Due to the high value of sea food and its important usage of them in social health, the present study was designed to investigate the effective factors in aquatic consumption in Mashhad. The consumption information of 150 Mashhadian households that collected by random sampling has been used. The results have analyzed using Heckman’s two-stage model and Double- Hurdle model. The results showed that, household population, education level oh households’ administrator, number of persons under 10 years old, income, Factors related to taste, access to fish, knowledge of methods to preparing and cooking aquatic and health-related factors, are important for household to consumption of aquatic. Due to the results of Double-Hurdle model, Education, income, occupation of households’ administrator, residential area, Factors associated with taste, knowledge of methods to preparing and cooking aquatic and aquatic health, have the significant effects on Action with households to consume aquatic. According to the results and Double- Hurdle model excellence in this study, this method is recommended as an alternative method for use in studies.
Dourandish, A., Hosseinzadeh, M., & Nematollahi, Z. (2016). Assessment the effective component of seafood consumption in Mashhad
(Comparison of Double-Hurdle model and Heckman two-stage method). Agricultural Economics, 9(4), 197-219.
MLA
Arash Dourandish; Masoud Hosseinzadeh; Zahra Nematollahi. "Assessment the effective component of seafood consumption in Mashhad
(Comparison of Double-Hurdle model and Heckman two-stage method)". Agricultural Economics, 9, 4, 2016, 197-219.
HARVARD
Dourandish, A., Hosseinzadeh, M., Nematollahi, Z. (2016). 'Assessment the effective component of seafood consumption in Mashhad
(Comparison of Double-Hurdle model and Heckman two-stage method)', Agricultural Economics, 9(4), pp. 197-219.
VANCOUVER
Dourandish, A., Hosseinzadeh, M., Nematollahi, Z. Assessment the effective component of seafood consumption in Mashhad
(Comparison of Double-Hurdle model and Heckman two-stage method). Agricultural Economics, 2016; 9(4): 197-219.
)