A comparative study of food values between the United States and Norway

Abstract

We compare food values in the US and Norway using the best-worst scaling approach. The food values examined are aimed at capturing the main issues related to food consumption such as naturalness, taste, price, safety, convenience, nutrition, novelty, origin, fairness, appearance, environmental impact, and animal welfare. Results show that respondents in both countries have mostly similar food values, with safety being the most important value; while convenience and novelty are the least important values. Specifically, US respondents consider price more important and naturalness less important than Norwegian respondents.

Heterogeneous consumers and differentiated food markets: Implications for quality signaling in food supply chains

“…Subsequent studies have used a similar set of food values to examine purchase decision for meat products (Lister, Tonsor, Brix, Schroeder, & Yang, 2017), responses to novel food technologies (Yang, 2018), beef labeled as raised without the use of growth hormones, and in cross-country comparisons of food value systems (Bazzani, Gustavsen, Nayga, & Rickertsen, 2018). Correlations between food values and stated willingness to pay a premium for organic bread, as well as revealed preferences (whether or not an individual had previously purchased organic food), show that price is less important for organic food purchasers, while naturalness and environmental impact are more important.…”

“…7 Generally speaking, taste, safety, nutrition, and price rank highly as important food values across various studies (Bazzani et al, 2018;Lusk & Briggeman, 2009;Yang, 2018). 8 Study 2 uses data from a smaller online survey conducted across 7 Slight amendments to the original Lusk-Briggeman Food Value Scale include the addition of animal welfare (Bazzani et al, 2018;Lister et al, 2017;Zhou, 2018) and novelty (Bazzani et al, 2018;Yang, 2018). Figure 1 summarizes food value scores from three recent Canadian consumer surveys conducted at the University of Saskatchewan.…”

“…Correlations between food values and stated willingness to pay a premium for organic bread, as well as revealed preferences (whether or not an individual had previously purchased organic food), show that price is less important for organic food purchasers, while naturalness and environmental impact are more important. Subsequent studies have used a similar set of food values to examine purchase decision for meat products (Lister, Tonsor, Brix, Schroeder, & Yang, 2017), responses to novel food technologies (Yang, 2018), beef labeled as raised without the use of growth hormones, and in cross-country comparisons of food value systems (Bazzani, Gustavsen, Nayga, & Rickertsen, 2018). 7 Generally speaking, taste, safety, nutrition, and price rank highly as important food values across various studies (Bazzani et al, 2018;Lusk & Briggeman, 2009;Yang, 2018).…”

“…Subsequent studies have used a similar set of food values to examine purchase decision for meat products (Lister, Tonsor, Brix, Schroeder, & Yang, 2017), responses to novel food technologies (Yang, 2018), beef labeled as raised without the use of growth hormones, and in cross-country comparisons of food value systems (Bazzani, Gustavsen, Nayga, & Rickertsen, 2018). 7 Generally speaking, taste, safety, nutrition, and price rank highly as important food values across various studies (Bazzani et al, 2018;Lusk & Briggeman, 2009;Yang, 2018). Methods of eliciting the relative importance of food values range from the use of best-worst scaling, to ranking and rating tasks, yielding similar results.…”

“…For details of best-worst scaling, seeLusk and Briggeman (2009) andBazzani et al (2018). Data from study 2 formed part of an undergraduate honors thesis at the University of Saskatchewan(Zhou, 2018).10 Study 3 is part of an ongoing research project with colleagues D. Natcher and Y. Yang at the University of Saskatchewan examining Canadian consumer responses to foods from the Arctic.…”