Comparative Consumer Perspectives on Eco-friendly and Insect Management Practices on Floriculture Crops

Abstract

<jats:p>Declining bee populations has garnered media attention, which has pressured plant retailers to ask or demand the reduction or elimination of neonicotinoid insecticide use in greenhouse production. This study investigated consumer perspectives on eco-friendly ornamental plant production practices in combination with a variety of insect management practices. Data from an online study were collected from 1555 Americans in May 2015. Over half (55%), nearly half (48.2%), and more than 30% of the participants felt that “bees are not harmed,” “better for the environment,” or “plants that attract bees,” respectively, was a characteristic of bee-friendly insect management practices. The latter group erroneously confused bee-friendly insect management practices with plants that are a potential food source for bees. When asked to rate various insect management plant production practices on a five-point Likert scale, consumer mean scores were positive (defined here as 3.5 to 5.0) for “plants grown using bee-friendly insect management practices,” “plants grown using insect management strategies that are safe for pollinators,” “plants grown using best insect management practices to protect pollinators,” and “plants grown using insect management practices that leaves no insecticide residue on the plant.” Plant species accounted for 31.6% of the decision to purchase the plant, followed by price (25.1%), insect management strategy (23.3%), and eco-friendly practices (20.1%) that was similar to prior published findings. Analyses showed that plants labeled as “grown using bee-friendly insect management practices” were worth $0.26, $0.26, $0.89, and $1.15 more than plants labeled as “grown in a sustainably produced potting soil/mix,” “grown using recycled/recaptured water,” “grown using protective neonicotinoid insecticides,” and “grown using traditional insect management practices,” respectively. In addition, plants labeled as “grown using best insect management practices to protect pollinators” were worth $0.10, $0.10, $0.73, and $0.99 more than plants labeled as “grown in a sustainably produced potting soil/mix,” “grown using recycled/recaptured water,” “grown using protective neonicotinoid insecticides,” and “grown using traditional insect management practices,” respectively. Thus, selected insect management strategies were valued more, on average, than eco-friendly production practices.</jats:p>

Pollinator-friendly Plants: Reasons for and Barriers to Purchase

“…Wollaeger et al (2015) hypothesize the negative perceptions of the neonicotinoid-free production practices were a result from low consumer knowledge. Getter et al (2016) found similar results with bee-friendly production methods obtaining premiums between $0.26 and $1.15 when compared with other eco-friendly production practices (i.e., ''grown in a sustainably produced soil/mix,'' ''grown using recycled/recaptured water,'' ''grown using protective neonicotinoid insecticides,'' or ''grown using traditional'' practices). Both studies demonstrate consumers' value of practices to aid pollinator insects.…”

“…Consumers have specific preferences for and perceptions of horticultural production methods that aid pollinator insects (Getter et al, 2016;Khachatryan and Rihn, 2017;Rihn and Khachatryan, 2016;Wollaeger et al, 2015). Wollaeger et al (2015) used a nationwide survey to assess U.S. consumer purchase likelihood for floriculture crops grown using different pest management strategies (i.e., traditional, neonicotinoid-free, bee-friendly, biological control).…”

“…Considering the findings in recent empirical investigations, consumers value pollinator insect conservation programs (Breeze et al, 2015;Diffendorfer et al, 2014;Mwebaze et al, 2010) and horticultural products grown using pollinator-friendly insect management programs (Getter et al, 2016;Khachatryan and Rihn, 2017;Rihn and Khachatryan, 2016;Wollaeger et al, 2015). However, the underlying reasons for their preferences or barriers to purchasing pollinator-friendly plants and the types of pollinators consumers are trying to protect have not been studied.…”

Consumer Preferences of Sustainability Labeled Cut Roses in Germany

“…Results from recent scientific studies show that the health aspect is influencing choices of purchase of sustainable products [24,25], but this aspect is considered less relevant in relation to non-edible products. In the case of horticultural plants, consumer segments have been identified by Behe et al [26] in the USA and Canada, whose purchase decisions for ornamental plants were determined by ecological aspects, and consumer preferences of additional ecologically-friendly practices were analyzed by other authors in recent years [27][28][29]. Further, Gabriel [30] could also demonstrate for Germany that environmental aspects were the main motive for purchasing plants in biodegradable pots, despite a higher price compared to the standard product.…”

Consumers’ willingness to pay for plants protected by beneficial insects—Evidence from two stated-choice experiments with different subject pools

“…While the use of beneficial insects is not a new technology, consumers are likely not very familiar with this plant-protection method. Indeed,Getter et al (2016) find that consumers have a lack of knowledge and understanding of insect-management strategies, in general.…”