consumers intentions to buy organic food

7/25/2019 Consumers Intentions to Buy Organic Food

1/14

SPRING 2012 VOLUME 46, NUMBER 1 157

TRENDS AND APPLICATIONS

GIOVANNI PINO, ALESSANDRO M. PELUSO,

AND GIANLUIGI GUIDO

Determinants of Regular and Occasional ConsumersIntentions to Buy Organic Food

This study analyzes the impact of ethical motivations, food safety

and health-related concerns on purchasing intentions of habitual

and less frequent consumers of organic food. A sample of 291

subjects was surveyed through a paper-and-pencil questionnaire andclassified either as regular or occasional purchasers of organic

food according to their buying frequency. Results show different

determinants of intention for the two groups of subjects: ethical

motivations affect the purchase intentions of regular consumers,

whereas food safety concerns influence the purchase intentions of

occasional consumers. Implications are discussed.

The market for organic food continues to expand worldwide at an aver-age rate of 20% annually. Currently, over thirty-seven million hectares of

land worldwide are managed organically by roughly two million farm-

ers. In Europe, more than 250,000 farms manage around ten million

hectares of organic land, with the highest share of organic agricultural

land found in Spain, Italy and Germany (Willer and Kilcher 2011). In the

last decades, this increasing popularity has fueled the growth of a mul-

tidisciplinary stream of research that has investigated the psychological

and anthropological drivers of organic food consumption. Several studies

have concluded that ethical principles, such as ecological sustainability

and care for animal welfarewhich constitute a sort of inspirational

framework for organic farmingdrive consumers choices of organic

food. Other studies posit that organic food purchase behavior is motivated

by the perceived healthiness of such products (Guido 2009; Guido et al.

Giovanni Pino is a PhD student at the ISUFI School of Advanced Studies of the University of

Salento, Lecce, Italy ([email protected]). Alessandro M. Peluso is an assistant professor

of marketing at the University of Salento, Lecce (Italy) and an adjunct professor of marketing

at the LUISS Guido Carli University of Rome, Italy ([email protected]). Gianluigi Guido is a

full professor of marketing and business management at the University of Salento, Lecce, Italy


2/14

158 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

2010). Many consumers are becoming more and more aware of health

risks associated with the consumption of traditional (nonorganic) as well

as novel (e.g., genetically modified) food products (Siegrist 2008). As aconsequence, the perceived healthfulness of organic food products may

be a driving force of their consumption.

On the basis of these considerations, we argue that organizations

aimed at fostering interest in organic food production should address the

specific concerns of the different groups of consumers. By developing

tailored communication programs, such institutions may efficaciously

promote organic food consumption and, possibly, stimulate the adoption

of sustainable consumption patterns. Royne, Levy, and Martinez (2011,

p. 332) maintain that reaching different consumer groups with the

appropriate strategies may translate into more positive eco-friendly

behaviors [. . .] and improved health for current and future generations.

However, in doing so, the above-mentioned organizations should

attempt to identify different consumer groups to target using customized

strategies. In this article, we propose that buying frequency may be rele-

vant to this purpose. Indeed, we will show that the purchasing intentions

of consumers who buy organic food products frequently and those of con-

sumers who do so only occasionally are driven by different motivatingfactors. Hence, we will conclude that distinguishing organic consumers

based on their purchase frequency may be useful in developing tailored

communication strategies for different consumer groups.

CONSUMPTION PATTERNS OF REGULAR AND OCCASIONAL

CONSUMERS OF ORGANIC FOOD

Research on organic food consumption has shown that the publicbenefits deriving from the environmental soundness of organic farming

as well as the private motives relative to the perceived healthiness and

safety of organic food act as driving forces of consumers purchasing

intentions (e.g., Gracia and De Magistris 2008; Honkanen, Verplanken,

and Olsen 2006; Magnusson et al. 2003). People tend to perceive

organic agriculture as an ecological production system able to preserve

biodiversity and reduce the concentration of polluting substances in the

environment (Magkos, Arvaniti, and Zampelas 2006). Environmentalpreservation and other ethical concerns can be considered factors that

triggered early purchasers support of organic farming (Storstad and


3/14


consumption a matter of lifestyle choice (Fotopoulos and Krystallis

2002). Ethical consumers take into account the public consequences

of their private acts of consumption and use their bargaining powerto foster the achievement of socially relevant objectives (cf. Freestone

and McGoldrick 2008). This sense of responsibility, or perceived ethical

obligation, is connected with their endorsement of a set of internalized

rules (or norms) and acts as a trait-like dimension because it

represents an essential part of these persons self-identity.

Michaelidou and Hassan (2008) have merged self-identity and per-

ceived ethical obligation into a single construct addressing peoples

inclination to perceive themselves as ethical consumers, termed eth-ical self-identity. The same authors proved that such a construct impacts

consumers disposition toward organic food and related purchase inten-

tion. Existing research, however, suggests that the tendency to identify

with ethical consumers is stronger for regular purchasers of organic food

than for occasional ones. The former, in fact, seem to draw a sense

of fulfillment from purchasing organic food. By contrast, the latter may

consider environmental protection a beneficial effect of organic farm-

ing, rather than a personal goal (Barrena and Sanchez 2010). Following

this reasoning we expect that ethical self-identity influences the pur-

chase intentions of regular consumers of organic food, but it does not

affect those of the occasional consumers. We formalize this hypothesis

as follows:

H1: Ethical self-identity influences the purchase intentions of regular consumers

but not those of occasional consumers.

Food safety concerns and individuals readiness to undertake healthactionsa construct known as health consciousness (Schifferstein and

Oude Ophuis 1998)are other relevant drivers of organic food con-

sumption. Williams and Hammitt (2001) have shown that, compared to

consumers of conventional food products, organic food buyers tend to

estimate far higher annual rates of mortality caused by ingestion of agro-

chemical residues and exposure to synthetic pesticides. Generally, the

latter consumers consider organic products harmless to human health

and safer than conventionally produced food. Moreover, it has been also

ascertained that responsibility of family and self well-being, as well as

buying healthy food for the sake of the children are primary motives


4/14


FIGURE 1

Hypothesized Links for Regular Buyers

: Direct Effect : Mediated Effect

Ethical Self-

Identity

Attitude Toward

Organic FoodPurchase

Intention

consumers of organic food than those of regular ones. Exploratory stud-

ies suggest, in fact, that the former may be induced to purchase organic

food products by particular events such as pregnancy, suffering fromcertain illnesses or the spread of food-borne diseases (Richter 2005).

Furthermore, compared to people who regularly consume organic food,

occasional consumers hold a more pragmatic view of consumption and

are basically interested in products that guarantee superior value in terms

of safety and healthiness (Pellegrini and Farinello 2009). On the other

hand, it has been shown that regular buyers of organic food attach less

importance to values like security, safety, and health preservation

than occasional buyers (Fotopoulos, Krystallis, and Ness 2008; Naspetti

and Zanoli 2004). This reasoning has led us to formalize the following

hypothesis:

H2: Food safety concerns and health consciousness affect the purchase intentions

of occasional consumers, but not those of regular consumers.

We also argue that the constructs discussed above affect purchase

intentions indirectly, through attitude toward organic food. More pre-

cisely, we hypothesize that individual attitude toward organic food servesas a mediator (see Baron and Kenny 1986) that transfers the effect of

the alleged antecedent variables on consumers purchase intentions.1 The

hypothesized linkages among the study variables for regular and occa-

sional consumers are represented in Figures 1 and 2, respectively.

THE STUDY

A total of 291 Italian buyers of organic food (mean age = 47.04,

SD = 10.17) were surveyed by means of a questionnaire in MayJune


5/14


FIGURE 2

Hypothesized Links for Occasional Buyers

: Direct Effect

: Mediated Effect

Purchase

Intention

Health

Consciousness

Food Safety

Concerns

Attitude Toward

Organic Food

2010. These subjects were approached by a student volunteer who was

instructed to randomly select respondents in a medium-sized supermarket.

The supermarket sold both conventional and organic food and was

located in a suburban area of a Southern Italian city of almost 100,000

inhabitants. Once introduced to the research topic, potential respondents

were invited to take part in the study and, upon agreement, were given a

questionnaire. They were informed that the questionnaire was anonymous

and were asked to complete it at home and return it within the next fewdays. To minimize possible social desirability biases, respondents were

requested to deposit the questionnaire in a box located in the waiting

area of the same supermarket (away from the student volunteer) during

a subsequent visit. The return rate was almost 45%.

The questionnaire was prefaced by a small definition of organic

foods, according to which such products are produced without artificial

fertilizer or chemical pesticides, and do not contain artificial colouring,

flavouring or aromatic substances, preservatives or genetically modifiedingredients (European Commission 2007).

This survey instrument was structured into five sections, the first

of which was designed to record participants buying frequency. Such

a scale allowed us to distinguish between regular and occasional

consumers on the basis of the following criterion: respondents who

asserted they purchase organic food more than ten times per year

were considered regular consumers of organic food, whereas those

who indicated that they purchase organic food less than ten times peryear were considered occasional buyers (cf. Cunningham 2001; Sirieix

and Schaer 2005) We chose this threshold because previous research has


6/14


The following sections of the questionnaire were designed to measure

the other study constructs. Specifically, respondents attitudes toward

organic food and the related purchase intentions were measured usingitems developed from Ajzens (1991) work. Ethical self-identity was

measured by a two-item scale drawn from prior studies of fair trade

products (Shaw and Shiu 2003) and organic food products (Sparks and

Shepherd 1992). Food safety concerns and health consciousness were

measured on scales drawn from Roddy, Cowan, and Hutchinson (1996)

and Goulds (1988) works, respectively. All constructs were measured on

7-point Likert scales. The questionnaire also collected sociodemographic

variables, namely the typology of retail outlet in which respondents

normally did the shopping, their gender and age.

RESULTS

Data on purchase frequency were preliminarily examined to distin-

guish between regular and occasional consumers. We established

that 178 respondents (mean age = 47.47, SD = 9.80) rated their buy-

ing frequency above the scale midpoint, i.e., ten times per year and,

hence, were classified as regular consumers. The other participants(N = 113, mean age = 46.37, SD = 10.73), who scored below the scale

midpoint, were assigned to the second group. Both groups of buyers were

largely composed of females who stated that they usually purchased food

products in supermarkets.

The basic descriptive statistics for the study variables for the sample

as a whole, and for regular and occasional buyers separately, are

shown in Table 1. As expected, regular buyers were found to hold

a stronger intention to purchase organic food than occasional buyers(M(Regular buyers) = 3.63;M(Occasional buyers) = 1.57), as well as a

more favorable disposition toward such products (M(Regular buyers) =

2.52; M(Occasional buyers) = 1.64). Bivariate correlations were lower

than .50 for all pairs of variables, with the exception of that between

attitude toward organic food and related purchase intention (Table 1).

To test our research hypotheses, a Structural Equation Model (SEM)

was employed. Before implementing the model, we assessed the validity

of each measure according to Anderson and Gerbings (1988) approach.For each construct, the average variance extracted (AVE) was not lower

than the recommended threshold of 50 and greater than the squared


7/14


TABLE 1

Means, Standard Deviations and Correlations of the Study Variables

Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5

Pooled sample

Purchase intention 2.832 1.648 1

Attitude 2.178 0.957 0.651 1

Ethical self-identity 1.854 0.894 0.402 0.362 1

Food safety concerns 1.955 1.222 0.315 0.286 0.285 1

Health consciousness 1.964 0.920 0.204 0.196 0.386 0.326 1

Regular buyers


Attitude 2.519 0.748 0.546 1




Occasional buyers


Attitude 1.641 1.005 0.526 1




Note: 1 = purchase intention; 2 = attitude; 3 = ethical self-identity; 4 = food safety concerns; 5 =

health consciousness; SD = standard deviation.p < .05; p < .001.

validity criterion. To test the model fit, we ran separate confirmatory

factor analyses (CFAs) for the whole sample and for each of the

two subgroups of regular and occasional buyers, respectively. In each

case, such analyses yielded adequate fit statistics and satisfactory factor

loadings (Table 2).

To check whether the model structure and the hypothesized relation-ships among the examined constructs were invariant across the inves-

tigated subsamples, a test of measurement invariance was performed.

Through this test, we established that for both groups of respondents the

adopted items measured the same psychological constructs and that the

proposed model allowed for a meaningful comparison of the patterns of

responses of the two investigated groups.2

2. This test involved a comparison of the fit of two nested models: a constrained one, whereinfactor loadings were constrained to be equal for both groups of regular and occasional buyers,

and an unconstrained one wherein no equality constraints were imposed in the analysis In both


8/14


TABLE 2

Results of Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFAs)

PooledSample (FL)

RegularBuyers (FL)

OccasionalBuyers (FL)

Purchase Intention:

G1 0.948 0.897 0.951

G2 0.883 0.876 0.752

G3 0.770 0.736 0.645

Attitude

H1 0.917 0.962 0.790

H2 0.891 0.844 0.949

Ethical self-identity:

I1 0.667 0.694 0.559I2 0.943 0.885 1.107

Food safety concerns:

J1 0.797 0.737 0.824

J2 0.899 0.918 0.904

J3 0.703 0.706 0.668

Health consciousness:

K1 0.922 0.914 0.935

K2 0.971 0.979 0.959

K3 0.776 0.760 0.806

Fit statistics

2 128.655 113.133 75.746

2/df 2.339 2.057 1.377

GFI 0.938 0.916 0.904

CFI 0.970 0.958 0.974

RMSEA 0.068 0.077 0.058

Note: FL = factor loadings; df (degrees of freedom) = 55; GFI = goodness of fit index; CFI =

comparative fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; N(Pooled sample) =

291; n(Regular buyers) = 178; n(Occasional buyers) = 113.p < .05; p < .001.

Once the validity of the measurement model was verified, causal

links among variables were set according to the hypothesized paths

and the structural model was tested with respect to the entire sample

of respondents (Table 3). The model fit was adequate and, as expected,

confirmed the existence of a significant relationship between attitude

toward organic food and purchase intention ( = .619; p < .001).

Significant linkages were also detected between ethical self-identity and

attitude toward organic food ( =

.285; p < .001), as well as betweenfood safety concerns and the attitude mediator ( = .223; p < .001).

Furthermore only ethical self identity was found to affect organic food


9/14


TABLE 3

Mediation Tests

Regular Buyers Occasional Buyers

Paths and Indicators

Pooled

Sample Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2

Ethical self-identity intention 0.192 0.587 0.245 0.167 0.147

Ethical self-identity attitude 0.285 0.572 0.422 0.024 0.021

Food safety concerns intention 0.061 0.022 0.050 0.309 0.164

Food safety concerns attitude 0.223 0.082 0.115 0.303 0.272

Health consciousness intention 0.025 0.023 0.020 0.102 0.068

Health consciousness attitude 0.046 0.045 0.013 0.097 0.085

Attitude intention 0.619 0.000 0.495 0.000 0.514

2

128.655 145.497 113.133 105.215 75.746df 55 56 55 56 55

2/df 2.339 2.598 2.057 1.879 1.377

p 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.033

GFI 0.938 0.895 0.916 0.878 0.904

CFI 0.970 0.936 0.958 0.938 0.974

RMSEA 0.068 0.095 0.077 0.089 0.058

Note: GFI = goodness of fit index; CFI = comparative fit index; RMSEA = root mean square

error of approximation; Model 1: constrained; Model 2: mediated (free); N(Pooled sample) = 291;

n(Regular buyers) = 178; n(Occasional buyers) = 113.

p < .05;

p < .001.

H1 posits the importance of ethical self-identity and a mediating

effect of attitudes in the relation between ethical self-identity and regular

consumers buying intentions. As a basic condition for mediation to

occur, Baron and Kenny (1986) suggest that the link between the

predictor and the outcome variable should be weakened by the insertion

of the mediating variable in the model. Thus, two models are compared to

test whether attitude toward organic food has a mediating effect (Table 3):one in which the path from attitude toward organic food to purchase

intention is constrained to zero (Model 1), and one in which all paths

among variables are allowed to freely vary (Model 2). Variations in the

structural coefficients between the two models are checked to verify

whether the mediation effect of attitude is significant.

For the sample of regular buyers we find that Model 1 fits the data

acceptably and reveals that ethical self-identity positively impacts both

attitude toward organic food ( = .

572; p< .

001) and buying intentions( = .587;p < .001). In Model 2 which frees the path from the mediator

(attitude) to the outcome variable the incidence of ethical self identity


10/14


change in the Chi-square statistic and an improvement in model fit when

comparing Model 1 and Model 2. Hence, we have established that for

regular buyers the link between ethical self-identity and the intentionto purchase organic food is partially mediated by consumers attitudes

(Table 3). For occasional buyers Model 1 fits the data adequately but

reveals that ethical self-identity does not affect buying intentions. Thus,

H1 finds support in our estimates.

As far as the effects of food safety concerns and health consciousness

are concerned, our analysis reveals that none of these constructs affects

the buying intentions of regular consumers (Table 3). Food safety

concerns, but not health consciousness, are found to exert a significant

effect on the attitudes and buying intentions of occasional consumers.

For this group, food safety concerns are found to influence both attitude

toward organic food ( = .303; p < .050) and purchasing intention

( = .309; p < .001) in Model 1 (when the mediating effect of attitude

is constrained to zero). However, when the effect of attitude is allowed to

freely vary in Model 2, the link between food safety concerns and organic

food purchase intentions is no longer significant ( = .164; p > .050).

This suggests that the relation between the two variables is fully mediated

by attitude toward organic food. Consequently, H2 is confirmed only inpart.

Finally, to check whether the results yielded by the application of

the structural model can be considered indicative of different behavior

patterns among the surveyed consumer groups, we conducted a multiple-

group test of invariance.3 This test proved to be significant, thus

corroborating the conclusion that the behaviors of regular and occasional

consumers of organic foods are driven by different psychological

constructs.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Our study shows that, for regular consumers, ethical self-identity

affects attitude toward organic food, as well as related buying intention.

This result implies that these consumers are aware of the relevance of

moral considerations in food consumption and are willing to express

3. We compared a model in which measurement and structural weights as well as structural

covariances were constrained to be equal for both groups with a model wherein all parameters


11/14


this sensitivity through their purchase behavior. In contrast, the results

for occasional buyers show that food safety concerns significantly affect

their attitudes toward organic food and, through the mediating effects ofthis variable, subsequent purchase intentions.

For regular consumers, the linkage between ethical self-identity and

the intention to buy organic food is mediated only in part by the

attitude toward such products. This indicates that these consumers

ethical commitment is able not only to determine a favorable disposition

toward organic food products, but also to affect their intention to

buy these products. Operationally, this finding implies that organic

food producers and regulatory bodies interested in supporting organic

farming should allow these consumers to express their ethical concerns

and contribute to the welfare of nature and other people by simply

choosing to consume organic products. For example, programs directed

at establishing a connection between ethical causes (like reforestation

projects or humanitarian initiatives) and the act of purchasing organic

food may enable these consumers to achieve a sense of self-actualization

as ethically oriented individuals.

For occasional consumers we ascertained that the link between food

safety concerns and purchase intention is fully mediated by attitudetoward organic food products. This suggests that food-related risks are

more likely to generate a favorable disposition toward these products

rather than immediately influencing occasional consumers purchase

intentions. Providing arguments in favor of the safety properties of

organic food may have the effect of raising the favorable attitudes of

occasional consumers toward organic farming and its output. In turn,

the more favorable attitudes can be expected to increase the likelihood

that these consumers will purchase organic food. Hence, to capture theinterest of infrequent consumers, food producers and regulatory agencies

should focus on the naturalness of organic products and raise confidence

in the organic label. For example, they could promote new distribution

channels suitable to match occasional consumers need for safe food, such

as the so-called farmers markets (i.e., direct sale markets). Such markets

may, in fact, allow customers to personally check the genuineness of the

purchased products.

Overall, the results of this study indicate that regulatory bodiesand consumer associations interested in supporting the growth of the

organic food sector may increase the receptiveness of their messages


12/14


differentiated approach may boost the effectiveness of policies directed at

stimulating sustainable consumption patterns and foster public confidence

in the safety standards of organic farming.

REFERENCES

Ajzen, Icek. 1991. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision

Processes, 50 (2): 179211.

Anderson, James C. and David W. Gerbing. 1988. Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A

Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103 (3): 411423.

Baron, Ruben M. and David A. Kenny. 1986. The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in

Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6): 11731182.Barrena, Ramo and Mercedes Sanchez. 2010. Frequency of Consumption and Changing Determi-

nants of Purchase Decision: From Attributes to Values in the Organic Food Market. Spanish

Journal of Agricultural Research, 8 (2): 251272.

Cunningham, Rosalie. 2001. The Organic Consumer Profile. Not Only Who You Think It Is! Alberta:

Strategic Information Services Unit, Alberta Agriculture Food and Rural Development.

European Commission. 2007. Council Regulation No 834/2007. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/

LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:189:0001:0023:EN:PDF.

Freestone, Oliver M. and Peter J. McGoldrick. 2008. Motivations of the Ethical Consumer. Journal

of Business Ethics, 79 (4): 445467.

Fotopoulos, Christos and Athanasios Krystallis. 2002. Purchasing Motives and Profile of the Greek

Organic Consumer: A Countrywide Survey. British Food Journal, 104 (8/9): 730765.Fotopoulos, Christos, Athanasios Krystallis and Ness Mitchell. 2008. Wine Produced by

Organic Grapes in Greece: Using Means-End Chain Analysis to Reveal Organic Buyers Pur-

chasing Motives in Comparison to the Non-Buyers. Food Quality and Preference, 14 (7):

549596.

Gould, Stephen J. 1988. Consumer Attitudes Toward Health and Health Care: A Differential

Perspective. The Journal of Consumers Affairs, 22 (1): 96118.

Gracia, Azucena and Tiziana de Magistris. 2008. The Demand for Organic Foods in the South of

Italy: A Discrete Choice Model. Food Policy, 33: 386396.

Guido, Gianluigi. 2009. Behind Ethical Consumption: Purchasing Motives and Marketing Strategies

for Organic Food Products, Non-GMOs, Bio-Fuels. Bern: Peter Lang AG International Academic

Publishers.Guido, Gianluigi, Irene Prete M., Peluso A. M., and Ralph C. Maloumby-Baka and Carolina Buffa.

2010. The Role of Ethics and Product Personality in the Intention to Purchase Organic Food

Products: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. International Review of Economics, 57(1):

79102.

Honkanen, Pirjo, Bas Verplanken, and Svein O. Olsen. 2006. Ethical Values and Motives Driving

Organic Food Choice. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 5 (5): 420430.

Magkos, Faidon, Fotini Arvaniti, and Antonis Zampelas. 2006. Organic Food: Buying More Safety

or Just Peace of Mind? A Critical Review of the Literature. Critical Reviews in Food Science

and Nutrition, 46 (1): 2356.

Magnusson, Maria K., Anne Arvola, Ulla K. Koivisto Hursti, Lars Aberg, and Per O. Sjoden. 2003.

Choice of Organic Food Is Related to Perceived Consequences for Human Health and toEnvironmentally Friendly Behaviour. Appetite, 40 (2): 109117.

Makatouni Aikaterini 2002 What Motivates Consumers to Buy Organic Food in the UK? Results


13/14


Naspetti, Simona and Raffaele Zanoli. 2004. Do Consumers Care about Where They Buy Organic

Products? A Means-End Study with Evidence from Italian Data. In Marketing Trends for Organic

Food in the 21st Century, edited by George Baourakis (239252). Singapore: World Scientific

Publishing.Niessen, Jan and Ulrich Hamm. 2008. Identifying the Gap between Stated and Actual Buying

Behaviour on Organic Products Based on Consumer Panel Data. Paper presented at the 16 th

IFOAM Organic World Congress, Modena, Italy, June 1620.

Pellegrini, Giuseppe and Federica Farinello. 2009. Organic Consumers and New Lifestyles an Italian

Country Survey on Consumption Patterns. British Food Journal, 111 (9): 948974.

Richter, Toralf. 2005. Approaches for Organic ProductsImplication of Recent Consumer Study

Results.Proceeding of the 1 st Scientific FQH Conference, Frick (CH), November 2829.

Roddy, Gerardine, Cathal A. Cowan and George Hutchinson. 1996. Consumer Attitudes and

Behavior to Organic Foods in Ireland. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 9 (2):

4163.

Royne, Marla B., Levy Marian, and Jennifer Martinez. 2011. The Public Health Implications ofConsumers Environmental Concern and Their Willingness to Pay for an Eco-Friendly Product.

The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 45 (2): 329343.

Schifferstein, Hendrik N. J. and Peter A. M. Oude Ophuis. 1997. Health-Related Determinants of

Organic Food Consumption in the Netherlands. Food Quality and Preference, 9 (3): 119133.

Shaw, Deirdre and Edward Shiu. 2003. Ethics in Consumer Choice: A Multivariate Modeling

Approach.European Journal of Marketing, 37 (10): 14851518.

Shaw, Hughner, Renee Pierre McDonagh, Andrea Prothero, Clifford J. Shultz II, and Julie Stanton.

2007. Who are Organic Food Consumers? A Compilation and Review of Why People Purchase

Organic Food. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 6 (MarchJune): 94110.

Siegrist, Michael. 2008. Factors Influencing Public Acceptance of Innovative Food Technologies

and Products. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 19 (11): 603608.

Sirieix, Lucie and Burkhand Schaer. 2005. Buying Organic Food in France: Shopping Habits and

Trust. Paper presented at the 15th IFMA Congress, Sao Paulo, Brazil, August 1419.

Sparks, Paul and Richard Shepherd. 1992. Self-Identity and the Theory of Planned Behavior:

Assessing the Role of Identification with Green Consumerism. Social Psychology Quarterly,

55 (4): 388399.

Storstad, Oddveig and Hilde Bjrkhaug. 2003. Foundations of Production and Consumption of

Organic foods in Norway: Common Attitudes Among Farmers and Consumers. Agriculture

and Human Values, 20 (3): 151163.

Willer, Helga and Lukas Kilcher, eds. 2011.The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics & Emerging

Trends 2011. Bonn: IFOAM and Frick: FiBL.Williams, Pamela R.D. and James K. Hammitt. 2001. Perceived Risks of Conventional and Organic

Produce: Pesticides, Pathogens, and Natural Toxins. Risk Analysis, 21 (2): 319330.


14/14

Copyright of Journal of Consumer Affairs is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied

or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.

However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

consumers intentions to buy organic food

Documents