Does importance influence confidence in organic food attributes?

Britwum, Kofi; Bernard, John C.; Albrecht, Sara E.

doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104056

Cited by 38 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this vein, Britwum et al. (2021) pointed out that the current evidence indicates that there exists a positive correlation between strong trust in organic requirements and a high positive WTP for the organic claim and vice versa.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Overall, the existing literature shows that consumers’ attitudes and perceptions concerning which benefits are associated with organic food are a major determinants of acceptance and the willingness to pay (WTP) a price premium for organic products (Kushwah et al., 2019; Schleenbecker & Hamm, 2013). Moreover, trust in the organic claim (e.g., Britwum et al., 2021; Nuttavuthisit & Thogersen, 2017), as well as information, seems to play a crucial role in influencing both the acceptance of and WTP for the organic claim (e.g., McFadden & Huffman, 2017; Teuber et al., 2016). Nuttavuthisit and Thogersen (2017) showed that for a sample of Thai consumers mistrust in the organic claim substantially lowered the likelihood to purchase organic food.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Consumers’ willingness to pay for organic versus all‐natural milk – Does certification make a difference?

Yormirzoev

Teuber

2020

Int J Consumer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While there is ample evidence on consumers’ perceptions and willingness to pay (WTP) for organic food in developed markets, empirical evidence for transition economies is scarce. This paper is based on a survey of 608 Russian consumers that combined a questionnaire with a contingent valuation approach to investigate the impact of perceptions and trust on consumers’ WTP for certified organic, uncertified all‐natural and conventional milk, respectively. A between‐subject treatment design was used to analyse how consumers’ WTP responds to different information treatments. Our results suggest that most participants connect health benefits with the consumption of organic food, followed by slightly fewer respondents connecting organic production with environmental benefits. In the case of animal welfare benefits, the picture is less clear, as only 46% of respondents indicated that they agree that organic livestock production is associated with animal welfare benefits. Concerning the trust in farmer’s adherence to organic standards, a substantially higher share of respondents expressed trust in producers from the European Union versus their Russian counterparts. About 51% of respondents exhibited a positive WTP for organic milk in comparison to conventional milk. At the same time, there is no statistically significant difference in respondents’ WTP between all‐natural and organic milk. This similarity suggests that respondents do not seem to differentiate between uncertified all‐natural milk and certified organic milk.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumers’ willingness to pay for organic versus all‐natural milk – Does certification make a difference?

Yormirzoev

Teuber

2020

Int J Consumer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, the demographic profile of buyers of organic products is not related to income, age or family size, but to education (Hassan et al , 2009). It is also worth citing the research conducted by Britwum et al (2021), proving that consumers are much more likely to pay for organic food than for their conventional counterparts. It seems important that average prices vary significantly between supermarkets and different food groups (Islam and Colonescu, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does organic means health for consumers? Selected issues of organic food market

Drejerska

Sobczak

Gołębiewski

et al. 2021

BFJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to describe organic food supply and demand from the perspective of evolutionary economics. Furthermore, identification of motives of organic food purchasing as well as the most important distribution channels was performed.Design/methodology/approachThis study included review of statistical data available on organic food market, observations from three different formats of shops in France and Poland as well as collected data from 54 French and 85 Polish consumers.FindingsThe findings of this paper show how the organic food market undergoes evolutionary changes, especially how supply and demand sides are being tuned to each other. Health properties of organic food were found as universal characteristics affecting organic food purchasing, regardless the level of the national market development. Organic food retail adjusts to consumer demand, but the rate of this transformation is different when markets of different countries are compared.Originality/valueChanges in supply and demand are continuous in the organic food market; therefore, they should be monitored on an ongoing basis. The insights extend present knowledge on consumer behaviour indicating health concerns as a universal motive affecting organic food purchasing. The study also takes the existing literature a step further by providing additional insight into adjustment of organic food retail to consumer demand.

show abstract

“…For example, the main barriers are lower availability, lack of relevant information (Tandon et al, 2020), price (Katt & Meixner, 2020;Rodríguez-Bermúdez et al, 2020), as well as a lack of confidence in organic products (quality, authenticity, cer-tification, etc.) (Britwum et al, 2021;Chiu et al, 2019;Tandon et al, 2020;Wojciechowska-Solis & Soroka, 2017). Obviously, this gap is truly problematic for both marketers who want to understand the consumers' motivation, as well as the organic food industry which tries to better understand consumer behaviour (Janssen, 2018;Peattie, 2010;Scalco et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Literature shows that, when it comes to buying organic products, consumers mention the following main criteria: 1) price; e.g., fair price, fits the budget (Magnusson et al, 2001;Tarkiainen & Sundqvist, 2005;Zanoli & Naspetti, 2011); 2) aspect of quality; e.g., attractiveness, healthy, tasty, high value (Hjelmar, 2011;Lee & Hwang, 2016;Ngobo, 2011;Vassallo et al, 2016); 3) availability; e.g., limited (Aertsens et al, 2009;Żakowska-Biemans, 2011); 4) social influences; e.g., peer pressure (Bartels & Reinders, 2010;Gottschalk & Leistner, 2013); and 5) knowledge; e.g., what consumer's know about organic food (Berger & Mitchel, 1989;Britwum et al, 2021;Fotopoulos & Krystallis, 2002;Krystallis & Chryssohoidis, 2005;Laroche et al, 2001;Liu, 2007;Magnusson et al, 2001;Van Kerckhove et al, 2011). Similar to several product categories, consumers often adopt desirable behaviours when their perceived benefit-cost ratio of purchasing a given product is higher than other alternatives on the market (Geller, 1992;Peattie, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Key Role of Consumers’ Involvement: The Case of Organic Food Consumption

Levesque

Pons

2021

Multidiscip. bus. rev (Impr.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to provide a better understanding of conditions that influence the gap between positive attitude and intention towards organic food products and actual behaviour regarding these products. Thus, we propose an extended version of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to explain parts of this gap and we highlight the crucial role played by consumers’ involvement as a moderator. A structural equation modelling was performed, and the sta-tistical analysis of a sample of 1327 French consumers supports our organic food products buying behaviour model. The results showed that the difference between the means of actual behaviour was highly different between low- and high-involvement consumers. More specifically, high-involvement consumers express more positive attitudes towards buying organic food products, perceive higher subjective norms and behavioural control, they have higher behavioural intention, and buy organic food products more frequently. Additionally, the results indicated that, com-pared to low-involvement consumers, high-involvement consumers regard organic food products as more attractive, healthier, tastier, and with higher value. We proposed some marketing strategies to help managers to better promote the organic food products market and, in turn, increase their revenues. For example, marketers therefore have a vested interest in increasing consumer involvement, and, among other things, they can do so by educating them (i.e., high-lighting the benefits of consuming organic foods). Moreover, since high-involvement customers have positive atti-tude-intention and behaviour, they can be allies for marketers through their influence (social norms). Thus, we suggest the use of digital influencers to endorse organic food.

show abstract

Does importance influence confidence in organic food attributes?

Cited by 38 publications

References 62 publications

Consumers’ willingness to pay for organic versus all‐natural milk – Does certification make a difference?

Consumers’ willingness to pay for organic versus all‐natural milk – Does certification make a difference?

Does organic means health for consumers? Selected issues of organic food market

The Key Role of Consumers’ Involvement: The Case of Organic Food Consumption

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About