint experiment. Gener-
ally, an individual chooses an alternative (the most preferred item) to
maximise their utility, and other options are not chosen, indicating their
mutual exclusiveness (Train, 2009a, 2009b). When respondent n ob-
serves choice set k with j alternatives, then the utility of alternative j for
respondent n can be dened as:
Unkj =x′
kjβ+
ε
nkj (1)
where β represents a vector of the importance of the attributes (x) for
consumers in assessing their utility. The error term
ε
nkj
captures the
inuence on the respondent’s utility of unobserved factors. Respondents
had four choices: Option A, Option B, Option C, and Option D (do not
buy either). Thus, a conditional logit model is used to estimate the
preference (Hensher et al., 2005; Roheim et al., 2012) where the prob-
ability of respondent n choosing product j of choice set k can be written
as:
Pnkj =eβjxj+γnjxjzn
keβjxj+γnjxjzn(2)
In the economics literature, it is common to use the discrete choice
model to choose between several alternative products (Train, 2009a,
2009b). This mathematical function predicts an individual’s choice
based on relative attractiveness or utility (Mehndiratta, 1997). This
model provides an analytical advantage; the logit model is often used for
Imagine you are in the market and would like to buy 1 kg of the Rui you usually buy. Do you choose
Option A, Option B, Option C or Option D?
Election number- # Option A Option B Option C Option D
Attribute
Production method Wild Coastal farmed Wild
None of these
Product form Frozen Iced Iced
Food safety control No authorised
safety inspection
National-level food
safety inspection
Local-level food
safety inspection
Price/kg BDT 200 BDT 360 BDT 280
I would choose:
Fig. 2. Example of a choice set.
Table 1
Fish attributes and levels for the choice experiments.
Fish attribute Description Levels/Alternatives
Production
method
The sh come from seas, rivers,
and other natural bodies of
water. Alternatively, they can be
raised in inland ponds or other
freshwater bodies, in coastal
areas in brackish water, or in the
sea in saline water.
Wild-caught, inland-farmed,
coastal-farmed.
Product form The nature of the product
purchased by consumers.
Fresh, frozen, iced.
Fish safety
control
A regulatory activity (e.g., safety
inspection) by an authority
(national or local) that provides
consumer protection and ensures
that during production,
handling, storage, processing
and distribution of the sh is
safe.
National-level food safety
inspection (NFSI); local-level
food safety inspection (LFSI);
and no authorised food safety
inspection (NoFSI)
Price This is an economic indicator of
the cost of purchase and what
consumers would pay for one kg
of sh. Here it is denoted in the
Bangladeshi currency, globally
coded as BDT (Bangladeshi
taka).
BDT 360/kg, BDT 280/kg, BDT
200/kg
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
6
modelling the relationship between a categorical outcome and one or
more numerical or categorical predictor variables. As a popular and
widely used logit model, the MNL model generalises the logistic
regression to more than two problems, providing log odds of the nom-
inal outcome as a linear combination of the predictor variables that
estimate a consumer’s choice based on relative attractiveness or utility
(Mehndiratta, 1997). The MNL model implicitly assumes independence
from irrelevant alternatives (IIA) where violation of the IIA assumption
is not a serious shortcoming (Guadagni and Little, 1983). In this study,
the household choice for whole Rui is modelled using the disaggregate
sh demand approach with a generic MNL model, in which the proba-
bility that respondent n chooses alternative j of choice set k is
Pnkj =
exp x′
kjβ
J
i=1exp(x′
kiβ)(3)
In addition, if the N respondents evaluate the same set of k choice
sets, the log-likelihood function for the MNL model becomes:
ln(L(β) ) =
N
n=1
K
k=1
J
j=1
ynkjlnPnkj (4)
In Eq. 4, the dummy variable y
nkj
equals one when respondent n
prefers alternative j from choice set k, and zero otherwise. Individually
respondents’ choices are linked to individual-specic explanatory vari-
ables (Franses and Paap, 2001). These denote the ratio of the probability
of choosing the options and the value of the various sh attributes, such
as wild, inland farmed, fresh, food safety inspected. The responses in
each choice set from four unlabelled options (1 =Option A, 2 =Option
B, 3 =Option C, and 4 =Option D) is truncated into a multivariate
binary choice exposing generic model (Hoque, 2020). For instance, the
six multivariate dummy variables for the six responses were coded as
equal to one if Option A is chosen and zero otherwise. Nonetheless, in
the choice sets, as ‘Option D’ is ‘None of these’ and that the alternative
specic constant (ASC) is equal to one when ‘Option A’, ‘Option B’, and
‘Option C’ is chosen, and zero if ‘Option D’. Based on Eq. (4), the
maximum likelihood estimates
β for the parameter and the vector are
obtained by maximising the log-likelihood function, indicating that the
parameters estimated in the model are useable for the probability of
making a choice. A positive parameter suggests that the explanatory
variable is likely to increase the likelihood of choosing the respective
sh attribute. A negative parameter indicates that the predictor value
tends to curtail the choice probability (Zhang et al., 2010).
Marginal values based on estimated parameters reect the WTP for
product attributes. According to Train (2009a, 2009b), the estimate can
be calculated as the negative ratio of the coefcient of an attribute
variable (β
attribute
) to the price coefcient (β
price
); the formula is as
follows:
WTPattribute = − βattribute
βprice
(5)
Consumers’ WTP is accounted for by choice modelling (Model 2),
which is measured hypothetically. Each marginal value represents
consumers’ WTP for a particular attribute related to the specic sh
types while holding all else constant.
6. Results
The participant demographics and socioeconomic variables are
presented in Table 2. Of the participants, most are male (78%), aged
between 30 and 39 years old (40%), and with more than 12 years of
education (83%). Culturally, men in Bangladesh (almost 80% in this
case) are responsible for purchasing food for their families (Schaetzel
et al., 2014). Most households (70%) have children and between two
and ve family members in total (77%). The mean monthly income of
30% of the respondents is between BDT 30,000 and BDT 50,000 (US$ 1
=BDT 84). Only 6.60% of the respondents are housemakers, while 54%
are employed.
The descriptive statistics also show that 65% of the households eat
sh several times per week, and 25% do so daily. Almost 80% of the
respondents do sh shopping for their families, with 52% buying their
sh from a wet market. The results also reveal that very few respondents
(8%) are registered members of any volunteer environmental organi-
zation or club. Approximately 15% of the total sh purchased were
bought from supermarkets.
This study investigates the effects of product attributes, interactions
between the attributes, and socioeconomic variables on the choice of
whole Rui through two econometric models. As specied in Eqs. (2,3),
Table 2
Descriptive statistics of the demographic and psychographic variables and the
preference patterns for whole rui.
Sample size (households) n =422
Age (%)
20 to 29 10.70
30 to 39 39.80
40 to 49 30.10
50 to 59 13.50
60 to 69 05.70
70 or older 00.20
Gender (%)
Male 78.20
Female 21.80
Education (%)
0 to 5 years 02.80
5 to 12 years 13.50
Over 12 years 83.60
Children (age 1–16) in the household (%)
Yes 70.40
No 29.60
Number of family members (%)
Fewer than 2 02.10
2 to 5 77.00
Over 5 20.90
Household monthly income in Bangladeshi Taka (BDT) (%)
Under 30,000 17.10
30,000 to 50,000 29.90
50,000 to 70,000 20.90
70,000 to 90,000 14.70
Over 90,000 17.50
Profession (%)
Jobholder 54.00
Businessperson 21.60
Housemaker 06.60
Direct services 16.10
Other 01.60
Overall sh consumption (%)
Once per month 00.50
Once per week 09.70
Several times per week 65.40
Daily 24.60
Do you do sh shopping for your family? (%)
Yes 79.10
No 20.90
Where do you buy the sh? (%)
Wet Market 51.70
Supermarket only 01.70
Both 46.70
Registered member of an environmental club (%)
Yes 8.10
No 91.90
Existence of a high value of food safety inspection among those
respondents who are environmental club members (%)
Yes 67.65
No 32.35
Percentage of sh that consumers buy from supermarkets (mean ±St.
dev.)
14.92 ±
20.78
N =10,128
A monthly income of less than BDT 50,000 is low, 50,000 to 89,000 is medium,
and 90,000 and above is a high level of income. Fish consumption once per week
is low, several times per week is medium, where daily is high.
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
7
the conditional logit (CL) model and MNL regression are estimated to
measure the impact of the attribute variables on sh choice, with the
results reported in Table 3. Both the CL and MNL analyses rst test the
model t by examining the chi-square of the nal model (see Table 3,
nal row). Eq. (4) illustrates the estimated parameters in the MNL
model; these are the marginal effects of the observed explanatory vari-
ables on the logarithm of the success odds ratio. The odds ratio shows
the exponential outcomes of the corresponding parameters. As the sign
and magnitude of the two models’ coefcients are almost identical, we
consider Model 2 with ASC for ease of analysis. The outcomes demon-
strate that the ASC is insignicantly positive, meaning that, overall,
consumers prefer whole sh. However, the odds of the price are −0.005,
which is signicantly negative, implying that consumers’ preferences for
whole sh would be lower at a higher price. (See Table 4.)
The individual parameter estimates show that, in response to the
coastal-farmed version, wild sh are valuable in increasing the utility of
consumers, as evidenced by their willingness to pay a price premium of
BDT 299.20/kg. This nding is in line with Hoque (2020) for Bangladesh
Table 3
Estimated results of the exp. (coef) of product attributes and socioeconomics, and consumers’ preferences.
Explanatory variables Choice of whole rui in the
Conditional logit (CL) model Multinomial logit (MNL) model
Model (1) with sh attributes, interactions between
the attributes and socioeconomic variables
Model (2) with sh attributes, interactions between the
attributes and socioeconomic variables
Coef WTP CI Coef WTP CI
ASC – – – 0.040
(0.356)
8.00 [−135.62, 151.62]
Wild 1.395***
(0.194)
348.75 [108.11, 589.38] 1.496*** (0.195) 299.20 [123.32, 475.07]
Inland-farmed 0.732***
(0.196)
183.00 [51.86, 314.13] 0.786*** (0.198) 157.20 [58.22, 256.17]
Fresh 0.237
(0.178)
59.25 [−51.66, 170.16] 0.243
(0.183)
48.60 [−39.42, 136.62]
Frozen −0.901***
(0.222)
−225.25 [−368.11, −82.38] −0.943*** (0.226) −188.60 [−295.18, −82.01]
NFSI 0.506**
(0.245)
126.5 [−10.27, 263.27] 0.259
(0.163)
51.80 [−15.67, 119.27]
NoFSI −3.829***
(0.606)
−957.25 [−1490.53, −423.96] −3.927*** (0.608) −785.40 [−1155.53, −415.26]
Price −0.004***
(0.001)
– – −0.005*** (0.001) – –
Opt-out −2.221***
(0.353)
−555.25 [−719.81, −390.68] −2.368*** (0.362) −473.60 [−571.22, −375.97]
Wild*Fresh 1.254***
(0.300)
313.50 [203.48, 423.51] 1.355*** (0.309) 271.00 [190.02, 351.97]
Wild*Frozen 1.715***
(0.289)
428.75 [229.46, 628.03] 1.818*** (0.296) 363.60 [223.61, 503.58]
Wild*NoFSI 1.205**
(0.601)
301.25 [−44.27, 646.77] 1.074*
(0.603)
214.80 [−48.48, 478.08]
Inland-farmed*Fresh 0.479**
(0.239)
119.75 [−29.62, 269.12] 0.526**
(0.246)
105.20 [−13.72, 224.12]
Inland-farmed*Frozen 0.268
(0.275)
67.00 [−86.38, 220.38] 0.254
(0.281)
50.80 [−71.90, 173.50]
Inland-farmed* NoFSI 0.533
(0.681)
133.25 [−207.91, 474.41] 0.504
(0.684)
100.80 [−173.75, 375.35]
Wild*High income −0.026
(0.126)
−06.50 [−71.64, 58.64] −0.020
(0.113)
−4.00 [−50.41, 42.41]
Inland-farmed*Medium income −0.374**
(0.158)
−93.50 [−187.30, 00.30] −0.410*** (0.150) −82.00 [−151.88, −12.11]
Coastal-farmed*Low income 0.174
(0.137)
43.50 [−30.21, 117.21] 0.190
(0.125)
38.00 [−15.79, 91.79]
Price*Wet market −0.002***
(0.000)
−00.50 [−00.90, −00.09] −0.0004* (0.000) −0.08 [−0.18, 0.022]
Price*Supermarket −0.003
(0.002)
−00.75 [−01.74, 00.24] −0.001
(0.001)
−0.20 [−00.57, 0.170]
NFSI* High income −0.005
(0.123)
−01.25 [−64.43, 61.93] −0.006
(0.110)
−1.20 [−46.57, 44.17]
LFSI*Medium income 0.272*
(0.143)
68.00 [−13.16, 149.16] 0.285**
(0.129)
57.00 [−0.83, 114.83]
NoFSI*Low income −0.482**
(0.195)
−120.50 [−237.63, −3.36] −0.492*** (0.189) −98.40 [−185.78, −11.01]
NFSI* High consumption −0.150
(0.236)
−37.50 [−160.96, 85.96] 0.125
(0.148)
25.00 [−36.76, 86.76]
LFSI*Medium consumption 0.578**
(0.242)
144.50 [−00.65, 289.65] 0.326**
(0.153)
65.20 [−3.23, 133.63]
NoFSI*Low consumption 0.715
(1.180)
178.75 [−435.44, 792.94] 0.665
(1.130)
133.00 [−335.50, 601.50]
Number of observations =10,128, Number of groups =422 Pseudo-R
2
=0.3048, LR Chi
2
(25) =3038.41, Prob.
(Chi
2
) =0.000
Pseudo-R
2
=0.2791, LR Chi
2
(25) =3179.00, Prob. (Chi
2
) =
0.000
Standard errors in parentheses; *** p <0.01, ** p <0.05, and * p <0.1. Parameter estimates from the MNL model; ASC =Alternative Specic Constant; NFSI =
National-level Food Safety Inspection; LFSI =Local-level Food Safety Inspection; NoFSC =No authorised Food Safety Inspection; WTP, standard error (S.E.), and
condence interval (C.I.) estimated with the delta method.
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
8
and Uchida et al. (2014) for Asia and is consistent with studies in Europe
and the Americas (Holland and Wessells, 1998; O’Dierno et al., 2006;
Wirth et al., 2007; Davidson et al., 2012; Nguyen et al., 2015; Rickertsen
et al., 2017a, 2017b).
Compared to the coastal-farmed version, inland-farmed sh also
signicantly increase the utility of consumers, who are willing to pay a
price premium. The literature reveals that consumers prefer inland
freshwater to sea sh (Galib, 2011), whereas a more signicant number
of North Carolina consumers prefer saltwater-farmed seafood (Drake
et al., 2006). In Europe, the value consumers place on farmed sh is
positively related to food safety (Claret et al., 2014). Most consumers
perceive no difference between farmed and wild sh, with availability a
salient feature of a preference for the former (Verbeke et al., 2007; Claret
et al., 2014). However, consumers’ WTP is much higher for wild than
farmed sh (Davidson et al., 2012).
Second, the results reveal that in response to iced sh, the utility of
fresh sh increases for consumers and their marginal WTP is positive.
Consumers’ preference for fresh sh is also consistent with previous
studies in both developed and developing economies, such as India
(Debnath et al., 2012), China (Hu et al., 2014), Kenya (Musa et al.,
2012), France (Nguyen et al., 2015), Denmark (Stubbe Solgaard and
Yang, 2011), and Malaysia (Ahmad Hanis et al., 2013). Freshness is also
an essential attribute for Asian consumers in the Northeastern United
States (Thapa et al., 2015). In addition, in comparison to iced sh, frozen
sh decreases the utility of whole rui for consumers, meaning they are
only willing to buy it at a reduced price. This result is consistent with
Davidson et al. (2012).
Third, in response to the food safety inspection of local authorities,
NFSI does not signicantly increase sh utility. Moreover, compared to
local-level inspection, not having an inspection greatly reduces the
utility of sh for consumers. The results also demonstrate that con-
sumers’ WTP for NoFSI is negative, and more signicantly so than the
WTP of the opt-out group. With either no or inadequate food safety
regulation, consumers are unable to assess sh products (Lawley et al.,
2012). Again, a high price premium was recorded for farmed sh with
Aquaculture Stewardship Council certication (Xuan, 2021). It appears
the application of scientic national-level food safety regulations are
required to meet world-class safety standards (Cato, 1998).
In this study, the effects we consider are those be analysed by
creating interaction terms between product attribute variables (David-
son et al., 2012). Without these interacted terms, the results can be
interpreted as capturing the average perceived value of the product at-
tributes for the sample (Train, 2009a, 2009b). In the interaction anal-
ysis, the interaction of production method and product form could
provide substantial information for consumer food-product utility. For
instance, the wild and fresh attributes together increase consumers’
utility, indicating they are complementary. As the attributes increase
utility individually, it is expected that together they will increase con-
sumers’ utility. Such a nding is relevant to the outcomes of Roheim
et al. (2012).
Furthermore, the wild and frozen attributes are valued individually
and increase or decrease consumers’ utility, respectively. However, this
attribute information signicantly increases consumers’ utility when the
attributes wild and frozen are provided together. This indicates they are
complementary and that consumers have a strong preference for wild
sh in the frozen form. Individually, the NoFSI attribute reduces the
utility of sh for consumers. When this and the wildness attribute are
considered together, wild sh signicantly increase consumer utility,
but the inland-farmed version does not. A recent study in France also
shows that consumers perceive wild sh as best for safety and health
(Rickertsen et al., 2017a, 2017b). However, it is only in the fresh form
that the inland-farmed version increases utility; consumers are willing to
pay a price premium of BDT 105.20/kg.
The model’s interaction effect also shows that high-income con-
sumers are willing to buy wild sh at a low price. The signicant
negative interaction effect between inland-farmed sh and a medium
level of income implies that they are substitutes; the coastal version
increases utility to consumers insignicantly, but they are willing to pay
a price premium of BDT 38.00/kg. Previous studies demonstrate that
both inland- and coastal-farmed sh signicantly benet Bangladeshi
consumers (Hoque et al., 2021b). In addition, the interaction term be-
tween price and the wet market is negatively signicant, meaning that
consumers are willing to buy whole sh in the wet market at a low price.
Presently, compared to wet markets, modern retailers (e.g., supermar-
kets) sell higher quality products at higher prices (Schipmann and Qaim,
2011).
The model’s interaction effect also indicates that a positive and
signicant interaction term between LFSI and a medium level of income
is signicantly positive and complementary. In this complementary ef-
fect, LFSI increases the utility of sh to consumers. Due to the intro-
duction of local GAP standards, minimum food safety and hygiene is
required for the control of the marketplace (Havinga et al., 2015, p.78).
The China Food and Drug Administration has introduced local gover-
nance regulations to develop a legal and regulatory system to address
food safety risks (Jensen and Zhou, 2015, p.181). Similarly, in terms of
sh consumption level, consumers are most likely to prefer LFSI. On the
other hand, sh with NoFSI produces consumer disutility, in which the
effect of NFSI is insignicantly negative.
Although consumers value the production method as the most
important attribute in sh choice (in the attitude rating and ranking),
their perceptions of food safety were heterogeneous. Consumers
weighted safety inspection as second in the rating (see Fig. 3) and third
in the attitude ranking. More mental effort is required to answer ranking
than rating questions (Verint, 2013). This neurocognitive process re-
ects the psychological cost (e.g., mental concern or mental resistance)
of information processing during perception (Logan, 2019). The out-
comes demonstrate that in the attitude ranking, where a high mental
cost (friction or anxiety) is involved in responding, consumers perceive a
lower value for food safety inspection than in the attitude rating. This
indicates that consumers prefer safety information that is legible, clearly
and consistently presented and with a low mental processing cost. Food
safety regulators that develop educational materials should thus include
the required safety information to reduce consumers’ mental costs, to
obtain strong form efciency in the sheries and aquaculture market.
In comparing two attitude objects, attitude ranking is superior to
attitude rating (Anne-Wil et al., 2009). Attitude rankings represent
Table 4
The relative importance of sh attributes (Numbers in parentheses indicate ranking).
Framework for Operationalisation and Conceptualisation Attribute Total
Price Production
method
Product
form
Safety
inspection
Operationalisation of safety inspection Types of rankings and their characteristics
Relative importance (based on the most important
attribute in sh choice; 1
–
–
yes, 0 =otherwise)
Attitude ranking: direct experiences, affective
reactions, consummatory behaviour, intrinsic
enjoyment.
9.95
(4)
47.14
(1)
13.94
(3)
28.97
(2)
100.00
Relative importance (based on the predicted
expected utility from sh attributes)
Preference ranking: indirect experiences, cognitive
reactions, instrumental behaviour, cognition and
beliefs.
−0.79
(3)
432.36
(1)
151.19
(2)
−482.75
(4)
100.00
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
9
consumer’s direct experiences of attitude objects that might produce
affective reactions linked to consumer behaviour and directly inuence
their preferences (Millar and Millar, 1996; Phillips et al., 2002). Such
behaviour greatly affects consumers’ consideration of product attributes
and their intrinsic enjoyment of the consumption (Millar and Millar,
1996). Consumers value the method of sh production and food safety
inspection as the rst and second most crucial sh-choice attributes (see
Fig. 4, Table 3).
In the preference ranking, consumers perceive sh attributes indi-
rectly by means of predicted objects that produce cognitive reactions
linked to their instrumental behaviour (Millar and Millar, 1996; Phillips
et al., 2002). This behaviour allows consumers to form their attitudes to
sh attributes based on cognition and beliefs rather than affectively
driven actions and intrinsic enjoyment (Millar and Millar, 1996; Hoque
and Hossan, 2020; Hoque et al., 2018). In such instrumental behaviour,
consumers perceive the sh production method to be most important,
with safety inspection as the fourth most important attribute. However,
they perceive sh safety inspection as the second most crucial attribute
in attitude ranking in relation to their consumption behaviour. There-
fore, consumers’ perception of sh safety inspection related to their
affective reaction for intrinsic enjoyment is higher than their reactions
based on cognition and beliefs. Such a low belief perception of sh safety
inspection indicates that Bangladeshi consumers’ do not have a high
level of belief in the existing sh safety control, with affective drivers
greatly inuencing their consumption of sh at a high rate. From the
affective perspective, sh and shery products have a strong association
with national pride, upbringing, and a sense of belonging to the com-
munity (Hoque et al., 2021b), which helps make Bangladesh a sh-
eating nation.
7. Discussion
Bangladesh has a high-level frequency of sh consumption, and
consumers’ sh choices are heterogeneous. Generally, consumers prefer
wild sh to the farmed version, and they are willing to pay a price
premium for wild sh for its positively valued taste and safety attributes.
Even a lack of authorised safety inspections increases consumers’ utility
from wild sh, clearly suggesting that they nd wild sh safe; the
existing food safety inspection is not required by consumers. Individu-
ally, the attribute ‘fresh’ increases consumers’ utility insignicantly,
while that of attribute ‘frozen’ decreases utility signicantly. Interest-
ingly, when the attributes of production method and product form are
combined, consumers value wild sh in frozen form more than in fresh
form, indicating their strong preference for wild sh, irrespective of the
product form (fresh or frozen).
Many wild sh are caught at sea, and the process from the point of
catch to the table is relatively long. Therefore, it is not easy to nd wild
sh in fresh form. Such inconvenience in obtaining wild fresh sh leads
consumers who prefer the wild version to mostly depend on the frozen
alternative. In addition, in the urban areas of Bangladesh, sh produced
in inland freshwater is treated as local, indicating a similar attitude to
consumers in European and the Mediterranean (Jaffry et al., 2004;
Br´
ecard et al., 2009; Claret et al., 2012; Mauracher et al., 2013), in their
preference for locally farmed sh (e.g., inland freshwater sh) over
coastal- and marine-farmed versions (Hoque et al., 2021a, 2021b).
In addition to the sh production method (wild vs farmed), the sh
form (fresh vs frozen) also plays a vital role in consumers’ sh choices.
When the attribute ‘fresh’ is considered alone, it increases consumer
utility. However, consumers are less likely to prefer the frozen sh,
indicating they are willing to pay a premium for the fresh sh. Alter-
natively, they are willing to buy the frozen sh product at a lower price.
These ndings imply that whole sh in fresh form will be popular in
local Bangladeshi markets.
Furthermore, a new form of sh or a new measure for frozen sh is
required to increase sh utility to consumers. Despite the market op-
portunities for new sh products, Bangladeshi consumers traditionally
have a xed afnity for consuming the sh available in local markets.
They have already formed the habit of eating sh, with a high level of
affection for sh consumption (Hoque, 2020). As the supply of fresh sh
is limited, to meet the high demand, consumers also prefer alternative
sh forms, such as frozen, iced, and dried.
Bangladeshi consumers are highly experienced in handling and
processing whole sh. There is also a sh-handling service available for
a fee at the point of sale, which motivates people to eat whole sh.
Therefore, consumers have a marked preference for whole inland-
farmed sh in fresh form. In addition, they assume frozen farmed sh
traded in the local markets is below average in terms of taste and safety.
Although consumers’ WTP for farmed sh in frozen form is positive, the
availability of such sh will not signicantly increase the number of
buyers.
An effective trading strategy is required for farmed frozen sh, for
example, authorised food safety inspections; these may help to signi-
cantly improve consumer’s utility from sh. Farmed sh is not consid-
ered suitable in terms of health and safety, but it may be the best option
for environmental sustainability and sh welfare (Rickertsen et al.,
2017a, 2017b). Although farmed sh raises food safety concerns, there
is a tendency to underestimate food safety risks. This factor, a high level
of demand for sh, and a certain afnity for sh consumption (e.g.,
ASC), mean that consumers are willing to pay a premium for inland-
farmed sh.
Surprisingly, consumer’s WTP for non-inspected inland-farmed sh,
which is the status-quo (BDT 100.80), is higher than for inland-farmed
frozen sh (BDT 50.80). It is notable that consumers in traditional
market outlets perceive a low level of food health risk (Hoque et al.,
2021b). Because there is a limited or absent supply of safety-inspected
sh, even the absence of an authorised food safety inspection may
480 408 576
1128
1536
2424
2952
3528
8112
7296
6600
5472
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
Production
Method
Product Form Safety
Inspection
Price
Low Value Neutral High Value
Fig. 3. Percieved value of sh attributes which affect their sh choice.
4824
2832
1320
1152
1392
2904
3288
2544
2904
2328
2424
2472
1008
2064
3096
3960
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Rank1
Rank2
Rank3
Rank4
Production Method Product Form
Safety Inspection Price
Fig. 4. Rank distribution of the four attributes according to the importance in
consumers’ sh choice.
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
10
increase consumers’ utility from sh in the domestic market. Such a
conventional or uninspected sh preference may be one kind of forced
choice. In the absence of the preferred seafood and its unsuitable sub-
stitutes, in developed countries, consumers do not buy any sh product
at all (Carlucci et al., 2015); however, this is not applicable in an
emerging economy such as Bangladesh. Consumers’ high level of sh
consumption and established habits may inuence them to prefer whole
nsh, even if no safety inspection has been made. However, due to the
higher levels of income and education now prevailing, Bangladeshi
urban households are becoming gradually more conscious of food safety
and sustainability in their sh choices (Hoque, 2020).
As food security and safety are vital, and sheries and aquaculture
are essential in the food economy, a sh safety system is now central and
provides opportunities for consumers to estimate their demand for sh
that is safety-inspected that which is not. In local Bangladeshi markets,
NFSI increases sh utility to consumers. NoFSI decreases consumer
utility from sh, clearly implying that for consumers wanting safe
farmed sh, the existing or additional food safety inspections are
mandatory. Although food elements should be labelled and the neces-
sary information provided to consumers, this is not the case in local sh
markets, specically in wet markets in Bangladesh (Hoque, 2020).
Therefore, consumers’ overall value of sh safety in Bangladeshi local
markets is low, and they are only willing to buy whole rui in the wet
market at a lower price.
Although preferences and perceptions are key elements in the anal-
ysis of market demand, price and income are also important issues. The
parameter estimates show that, based on income, consumers are less
likely to prefer inland-farmed sh, meaning that they are highly price-
sensitive to farmed sh. Therefore, because of the higher price of
inland-farmed sh, consumers choose coastal-farmed sh. Food safety is
a vital information cue when buying sh (Pieniak et al., 2013); however,
consumers are rarely able to nd any safety information when buying
sh in Bangladeshi local markets.
Additionally, to boost the lifespan and appearance of sh, it is
common practice for vendors to spray sh with chemical preservatives,
including formalin (Goon et al., 2014). As a result, consumers are sus-
picious and worried about sh safety, and sh farmers face the challenge
of having to engage in communication campaigns because of the low
consumer loyalty to their products (Gaviglio, 2009). The overall nega-
tive evaluation of the Bangladeshi sheries sector posing a signicant
threat to households’ income and food security and requires immediate
action by policymakers (Ghose, 2014). The results also show that LFSI
increases sh utility to consumers, and their MWTP is positive. How-
ever, our most interesting nding is that consumers are less likely to
prefer sh with NoFSI, meaning they expect active and reliable safety
inspections. The research shows that in terms of safety and hygiene is-
sues, production methods, and nutrition value (Claret et al., 2016), the
availability of information also inuences consumers’ sh preferences
(Siret and Issanchou, 2000). Such ndings in the literature conrm that
whole sh with LFSI will be popular in local markets in emerging
economies such as Bangladesh.
Currently, Bangladeshi market food safety issues are causing a severe
crisis of trust, and the existing national-level certication system for
food safety (e.g., BSTI approved) is extremely inefcient (Hoque et al.,
2021b). Even the government has not veried this scheme through
consumers, and many substandard food products have been found
labelled as ‘BSTI approved’. Additionally, many counterfeit food prod-
ucts are traded in the local markets cynically labelled with the warning
“Beware of fake products” (Hoque, 2020). Therefore, to increase con-
sumers’ trust level, Bangladesh’s food safety regulators should provide
unique inspection resources to supervise the safety of sh and other
seafood sold in ostensibly trustworthy markets and must not permit
exemptions to inspections. In China, despite the inefcient safety cer-
tication system for milk (Zhang et al., 2010), consumers are willing to
pay a premium for safe, traceable sh products over non-traced products
of uncertain safety (Wang et al., 2009).
Another interesting nding is that consumers are not sensitive to
food safety risks relating to sh consumption levels. Even with NoFSI,
they prefer to consume a certain level of sh that is, in fact, higher than
that preferred for sh with an NFSI. Such discrepancies in the percep-
tions of food safety risk may lead to potential market failures, despite the
focus on a health-driven approach to food safety (Johan et al., 2013). On
the one hand, consumers are concerned about food safety, and on the
other, they underestimate the threats of safety risks, revealing a gap
between their expectations and perceptions regarding food safety in-
spection (Lin et al., 2020). Such behaviour shows emotional responses
to, or experiences of, sh consumption. These responses could be turned
into emotional preferences and further the potential of sheries and
aquaculture (Hoque et al., 2021a) and support the cultural connotation
of consumption “Fish eater Bangali (Mach-e-bhat-e-Bangali)”.
People are reluctant to buy the greenest products (Young et al.,
2010), with green consumers giving these low priority. Similarly, the
introduction of LFSI for whole rui offers a policy approach to change
consumer behaviour (Hoque, 2020). In recent years, a combined gov-
ernment and private monitoring mechanism has been introduced to
improve seafood safety and restore consumers’ trust in shery products
in Bangladesh (Economic Review, 2018). These are mostly reactive and
based on completed sh product inspections. In addition, these reactive
inspections are ineffective and poorly implemented. As the efforts are
not complete or sufcient to ensure sh safety security in local markets,
a preventive and risk-based inspection focusing on the entire sh chain
should be implemented to better manage sh safety control. Such
risk-based safety inspections could support the authorities in formu-
lating an effective food safety policy with a proper institutional frame-
work for its operationalisation (FAO, 2004) and resources allocated to
the areas with the more signicant safety risks.
8. Conclusion
We assessed consumers’ perceptions of sh attributes using three
different attitude measurement and scaling techniques: attitude rating,
attitude raking, and preference ranking. The typical value of the sh
attributes assessed across all estimation techniques indicates that the
production method (wild or farmed) greatly inuences people in their
sh choice. A heterogeneous value for sh safety inspection suggests
that consumers expect information regarding food safety control at a
low mental cost. Consumers beliefs regarding sh safety inspections in
safety control are low, whereas the effects of affection on sh choice are
high.
Second, the results indicate that for most consumers, wild sh is still
perceived as having better overall quality than the farmed equivalent.
When consumers nd it difcult to locate fresh wild sh in the
marketplace, and if the price is relatively high, they are more likely to
prefer frozen wild sh. Although wild sh may not involve food safety
inspection, consumers are most likely to buy such sh. Interestingly,
consumers prefer frozen wild sh to fresh wild sh because of its
availability in the local market.
Third, only fresh-farmed sh increases consumer utility. Farmed sh
in frozen form and with no authorised food safety inspection is not
appealing but becomes attractive if there is a local-level food safety
inspection. Alhough consumers have mixed perceptions of sh that has
passed an NFSI, they are willing to pay a premium for sh with a local-
level food safety inspection. This suggests the market potential for
farmed sh if it is certied by the local authority. Interestingly, when no
sh with a food safety certication is available, they are still interested
in conventional or uninspected wild sh.
Consumers’ WTP behaviour shows that they are willing to pay less
for inland-farmed sh. Therefore, coastal-farmed sh could offer an
alternative to meet the high demand from urban households. Addi-
tionally, inland fresh-farmed sh with a local municipality inspection
would be an excellent alternative to scarce wild sh. This may support
the claim that safety-inspected farmed sh could become prevalent in
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
11
Bangladeshi sh markets. More focus should be placed on the relative
importance of consumers’ preferences for particular attributes, such as
production methods, product forms, food safety inspection authorities,
and the potential interaction effect among sh attributes. Accordingly,
effective information strategies addressed to the general public should
be developed to support and increase farmed fresh sh and safe sh
consumption. This would reduce the negative impact of traditional sh
preservation practices on selling methods and reduce unsustainable sh
consumption. Such outcomes and policy recommendations would pro-
vide essential information to cities such as Dhaka and Chittagong to
improve Bangladeshi consumers’ general perceptions of policymakers
and major potential food traders (domestic and foreign).
In this study, we considered two major cities, covering the country’s
southern and central urban households; North Bengal was excluded.
However, we suspect that the results would vary considerably for
diverse geographical locations and cultures. For example, the preference
for wild over farmed sh is likely to be improved in the west and
southern parts, and the wild sheries in the Bay of Bengal expanded.
Therefore, it is not easy to generalise from our results. Another caveat is
that the design of choice experiments varies from study to study,
including concerning the range of prices used to cover the potential
WTP. We employed stratied cluster sampling, which is a systematic
tool, suggesting the results can be used to draw a more robust conclu-
sion. Similar studies could be conducted in future that include food
safety labelling and cover more of Bangladesh; these could potentially
cover major urban areas to account for the signicant differences be-
tween economic conditions in rural and urban households.
Funding
The publication charges for this article have been funded by a grant
from the publication fund of UiT The Arctic University of Norway.
Informed consent statement
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the
study.
Data availability statement
The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing nancial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to inuence
the work reported in this paper.
Appendix A. The questionnaire
Consumer Preference for Fish Safety Inspection in Bangladesh: A Survey Questionnaire-February 2019.
Dear Respondents,
This questionnaire survey is a part of my Doctoral research. This survey is about the choice of sh, and the aim is to measure the effect of food safety
inspection and price on buying decision. Please ll in the rst choice that comes to your mind since this is probably closest to your real purchase
behaviour in markets. There are no risks or benets related to lling in this survey, and all the information you provide remains very condential.
Notice, all data will be used anonymously for academic purpose as suggestions to estimate consumer preferences.
The survey is a direct interview method and mostly self-report choice questions. It will be divided into two parts. First, we will ask you to choose
one type of sh among three alternatives in the six choice sets. In the second phase, we will ask to answer some demographic questions. It will take
around 20 min to ll in this questionnaire.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Best Regards,
Mohammed Ziaul Hoque.
PhD Fellow, School of Business and Economics (HHT).
Faculty of Bioscience, Fisheries and Economics.
UiT The Arctic University of Norway.
www.uit.no
*For any clarication, please, contact Mr. Hoque (+4,747,733,295; +8,801,716,584 124, https://www.facebook.com/ziaul.hoque.5492,
mohammed.z.hoque@uit.no).
Section 1: Choice Experiment.
Instructions
•You will view details about three types of sh at a time on a choice card.
•Examine the design details—such as the variety of attributes or price—that you usually use to make a buying decision.
•Indicate which of the three shes you would choose; only one choice is allowed. You can also indicate that you would not choose either sh in that
particular three types.
•Please think carefully about each decision as though your choices were real.
Below is an example of a choice scenario:
Imagine you are in the market and will buy Rui sh that you usually buy: There are four choices A, B, C and D. You are asked to choose the one you
would most likely buy. Again, only one option is allowed.
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
12
Example Option A Option B Option C Option D
Attributes
Production method Wild Wild Inland Farmed
None of these
Product form Frozen Fesh Frozen
Food safety control National-level food
safety inspection
Local-level food
safety inspection
No-authorised
safety inspection
Price/kg TK 200 TK 280 TK 360
I would choose:
Fig. A1. Example of a choice set.
Please read the relevant text information regarding sh attributes carefully, then begin the survey:
•Price: Price of 1 kg of the type of sh you have selected (Bangladeshi Taka)
•National-level food safety inspection: A regulatory safety inspection by national authority to provide consumer protection and ensure that shes
during production, handling, storage, processing & distribution are safe. For instance, the regulatory functions of IPH (Institute of Public Health),
Dhaka, and the BSTI (Bangladesh Standard Testing Institutions).
•Local-level food safety inspection: A regulatory safety by the local authority to provide consumer protection and ensure that shes during
production, handling, storage, processing & distribution are safe. For instance, the regulatory functions of the executive magistrate and health
ofcer of Dhaka City Corporations and Chittagong City Corporations.
•No-authorised safety inspection: There is no authority to provide safety protection to consumers and ensure that shes during production,
handling, storage, processing & distribution are safe.
Now we will begin the survey; please tick (√) your choice in the following choice sets.
Election-1
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Attributes
Production method
Inland Farmed
Coastal farmed
Coastal farmed
None of
these
Product form
Fresh
Fresh
Iced
Food safety control
National-level food
safety inspection
Local-level food
safety inspection
No-authorised safety
inspection
Price/kg
TK 200
TK 200
TK 200
I would choose:
Election-2
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Attributes
Production method
Inland Farmed
Wild
Coastal farmed
None of
these
Product form
Fresh
Fresh
Iced
Food safety control
National-level food
safety inspection
Local-level food
safety inspection
No-authorised safety
inspection
Price/kg
TK 200
TK 200
TK 200
I would choose:
Election-3
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Attributes
Production method
Inland
Farmed
Wild
Coastal
farmed
None of
these
Product form
Frozen
Fresh
Fresh
Food safety control
Local-level food
safety inspection
No-authorised
safety inspection
National-level food
safety inspection
Price/kg
TK 200
TK 280
TK 280
I would choose:
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
13
Election-4
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Attributes
Production method
Coastal farmed
Wild
Inland Farmed
None of
these
Product form
Frozen
Iced
Iced
Food safety control
Local-level food
safety inspection
National-level food
safety inspection
No-authorised safety
inspection
Price/kg
TK 280
TK 200
TK 280
I would choose:
Election-5
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Attributes
Production method
Wild
Coastal
farmed
Wild
None of
these
Product form
Frozen
Iced
Iced
Food safety control
No-authorised
safety inspection
National-level food
safety inspection
Local-level food
safety inspection
Price/kg
TK 200
TK 360
TK 280
I would choose:
Election-6
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Attributes
Production method
Inland Farmed
Inland Farmed
Wild
None of
these
Product form
Fresh
Frozen
Fresh
Food safety control
No authorized
safety inspection
National-level food
safety inspection
Local-level food
safety inspection
Price/kg
TK 360
TK 280
TK 360
I would choose:
Please rate the following statements by giving the tick mark on the best agreeing (one) option only.
Statements
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Neutral
Somewhat
Agree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Production method (e.g.,
wild or farmed) affects
my choice of fish
❶
❷
❸
❹
❺
❻
❼
Production form (e.g.,
fresh or frozen) affects
my choice of fish
❶
❷
❸
❹
❺
❻
❼
Safety inspection affects
my choice of fish
❶
❷
❸
❹
❺
❻
❼
Price affects my choice
of fish
❶
❷
❸
❹
❺
❻
❼
Section 2: Personal Characteristics.
Finally, please rank the following four attributes according to the importance of your sh choice (1 =most important to 4 =least important).
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
14
a) Age: 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70 years or older
b) Gender: Male Female
c) Income/month (Taka): <30,000 30,000-50,000 50,000-70,000
70,000-90,000 > 90,000
d) Child (age 1-16) in household: Yes No
e) Number of family member: less than 2 2 to 5 more than 5
f) Your education of years: 0 to 5 years 5 to12 years above 12 years
g) Your profession: ______________________
h) Do you do most of the food shopping for your family? Yes No
i) Overall fish consumption: Less-than once/month once/month once/week
Several-times/week Daily
j) I buy fish from: Wet market Supermarket Both
k) In general, what is the percentage of fish that you buy from supermarkets? %
l) Are you a registered member of any environmental organization? Yes No
Finally, please rank the following four attributes according to the importance of your fish
choice (1=most important to 4=least important)
Finally, please rank the following four attributes according to the importance of your sh choice (1 =most important to 4 =least important).
Attribute Production method Product form Safety inspection Price
Ranking
References
Ababouch, L., 2006. Assuring sh safety and quality in international sh trade. Mar.
Pollut. Bull. 53, 561–568.
Ahmad Hanis, I.A.H., Jinap, S., Mad Nasir, S., Alias, R., 2013. Eliciting Malaysian
consumer preferences for marine sh attributes by using conjoint analysis. World
Appl. Sci. J. 28 (12), 2054–2060.
Akinbode, S.O., Dipeolu, A.O., Okojie, L.O., 2012. Estimating consumers’ willingness to
pay for safety of street foods in south-West Nigeria. Niger. J. Agric. Econ. 3 (1),
28–39.
Alam, A., Alfnes, F., 2020. Consumer preferences for sh attributes in Bangladesh: a
choice experiment. J. Int. Food Agribusiness Market. 32 (5), 425–440. https://doi.
org/10.1080/08974438.2019.1697409.
Ali, A.N.M., 2013. Food safety and public health issues in Bangladesh: a regulatory. Eur.
Food Feed Law Rev. 8 (1), 31–40 (accessed May 02 2020).
Amagliani, G., Brandi, G.F. Schiavano, 2012. Incidence and role of Salmonella in seafood
safety. Food Res. Int. 45 (2), 780–788. ISSN 0963–9969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodres.2011.06.022.
Anderson, J.L., Soa, U.B., 1993. A conjoint approach to model product preferences: the
New England market for fresh and frozen Salmon. Mar. Resour. Econ. 8, 31–49.
https://doi.org/10.1086/mre.8.1.42629045.
Anne-Wil, Harzing, Baldueza, Joyce, Barner-Rasmussen, Wilhelm, Barzantny, Cordula,
Canabal, Anne, Davila, Anabella, Zander, Lena, 2009. Rating versus ranking: what is
the best way to reduce response and language bias in cross-national research? Int.
Bus. Rev. 18 (4), 417–432.
Baki, M.A., Hossain, M.M., Akter, J., Quraishi, S.B., Haque Shojib, M.F., Atique Ullah, A.
K.M., Khan, M.F., 2018. Concentration of heavy metals in seafood (shes, shrimp,
lobster and crabs) and human health assessment in Saint Martin Island, Bangladesh.
Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 159, 153–163.
Balcombe, K., Fraser, I., Falco, S.Di., 2010. Trafc lights and food choice: A choice
experiment examining the relationship between nutritional food labels and price.
Food Policy 35 (3), 211–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2009.12.005.
Banglapedia, 2015. Bangladesh Food Safety Laws and Regulations. Available at. http
://en.banglapedia.org/index.php?title=Bangladesh_Food_Safety_Laws_and_Regulat
ions (Retrieved on May 30, 2020).
Birol, E., Roy, D., Deffner, K., Karandikar, B., 2009. Developing Country Consumers’
Demand for Food Safety and Quality: Is Mumbai Ready for Certied and Organic
Fruits? Contributed Paper at the International Association of Agricultural Economists
Conference, Beijing, 16–22, August.
Br´
ecard, D., Hlaimi, B., Lucas, S., Perraudeau, Y., Salladarre, F., 2009. Determinants of
demand for green products: an application to eco-label demand for sh in Europe.
Ecol. Econ. 69, 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.07.017.
Carlucci, D., Nocella, G., De Devitiis, B., Viscecchia, R., Bimbo, F., Nardone, G., 2015.
Consumer purchasing behaviour towards sh and seafood products. Patterns and
insights from a sample of international studies. Appetite 84, 212–227. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.10.008.
Caswell, J.A., 1998. How labeling of safety and process attributes affects markets for
food. Agric. Resour. Econ. Rev. 27 (2), 151–158.
Cato, J.C., 1998. Economic Values Associated with Seafood Safety and Implementation of
Seafood Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) Programmes. In: FAO
Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 381. Rome, FAO, 70p. (ISBN 92-5-102414-4, ISSN
0429-9345).
Chowdhury, M.S., 2011. Encountering food safety challenges in Bangladesh-A regulatory
analysis. Journal of Law, Chittagong University, 1-23.
Chowdhury, M.M., 2019. Preliminary survey on the sh consumer behavior and
infrastructures of sh markets in Dhaka City. IOSR J. Agric. Vet. Sci. 12 (4), 86–91.
Claret, A., Guerrero, L., Aguirre, E., Rinc´
on, L., Hern´
andez, M.D., Martínez, I., Rodríguez-
Rodríguez, C., 2012. Consumer preferences for sea sh using conjoint analysis:
exploratory study of the importance of country of origin, obtaining method, storage
conditions and purchasing price. Food Qual. Prefer. 26, 259–266. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.05.006.
Claret, A., Guerrero, L., Gin´
es, R., Grau, A., Hernandez, M.D., Enaitz Aguirre, E.,
Rodríguez-Rodríguez, C., 2014. Consumer beliefs regarding farmed versus wild sh.
Appetite 79, 25–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.03.031.
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
15
Claret, A., Gartzia, I., Guerrero, L., Quiroga, G.M., Gin´
es, R., 2016. Does information
affect consumer liking of farmed and wild sh? Aquacult. (Amst. Neth.) 454,
157–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2015.12.024.
Danso, G.K., Miriam, O., Linh, D.N., Ganesha, M., 2017. Households’ willingness-to-pay
for sh product attributes and implications for market feasibility of wastewater-
based aquaculture businesses in Hanoi, Vietnam. Resources 6 (2), 1–22. https://doi.
org/10.3390/resources6030030.
Davidson, K., Pan, M., Hu, W., Poerwanto, D., 2012. Consumers’ willingness to pay for
aquaculture sh products vs. wild-caught seafood–a case study in Hawaii. Aquac.
Econ. Manag. 16 (2), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/13657305.2012.678554.
Debnath, B., Biradar, R.S., Pandey, S.K., Ananthan, P.S., Das, A., Patil, P.R., 2012.
Consumers’ preferences for different sh groups in Tripura, India. Fish. Technol. 49
(2), 193.
Dey, Madan Mohan, 2000. Analysis of demand for sh in Bangladesh. Aquac. Econ.
Manag. 4 (1–2), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/13657300009380261.
Dey, M.M., Surathkal, P., 2020. Value chains in aquaculture and sheries in Bangladesh.
In: Transforming Agriculture in South Asia, pp. 195–210 (Routledge).
Dey, Madan Mohan, Ferdous Alam, Md., Paraguas, Ferdinand J., 2011. A multistage
budgeting approach to the analysis of demand for sh: an application to inland areas
of Bangladesh. Mar. Resour. Econ. 26 (1), 35–58.
DoF, 2018. Yearbook of Fisheries Statistics of Bangladesh, Fisheries Resources Survey
System (FRSS), Department of Fisheries. Ministry of Fisheries, Bangladesh.
Drake, S.L., Drake, M.A., Daniels, H.V., Yates, M.D., 2006. Sensory properties of wild and
aquacultured southern ounder. J. Sens. Stud. 21, 218–227.
Eagly, A.H., Chaiken, S., 1998. Attitude structure and function. In: Gilbert, D.T., Fiske, S.
T., Lindzey, G. (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology, 4th ed. Oxford Univeristy
Press, pp. 269–322.
Economic Review, 2018. Bangladesh Economic Review, Economic Adviser’s Wing
Finance Division. Ministry of Finance Government of the People’s Republic of
Bangladesh, Bangladesh Government Press, Tejgaon, Dhaka, p. 1208.
FAO, 2004. FAO/WHO Regional Conference on Food Safety for Asia and Pacic,
Seremban, Malaysia, 24–27 May 2004; Bangladesh Country Paper, Agenda Items
5–9.
FAO, 2013. Global Aquaculture Advancement Partnership ( Gaap ) Programme, 2,
pp. 1–10.
FAO, 2015. Consumers’ Concerns and External Drivers in Food Markets, by Alena Lappo,
Trond Bjørndal, Jos´
e Fern´
andez-Polanco and Audun Lem. Fisheries and Aquaculture
Circular No. 1102. Rome, Italy.
FAO, 2016. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture: Contributing to Food Security
and Nutrition for All. Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, FAO, Rome.
FAO, 2017. Bangladesh Food Safety Cluster Evaluation. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations, Ofce of Evaluation (OED) accessed on
September 01, 2021, retrieved from. http://www.fao.org/evaluation.
FAO, 2018. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2018 - Meeting the Sustainable
Development Goals. Retrieved from. http://www.fao.org/3/i9540en/i9540en.pdf
(Fdey accessed on May 23, 2020).
FAO, 2020. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020. Sustainability in Action.
Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9229en.
FAO, WHO, 2003. Assuring Food Safety and Quality: Guidelines for Strengthening
National Food Control Systems, Joint FAO/WHO Publication, FAO Food and
Nutrition Paper, p. 76.
Franses, Hans P., Paap, R., 2001. Quantitative Models in Marketing Research. UK,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
FSA, 2019. Food Standard Agency: Ensuring food safety and standards, Comptroller and
Auditor General, National Audit Ofce, 157–197 Buckingham Palace Road Victoria
London SW1W 9SP.
Furst, T., Connors, M., Sobal, J., Bisogni, C., Falk, L.W., 2000. Food classications: levels
and categories. Ecol. Food Nutr. 39 (5), 331–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/
03670244.2000.9991623.
Galib, S.M., 2011. Puffer Fishes: a Common and an Old Threat in Bangladesh (Online).
http://en.bdsh.org/2011/01/puffer-sh-threat-bangladesh/.
Garcia, S.M., Rosenberg, A.A., 2010. Food Security and Marine Capture Fisheries:
Characteristics, Trends, Drivers and Future Perspectives, vol. 365, pp. 2869–2880.
Gaviglio, E. Demartini, 2009. Consumer attitudes towards farm-raised and wild caught
sh: A segmentation based on variables of product perception. New Medit. VIII (3,
Supp), 34–40.
Ghose, B., 2014. Fisheries and aquaculture in Bangladesh: challenges and opportunities.
Ann. Aquac. Res. 1 (1), 1001.
Goon, S., Bipasha, S., Islam, M.S., 2014. Fish marketing status with formalin treatment in
Bangladesh: an overview. Online J. Soc. Sci. Res. 3, 49–53.
Grace, D., 2015. Food safety in low and middle income countries. Int. J. Environ. Res.
Public Health 12 (9), 10490–10507. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120910490.
Guadagni, Peter M., Little, John D.C., 1983. A Logit model of brand choice calibrated on
scanner data. Mark. Sci. 1 (2), 203–238.
Guillen, J., Natale, F., Carvalho, N., Casey, J., Hofherr, J., Druon, J.N., et al., 2019.
Global seafood consumption footprint. Ambio. 48 (2), 111–122. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s13280-018-1060-9.
Hanning, I.B., O’Bryan, C.A., Crandall, P.G., Ricke, S.C., 2012. Food safety and food
security. Nat. Educ. Knowl. 3 (10), 9.
Havinga, T., Casey, D., van Waarden, F., 2015. Changing regulatory arrangements in
food governance. In: Casey, D. (Ed.), The Changing Landscape of Food Governance:
Public and Private Encounters. Edward Elgar Publisher, Cheltenham, UK.
Hensher, D., Rose, J.M., Greene, W.H., 2005. Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer.
Cambridge University Press, 10.1017/CBO9780511610356.
Henson, S., Brouder, A.M., Mitullah, W., 2000. Food safety requirements and food
exports from developing countries: the case of sh exports from Kenya to the
European Union. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 82, 1159–1169. https://doi.org/10.1111/
0002-9092.00115.
Hernandez, R., Belton, B., Reardon, T., Hu, C., Zhang, X., Ahmed, A., 2018. The “quiet
revolution” in the aquaculture value chain in Bangladesh. Aquaculture 493
(December 2016), 456–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2017.06.006.
HIES, 2016. Household Income and Expenditure Survey. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics,
Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Holland, D., Wessells, C.R., 1998. Predicting consumer preferences for fresh Salmon: the
inuence of safety inspection and production method attributes. Agric. Resour. Econ.
Rev. 27, 1–14.
Hoque, M.Z., 2020. Sustainability indicators for sustainably-farmed sh in Bangladesh.
Sustain. Prod. Consum. 27, 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.10.020.
Hoque, M.Z., Alam, M.N., 2018. What determines the purchase intention of liquid milk
during a food security crisis? The role of perceived trust, knowledge, and risk.
Sustainability 10 (10), 3722. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103722.
Hoque, M.Z., Alam, M.N., 2020. Consumers’ knowledge discrepancy and confusion in
intent to purchase farmed sh. Br. Food J. 122 (11), 3567–3583. https://doi.org/
10.1108/BFJ-01-2019-0021.
Hoque, M.Z., Hossan, M.A., 2020. Understanding the inuence of belief and belief
revision on consumers’ purchase intention of liquid Milk. SAGE Open 10 (2), 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020922972.
Hoque, M.Z., Alam, M.N., Nahid, K., 2018. Health consciousness and its effect on
perceived knowledge, and belief in the purchase intent of liquid milk: consumer
insights from an emerging market. Foods 7 (9), 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/
foods7090150.
Hoque, M.Z., Bashar, Mohammad Abul, Akhter, Farzana, 2021a. Ambiguity tolerance
and confusion avoidance in the intent to purchase farmed sh. J. Appl. Aquac.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10454438.2021.1872462.
Hoque, M., Akhter, N., Mawa, Z., 2021b. Consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for
organically farmed sh in Bangladesh. J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 1–28. https://doi.org/
10.1017/aae.2021.12.
Hu, Y., Yu, K., Qu, Y., Chen, S., Wang, X., Kimura, I., 2014. An online survey study of
consumer preferences on aquatic products in China: current seafood consumption
patterns and trends. Fish. Aquac. J. 5 (2), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.4172/2150-3508.
1000094.
Hussain, M.A., Saputra, T., Szabo, E.A., Nelan, B., 2017. An overview of seafood supply,
food safety and regulation in New South Wales, Australia. Foods (Basel, Switzerland)
6 (7), 52. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods6070052.
IMED (Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Division), 2013. Impact Evaluation
Study on the Strengthening of Fish Inspection and Quality, Control Service in
Bangladesh, 2nd Revised, Ministry of Planning Government of the People’s Republic
of Bangladesh, The report Conducted by Development Technical Consultants Pvt.
Limited (DTC).
Islam, G.M.R., Hoque, M.M., 2013. Food safety regulation in Bangladesh, chemical
hazard and some perception to overcome the dilemma. Int. Food Res. J. 20, 47–58.
Jaffry, S., Pickering, H., Ghulam, Y., Whitmarsh, D., Wattage, P., 2004. Consumer
choices for quality and sustainability labelled seafood products in the UK. Food
Policy 29, 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2004.04.001.
Jennings, S., Stentiford, G.D., Leocadio, A.M., Jeffery, K.R., Metcalfe, J.D., Katsiadaki, I.,
Verner-Jeffreys, D.W., 2016. Aquatic food security: insights into challenges and
solutions from an analysis of interactions between sheries, aquaculture, food safety,
human health, sh and human welfare, economy and environment. Fish Fish. 17 (4),
893–938. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12152.
Jensen, H.H., Zhou, J., 2015. Food safety regulation and private standards in China. In:
Hammoudi, A., Grazia, C., Surry, Y., Traversac, J.B. (Eds.), Food Safety, Market
Organization, Trade and Development. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-319-15227-1_9.
Johan, Lagerkvist Carl, Hess, Sebastian, Okello, Julius, Hansson, Helena, Karanja, Nancy,
2013. Food health risk perceptions among consumers, farmers, and traders of leafy
vegetables in Nairobi. Food Policy 38, 92–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodpol.2012.11.001.
Khan, M.A., Hossain, M.E., Alam, M.S., 2020. Economics of Rohu (Labeo rohita) Based
Aquaculture in Bangladesh: Efciency, Youth Engagement and Nutritional
Perspectives, Genome Sequencing and Development of SNP Markers from Rohu.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.22907.75040.
King, Thea, Cole, Martin, Farber, Jeffrey M., Eisenbrand, Gerhard, Zabaras, Dimitrios,
Fox, Edward M., Hill, Jeremy P., 2017. Food safety for food security: relationship
between global megatrends and developments in food safety. Trends Food Sci.
Technol. 68, 160–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2017.08.014.
Lawley, M., Birch, D., Hamblin, D., 2012. An exploratory study into the role and
interplay of intrinsic and extrinsic cues in Australian consumers’ evaluations of sh.
Australas. Mark. J. 20, 260–267.
Lin, P., Tsai, H., Ho, T., 2020. Food safety gaps between consumers’ expectations and
perceptions: development and verication of a gap-assessment tool. Int. J. Environ.
Res. Public Health 17 (17), 6328 (MDPI AG).
Logan, Trujillo, 2019. Mental effort and information-processing costs are inversely
related to global brain free energy during visual categorization. Front. Neurosci. 13,
1292. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.01292.
Lucia, Reisch, Eberle, Ulrike, Lorek, Sylvia, 2013. Sustainable food consumption: an
overview of contemporary issues and policies. Sustainability 9 (2), 7–25. https://doi.
org/10.1080/15487733.2013.11908111.
Madichie, N., Yamoah, F., 2006. Country image and consumer quality food perception: a
developing country perspective. Consortium J. Hosp. 10 (2), 89–100.
Mari, N., Kalenius, S., Lund´
en, J., 2013. Signicance of ofcial food control in food
safety: food business operators’ perceptions. Food Control 31, 59–64. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.09.04.
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland
Aquaculture 551 (2022) 737911
16
Mauracher, C., Tempesta, T., Vecchiato, D., 2013. Consumer preferences regarding the
introduction of new organic products. The case of the Mediterranean Sea bass
(Dicentrarchus labrax) in Italy. Appetite 63, 84–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
appet.2012.12.009.
Mehndiratta, S.R., Hensen, M., 1997. Analysis of discrete choice data with repeated
observations: comparison of three techniques in intercity travel case. Transp. Res.
Record 1607 (1), 69–73. https://doi.org/10.3141/1607-10.
Millar, Murray G., Millar, Karen U., 1996. The effects of direct and indirect experience on
affective and cognitive responses and the attitude-behavior relationship. J. Exp. Soc.
Psychol. 32 (6), 561–579.
Monier-Dilhan, S., Berg`
es, F., 2016. Consumers’ motivation driving organic demand:
between self interest and sustainability. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 45 (3), 522–538.
Murphy, J.J., Allen, P.G., Stevens, T.H., et al., 2005. A Meta-analysis of hypothetical Bias
in stated preference valuation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 30, 313–325. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10640-004-3332-z.
Musa, S., Aura, C.M., Kundu, R., 2012. Wild-caught sh versus aquaculture sh products:
A sh marketing concept for aquaculture quality improvement, a case study of
Nyanza region, Kenya. Int. J. Sci. Res. 3 (9), 1972–1978.
Nauman, F.A., Gempesaw, R., Bacon, J.R., Manalo, A., 1995. Consumer choice for fresh
sh: factors affecting purchase decisions. Mar. Resour. Econ. 10, 117–142.
Naylor, R., Goldburg, R., Primavera, J., et al., 2000. Effect of aquaculture on world sh
supplies. Nature 405, 1017–1024. https://doi.org/10.1038/35016500.
Needham, S., Funge-Smith, S.J., 2014. The Consumption of Fish and Fish Products in the
Asia-Pacic Region Based on Household Surveys. FAO Regional Ofce for Asia and
the Pacic, Bangkok, Thailand. RAP Publication 2015/12 (87pp).
Nguyen, T.T., Haider, W., Solgaard, H.S., Ravn-Jonsen, L., Roth, E., 2015. Consumer
willingness to pay for quality attributes of fresh seafood: A labeled latent class
model. Food Qual. Prefer. 41, 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodqual.2014.12.007.
O’Dierno, L., Govindasamy, R., Puduri, V., Myers, J.J., Islam, S., 2006. Consumer
perceptions and preferences for organic aquatic products: results from the telephone
survey. In: New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Rutgers University
Department of Agricultural. Food and Resource Economics, pp. 1–58.
OECD, 2020. Business Insights on Emerging Markets 2020. OECD Emerging Markets
Network, OECD Development Centre, Paris. http://www.oecd.org/dev/oecdemnet.
htm.
Ortega, D.L., Tschirley, D.L., 2017. Demand for food safety in emerging and developing
countries: a research agenda for Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. J. Agribusiness
Develop. Emerg. Econ. 7 (1), 21–34.
Ortega, D.L., Wang, H.H., Wu, L., Olynk, N.J., 2011. Modeling heterogeneity in consumer
preferences for select food safety attributes in China. Food Policy 36, 318–324.
Paul, P.C., Reza, M.S., Islam, M.N., Kamal, M., 2018. A review on dried sh processing
and marketing in the coastal region of Bangladesh. Res. Agric. Livest. Fish 5 (3),
381–390.
Peattie, K., 2001. Towards sustainability: the third age of green marketing. Mark. Rev. 2
(2), 129–146.
Phillips, K., Johnson, F.R., Maddala, T., 2002. Measuring what people value: A
comparison of “attitude” and “preference” surveys. Health Serv. Res. 37, 1659–1679.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.01116.
Pieniak, Z., Vanhonacker, F., Verbeke, W., 2013. Consumer knowledge and use of
information about sh and aquaculture. Food Policy 40, 25–30. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.foodpol.2013. 01.005.
Ragasa, C., Andam, K.S., Amewu, S., Asante, S., 2019. Consumer demand and willingness
to pay for safe food in Accra, Ghana. In: Implications for Public and Private Sectors’
Roles in Food Safety Management. IFPRI Discussion Paper 1795. IFPRI, Washington,
DC.
Rahman, M.M., Ahmed, S., Hosen, M.M., Talukder, A.K., 2012. Detection of formalin and
quality characteristics of selected sh from wet markets at Sylhet City in Bangladesh.
Bangladesh Res. Publ. J. 7 (2), 161–169.
Raknuzzaman, M., Ahmed, K., Islam, S., Tokumura, M., Sekine, M., Masunaga, S., 2016.
Trace metal contamination in commercial sh and crustaceans collected from coastal
area of Bangladesh and health risk assessment. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 23,
17298–17310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-6918-4.
Reilly, A., Ellard, R., O’Connor, J., 2009. Food safety at the national level—The role of
governments. In: Mansourian, B.P., Wojtczak, A., BMcA, Sayers (Eds.), Medical
Sciences, Vol. II. Eolss Publishers Co, Oxford, pp. 383–393.
Rickertsen, K., Alfnes, F., Combris, P., Enderli, G., Issanchou, S., Shogren, J.F., 2017a.
French Consumers’ attitudes and preferences toward wild and farmed sh. Mar.
Resour. Econ. 32, 59–81.
Rickertsen, K., Alfnes, F., Combris, P., Enderli, G., Issanchou, S., Shogren, J.F., 2017b.
French consumers’ attitudes and preferences toward wild and farmed sh. Mar.
Resour. Econ. 32 (1), 59–81. https://doi.org/10.1086/689202.
Roheim, C.A., Asche, F., Santos, J.I., 2011. The elusive price premium for ecolabelled
products: evidence from seafood in the UK market. J. Agric. Econ. 62 (3), 655–668.
Roheim, C.A., Sudhakaran, P.O., Durham, C.A., 2012. Certication of shrimp and salmon
for best aquaculture practices: assessing consumer preferences in Rhode Island.
Aquac. Econ. Manag. 16 (3), 266–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13657305.2012.713075.
Roksana, Alamgir, Alam, Masihul, 2014. Strategic approaches to food security in
Bangladesh. J. Econ. Sust. Dev. 5 (1), 42–50.
Roy, D., Sarker Dev, D., Sheheli, S., 2019. Food security in Bangladesh: insight from
available literature. J. Nutr. Food Secur. 4 (1), 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/
2158244020922972.
Saiful Islam, A.H.M., 2016. Integrated rice-sh farming system in Bangladesh: An ex-
Ante value chain evaluation framework. In: Gatzweiler, F., von Braun, J. (Eds.),
Technological and Institutional Innovations for Marginalized Smallholders in
Agricultural Development. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
25718-1_17.
Schaetzel, Thomas, Antal, Melissa, Guyon, Agnes, 2014. Market Purchase Motivations
Among Rural Men in Khulna District of Bangladesh. A Qualitative Study. Arlington,
VA: USAID Strengthening Partnerships, Results, and Innovations in Nutrition Globally
(SPRING) Project.
Schipmann, Christin, Qaim, Matin, 2011. Modern Food Retailers and Traditional Markets
in Developing Countries: Comparing Quality, Prices, and Competition Strategies in
Thailand, Global Food Discussion Papers, No. 2, Georg-August-Universit¨
at
G¨
ottingen, Research Training Group (RTG) 1666 – Global Food, G¨
ottingen.
Scholderer, J., Trondsen, T., 2008. The dynamics of consumer behaviour on habit,
discontent, and other sh to fry. Appetite 51 (3), 576–591.
Shamsuzzaman, M.M., Islam, M.M., Tania, N.J., Abdullah Al-Mamun, M., Barman, P.P.,
Xu, X., 2017. Fisheries resources of Bangladesh: present status and future direction.
Aquac. Fish. 2 (4), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaf.2017.03.006.
Siret, F., Issanchou, S., 2000. Traditional process: inuence on sensory properties and on
consumers’ expectation and liking - application to ‘pate de campagne’. Food Qual.
Prefer. 11, 217–228.
Stubbe Solgaard, H., Yang, Y., 2011. Consumers’ perception of farmed sh and
willingness to pay for sh welfare. Br. Food J. 113 (8), 997–1010. https://doi.org/
10.1108/00070701111153751.
Sudhir, K., Priester, J., Shum, M., et al., 2015. Research opportunities in emerging
markets: an inter-disciplinary perspective from marketing, economics, and
psychology. Cust. Needs Solut. 2, 264–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40547-015-
0044-1.
Thapa, G., Dey, M.M., Engle, C., 2015. Consumer preferences for live seafood in the
northeastern region of USA: results from Asian ethnic sh market survey. Aquac.
Econ. Manag. 19 (2), 210–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/13657305.2015.1024346.
Tjaart, W., van Veen, Schillhorn, 2005. International trade and food safety in developing
countries. Food Control 16 (6), 491–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodcont.2003.10.014.
Train, K.E., 2009a. Ch0_Front_Quotes_Contents, 2nd. Cambridge University Press, New
York, p. 1148. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-1221(04)90100-9.
Train, K., 2009b. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation, 2nd ed. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805271.
Trienekens, J., Zuurbier, P., 2008. Quality and safety standards in the food industry,
developments and challenges. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 113 (1), 107–122.
Trondsen, T., Scholderer, J., Lund, E., Eggen, A.E., 2003. Perceived barriers to
consumption of sh among Norwegian women. Appetite 41, 301–314.
Uchida, H., Onozaka, Y., Morita, T., Managi, S., 2014. Demand for ecolabeled seafood in
the Japanese market: A conjoint analysis of the impact of information and
interaction with other labels. Food Policy 44, 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodpol.2013.10.002.
UN, 2015. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, UN
(United Nations). (2015). General Assembly: Resolution adopted by the General
Assembly on 25 September 2015. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development, A/RES/70/1, Seventieth session, Agenda items 15 and
116 (Accessed on July 23, 2020).
Van der Pijl, Willem, van Duijn, A.P., 2012. The Bangladeshi Seafood Sector: A Value
Chain Analysis. LEI, Wageningen UR.
Verbeke, Wim, Isabelle, Vackier, 2005. Individual determinants of sh consumption:
application of the theory of planned behaviour. Appetite 44 (1), 67–82. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.appet.2004.08.006.
Verbeke, W., Sioen, I., Brunsø, K., Henauw, S., Camp, J., 2007. Consumer perception
versus scientic evidence of farmed and wild sh: exploratory insights from
Belgium. Aquac. Int. 15 (2), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-007-90727.
Verint, 2013. Ranking Questions vs. Rating Questions. Mental Burden of Ranking
Questions, Guest Blogger. available at. https://community.verint.com/b/customer-
engagement/posts/ranking-questions-vs-rating-questions.
Vipham, Jessie L., Chaves, Byron D., Trinetta, Valentina, 2018. Mind the gaps: how can
food safety gaps be addressed in developing nations? Anim. Front. 8 (4), 16–25.
https://doi.org/10.1093/af/vfy020.
Wang, Feng, Zhang, Jian, Weisong, Mu, Zetian, Fu, Zhang, Xiaoshuan, 2009. Consumers’
perception toward quality and safety of shery products, Beijing, China. Food
Control 20 (10), 918–922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2009.01.008.
Wirth, F.F., Love, L.A., Palma, M.A., 2007. Purchasing shrimp for at-home consumption:
the relative importance of credence versus physical product features. Aquac. Econ.
Manag. 11 (1), 17–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/13657300701202668.
Xu, P., Zeng, Y., Fong, Q., Lone, T., Liu, Y., 2012. Chinese consumers’ willingness to pay
for green- and eco-labeled seafood. Food Control 28, 74–78.
Xuan, Bui Bich, 2021. Consumer preference for eco-labelled aquaculture products in
Vietnam. Aquaculture 532, 736111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
aquaculture.2020.736111.
Young, W., Hwang, K., McDonald, S., Oates, C.J., 2010. Sustainable consumption: green
consumer behaviour when purchasing products. Sust. Dev 18, 20–31. https://doi.
org/10.1002/sd.394.
Zhang, C., Bai, J., Lohmar, B.T., Huang, J., 2010. How do consumers determine the safety
of milk in Beijing, China? China Econ. Rev. 21, S45–S54.
M.Z. Hoque and Ø. Myrland