Consumer response to food labels in an emerging market: the case of <scp>R</scp>omania

Festila, Alexandra; Chrysochou, Polymeros; Krystallis, Athanasios

doi:10.1111/ijcs.12085

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in line with previous studies from Western European countries, which have shown that the quality label is seen as a major source of information about product quality (Grunert, 2005; Joubert and Poalses, 2012; Garavaglia and Mariani, 2017), whereas in fact knowledge of quality labels is not high. This is also confirmed by studies from Loureiro and McCluskey (2003), Aprile et al (2012), Rousseau and Vranken (2013) and Festila et al (2014), indicating that quality labels are an effective tool for increasing consumer awareness of food quality.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Consumer preferences regarding food quality labels: the case of Czechia

Sadílek

2019

BFJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify consumer segments based on preferences for food quality labels in Czechia. The goal of the research is to identify the attitudes of Czech consumers towards foods bearing quality labels and to create a consumer typology based on attitudes towards food quality labels. Design/methodology/approach The survey was conducted among 444 respondents of Czechia over 18 years of age, addressed in front of grocery stores. Using cluster analysis, the segmentation of Czech consumers based on their attitudes to food quality labels was investigated. Consumer segments were profiled using individual consumer characteristics (knowledge of quality labels, perception of quality labels, willingness to pay more for food quality labels and socio-demographics characteristics). Findings The three most important factors for Czech consumer when buying food are price, origin and appearance. There are three segments of Czech consumers: quality seekers, unconscious shoppers and impulsive shoppers. Consumers from these segments have different attitudes and perceptions regarding food quality labels. The largest segment is unconscious shoppers (almost 50 per cent of respondents, lower values for their attitudes towards quality labels as well as their knowledge, primarily women living in single households or in three- to four-person households), followed by quality seekers and impulsive shoppers. Quality seekers (24 per cent of all respondents) have positive attitudes towards food quality labels and have had previous positive experiences with quality labels and the composition and origin of the foods. These respondents exhibited the highest spontaneous knowledge of food quality labels on the Czech market. They are primarily men with a university education, living in two- to five-person households, and with above-average earnings. Impulsive shoppers (26 per cent of all respondents) consider the price and composition of the product to be the most important criterion. Current taste or preference is an important purchase criterion, and they are focused on BIO and Ceský výrobek labels. They are typically educated women, living in up to four-person households, and with average earnings. Research limitations/implications The study demonstrates that consumers are driven by different factors when buying food. The research sample does not fully correspond with the proportion of males and females in the Czech population. Food quality labels are a favourably perceived decision-making factor. The study is focused on food quality labels on the Czech market, where knowledge of EU quality schemes is lower compared to other EU countries such as France, Italy and Spain. Practical implications Food quality labels bring benefits to consumers as well as producers, because consumers are buying a product with specific value-adding qualities and producers can better promote food products with unique quality. Furthermore, the study confirms a need to extend and intensify promotional and communication activities to increase consumer preferences for food quality labels. Originality/value The study presents some important differences between the developed segments and highlights the importance of various factors in making food choices. Another finding is that the segmentation of Czech consumers based on their perception of food quality labels is better than one based on socio-demographic characteristics.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Consumer preferences regarding food quality labels: the case of Czechia

Sadílek

2019

BFJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other companies have developed or are using carbon labeling or measuring schemes, such as the Finnish Raisio and Fazer Groups, the companies involved in the Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) project in Germany, Unilever using the Cool Farming Tool, and the French Leclerc (Tuomisto et al, 2011). Although the number of large scale success stories is limited, the number of publications which survey groups on label perceptions, preferences, and usefulness is growing and potentially indicates increasing awareness and perhaps the potential for the future use and expansion of labeling (Hu et al, 2012;Sirieix et al, 2013;Zepeda et al, 2013;Chkanikova and Lehner, 2014;Festila et al, 2014;Van Loo et al, 2014). Examples of environmental impact labels include the United Kingdom Tesco grocery store carbon label, the carbon footprint stoplight label designed by Vanclay et al, 2011, and Consumer confusion is a concern for environmental food labeling strategies (Grunert et al, 2014).…”

Section: Environmental Impact Food Labelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental impact food labels combining carbon, nitrogen, and water footprints

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

TitleEnvironmental impact food labels combining carbon, nitrogen, and water footprints Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7c08t1fv Journal Food Policy, 61(Significance 5 2008) a b s t r a c tThe environmental impact of the production and consumption of food is seldom depicted to consumers. The footprint of food products provides a means for consumers to compare environmental impacts across and within product groups. In this study we apply carbon, nitrogen, and water footprints in tandem and present food labels that could help inform consumers about the environmental impacts of individual food products. The footprint factors used in this study are specific to the United States, but the concept can be applied elsewhere. We propose three methods of footprint calculations: footprint weight, sustainability measures, and % daily value. We apply the three footprint calculation methods to four example labels (stars label, stoplight label, nutrition label add-on, and a detailed comparison label) that vary in design and the amount of detail provided. The stars label is simple and easily understood but provides minimal detail about the footprints. At the other end of the spectrum, the detailed comparison label gives context in relative terms (e.g., carbon emissions for equivalent distance driven) for the food product. Implementing environmental impact food labels requires additional understanding of how consumers use footprint labels, and label suitability may vary for government organizations, retail and local grocers, and farmers.

show abstract

“…Currently, organic products are available in upscale Romanian supermarkets, reflecting the growing interest of the market in organics. Romanian literature in this area mostly concentrates on the labeling scheme and certification process in general [21][22][23] and there is relatively little research on the identification of consumers' perceptions towards organic products [24][25][26][27][28]. The NW Region, which is examined in this study, makes the second-largest contribution to the national GDP (11.3%; 2012 data) and has the third-largest population (13%; 2014 data), the fourth-largest monthly income per person and yearly expenditure level per household (2013 data), and the second-lowest relative at-risk-of-poverty rate (percentage of poor people in the entire population; 2013 data) among the eight Romanian NUTS (Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics) regions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organic Food Perception: Fad, or Healthy and Environmentally Friendly? A Case on Romanian Consumers

Petrescu

Petrescu-Mag

2015

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The main purpose of this paper is to explore consumers' perceptions of organic food and examine whether organic food products are perceived in the North-West Region of Romania as offering health and environmental benefits or as simply another sine qua non condition to be integrated into the luxurious yuppie lifestyle. The inspiration for our study came from witnessing the stereotypical image of organic food consumers as "stylish, trendy, fancy consumers" in the last three to five years. Scientific evidence on the perceptions of organic food is based on a probabilistic survey. The results indicate an environmental consciousness of organic food consumers in North-Western Region of Romania in terms of organic food: a high percentage of consumers believe that organic food is healthier than conventional food (87%) and that it contributes to environmental protection more than conventional food (75%). A statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) was observed between people with higher education and those without higher education concerning the following beliefs: belief that most people consume organic products because they are in fashion, and belief that organic food contributes to environmental protection.

show abstract

Consumer response to food labels in an emerging market: the case of Romania

Cited by 13 publications

References 29 publications

Consumer preferences regarding food quality labels: the case of Czechia

Consumer preferences regarding food quality labels: the case of Czechia

Environmental impact food labels combining carbon, nitrogen, and water footprints

Organic Food Perception: Fad, or Healthy and Environmentally Friendly? A Case on Romanian Consumers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About