Although food and agricultural policies are often motivated by noble intentions, economic analysis provides a framework for attempting to sort out the actual consequences. I’ve analyzed the consequences of various policies ranging from food labels, to bans on controversial agricultural technologies, to fat taxes on the well-being of farmers, processors, and consumers.
Muller, L., A. Lacroix, J.L. Lusk, and B. Ruffieux. "Distributional Impacts of Fat Taxes and Thin Subsidies." Economic Journal. forthcoming
Ellison, B., D. Davis, and J.L. Lusk. "The Value and Cost of Restaurant Calorie Labels: Results from a Field Experiment." Economic Inquiry. 52(2014):666-681.
Lusk, J.L. “The Effect of Proposition 2 on the Demand for Eggs in California.” Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization. 8(2010), Iss. 1, Article 3.
Schroeter, C., J.L. Lusk, and W. Tyner. “Determining the Impact of Food Price and Income Changes on Body Weight.” Journal of Health Economics. 27(2008):45-68.
Lusk, J.L., B. Norwood, and R. Pruitt. “Consumer Demand for a Ban on Subtherapeutic Antibiotic Use in Pork Production.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 88(2006):1015-1033.
Lusk, J.L., L.O. House, C. Valli, S.R. Jaeger, M. Moore, B. Morrow, W.B. Traill “Consumer Welfare Effects of Introducing and Labeling Genetically Modified Food.” Economics Letters. 88(2005):382-88.
Lusk, J.L. and J.D. Anderson. “Effects of Country-of-Origin Labeling on Meat Producers and Consumers.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics. 29(2004):185-205.
Emerging Food Issues
Food preferences and technologies are constantly evolving, and as such, much of my research has focused on providing economic analysis and insight into consumer preferences for emerging food issues such as animal welfare, biotechnology, cloning, nanotechnology, growth promotants, local foods, vegetarianism, and foods with various health claims.
Lusk, J.L. and F.B. Norwood. “Animal Welfare Economics.” Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy. 33(2011):463-483.
Brooks, K. and J.L. Lusk. “Consumers Attitudes towards Farm Animal Cloning.” Appetite. 57(2011):483-492.
Lusk, J.L., W.B. Traill ,L.O. House, C. Valli, S.R. Jaeger, M. Moore, B. Morrow,. “Comparative Advantage in Demand: Experimental Evidence of Preferences for Genetically Modified Food in the United States and European Union.” Journal of Agricultural Economics. 57(2006):1-21.
Lusk, J.L. and A. Rozan. “Consumer Acceptance of Ingenic Foods.” Biotechnology Journal. 1(2006):1433-34.
Predicting consumers’ responses to food marketing and policy initiatives requires an understanding of why people do what they do, which means studying preferences for risk, time-delays, “fairness,” social status, and the like. A key question driving much of my research is: why do consumers say they will do one thing in a survey but do something entirely different when shopping in the grocery store?
Lusk, J.L. and F.B. Norwood. “Bridging the Gap between Laboratory Experiments and Naturally Occurring Markets: An Inferred Valuation Method.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 58(2009):236–250.
Chang, J.B., J.L. Lusk, and F.B. Norwood. “How Closely Do Hypothetical Surveys and Laboratory Experiments Predict Field Behavior?” American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 91(2009):518-534.
Coble, K.H. and J.L. Lusk. “At the Nexus of Risk and Time Preferences: An Experimental Investigation.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. 41(2010):67–79.
Lusk, J.L. and B.C. Briggeman. “Selfishness, Altruism, and Inequality Aversion towards Consumers and Farmers.” Agricultural Economics. 42(2011):121-139.
Livestock and Meat Technology and Marketing
Growing up and attending Universities in the prime meat-producing regions of the U.S. has led to a lifelong interest in livestock and meat marketing and the impacts of technologies on the livestock and meat sectors.
Weaber, R.L. and J.L. Lusk. “The Economic Value of Improvements in Meat Tenderness by Genetic Marker Selection.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 92(2010):1456-1471.
Lusk, J.L. “Association of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms in the Leptin Gene with Body Weight and Backfat Growth Curve Parameters for Beef Cattle.” Journal of Animal Science. 85(2007):1865-1872.
Lusk, J.L. R. Little, A. Williams, J. Anderson, and B. McKinley. “Utilizing Live Animal Ultrasound to Improve Livestock Marketing Decisions.” Review of Agricultural Economics. 25(2003):203-217.
Lusk, J.L., J.A. Fox, T.C. Schroeder, J. Mintert, and M. Koohmaraie. “In-Store Valuation of Steak Tenderness.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 83(2001):539-550.
I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about how to improve experimental, survey, and statistical methods to better understand how consumers will actually react to food marketing and policy initiatives. This work has led to some new consumer research methods such as inferred valuation, incentive compatible conjoint, and calibrated auction-conjoint methods, and has led to further refinements in existing methods including best-worst scaling, choice experiments, and experimental auctions.
Norwood, F.B., and J.L. Lusk. “A Calibrated Auction-Conjoint Valuation Method: Valuing Pork and Eggs Produced under Differing Animal Welfare Conditions.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 62(2011):80-94.
Lusk, J.L. and F.B. Norwood. “An Inferred Valuation Method.” Land Economics. 85(2009):500-514.
Lusk, J.L. and B.C. Briggeman. “Food Values.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 91(2009):184-196.
Lusk, J.L., D. Fields, and J. Prevatt. “An Incentive Compatible Conjoint Ranking Mechanism.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 90(2008):487-498.
Lusk, J.L. and T.C. Schroeder. “Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86(2004):467-482.