consumer’s perceptions of organic foods in ambato, ecuador · universidad técnica de ambato...

AbstractObjective: The aim of this study was to identify the factors that explain consumers pur-chasing behavior towards organic food products in Ambato (Ecuador).Methodology: Data were collected from a survey of 1,500 organic consumers and other 1,500 consumers who prefer conventional foods, and analyzed using multivariate techniques.Results: Principal component analysis identified four factors which explain the buying behavior of organic consumers: Belief in health benefits, quality and taste attributes; belief in environmental benefits; and contextual issues. Cluster analysis identified three groups of organic consumers: organic consumers interested in self benefit and highly influenced by contextual aspects (Group I), organic consumers interested in expected environment benefits (Group II) and organic consumers very interested in self benefits and less affected by contextual aspects (Group III). The relationships established in organic consumers are different to conventional consumers. This defines different variables that explain the pur-chase process. The socio-demographics profiles were different in gender and occupation; women and free license workers were more frequently interested in buying organic foods. Limitations: The study was carried out in the city of Ambato that could be considered representative of the Ecuadorian urban society. The results should be complemented by future studies focused on other cities or rural areas. Practical implications: Results suggest that the Ecuadorian organic sector follows the developing patterns identified in the Western countries. This implies that the promotion and practical support for the organic sector should be focused on strengthening positive attitudes towards organic purchases.

Keywords: Buying behaviour; consumer preferences; intention to purchase; decision mak-ing; organic production.

JEL codes: O13, Q12.

Esic Market Economics and Business JournalVol. 51, Issue 2, May-August 2020, 263-279

* Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

ISSN 0212-1867 / e-ISSN 1989-3574© ESIC Editorial, ESIC Business & Marketing SchoolDOI: 10.7200/esicm.166.0512.1http://www.esic.edu/esicmarket

Consumer’s perceptions of organic foods in Ambato, Ecuador

Juan Carlos Castro Analuiza

Universidad Técnica de Ambato (Ecuador)

Cristina Checa* and José Perea

Universidad de Córdoba (España)

Received: 10/12/2019; Accepted: 22/04/2020; Published: 20/05/2020

文章摘要

研究目的：本研究目的为探索那些能够影响在安巴托（厄瓜多尔）消费者对有机食品购买行为之因素。分析方法：研究数据是通过对一千五百位有机食品消费者和另外一千五百位选择传统食品的消费者进行的问卷调查而获得的，其后我们对该数据进行多变量分析。研究结论：经过对主要要素进行的分析，我们发现有四种能够解释有机食品消费者购买行为的因素：相信有机食品健康益处多、其质量及味道优良；相信其环境效益高，以及其他外在因素效益。通过聚类分析，我们发现有三类绿色消费者：重视食品对自身益处同时极度受外在因素影响的绿色消费者（第一类）；重视食品环境效益的绿色消费者（第二类），以及非常重视食品对自身益处但较少受到外在因素影响的绿色消费者（第三类）。此外，其与有机食品消费者建立的关系有别于与常规消费者建立的关系。这定义了不同的变量，从而解释其购买过程。在社会人口的层面上来看，消费者的性别和职业会影响其消费喜好：妇女和自由职业者对购买有机食品比较感兴趣。研究局限: 由于本研究是在安巴托市进行的，其结果可以被视为反映厄瓜多尔都市社会的情况。在未来的研究，我们应该针对其他城市以及农村地区进行进一步研究，让本研究结果更完整。实际应用: 研究结果显示，厄瓜多尔的生态产业跟随西方的发展模式。这意味着生态产业的推广和支持应该集中于对有机食品发展采取更积极的态度。

关键词：消费行为、消费者偏好、购买意图、购买决策、生态化产业。

JEL 分类号: M21、 M31。

厄瓜多尔安巴托的消费者对有机食品的观点

Juan Carlos Castro Analuiza

Universidad Técnica de Ambato (Ecuador)

Cristina Checa* and José Perea

Universidad de Córdoba (España)

Esic Market Economics and Business JournalVol. 51, Issue 2, May-August 2020, 263-279

* Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

ISSN 0212-1867 / e-ISSN 1989-3574© ESIC Editorial, ESIC Business & Marketing SchoolDOI: 10.7200/esicm.166.0512.1http://www.esic.edu/esicmarket

Consumer’s perceptions of organic foods in Ambato, Ecuador 265

Juan Carlos Castro Analuiza, Cristina Checa, & José Perea (2020). Consumer’s percep-tions of organic foods in Ambato, Ecuador, Esic Market Economics and Business Journal, 51(2), 263-279. Doi: 10.7200/esicm.166.0512.1

1. Introduction

The need to intensify the actions focused in mitigating the impact of climate change was supported during the Lima Climate Change Conference in 2014; espe-cially in most vulnerable regions as Amazonas (Polman, 2014). The cessation of deforestation and adoption of ecological practices have been identified as the main ways of improvement; highlighting, organic production as a key tool. The agro ecological approach of organic production improves the resilience of the production systems, generating a more sustainable and robust environment against climate vari-ability (Padgham, Jabbour & Dietrich, 2015). Besides, it contributes to improve the performance of smallholders, generating wealth and employment in rural territories; thus reducing the pressure on forest areas (Huang & Wang, 2014).

Ecuador is one of the Amazon countries with highest growth potential in the organic sector. In the Ecuador Political Constitution, the sustainable development principles are defined into a social and political context. The country has implement-ed different sector policies and actions to strengthen the food sovereignty and the agro ecological production patterns (Flores, 2015). Consequently, organic produc-tion has increased in the recent years, reaching around 40,000 ha and 9,000 farmers, mainly smallholders (Lernoud, Willer & Schlatter, 2016).

Although Ecuadorian organic production has a strong orientation to outward markets, mainly to Europe and the USA, many farmers are focusing in local markets as a growth strategy. The exportation requirements are complex and different among markets due to the poor international harmonization of the legislative framework; this situation means a real obstacle for trade. Moreover, policy performances to improving the internationalization have not been adequately effective (Scherer, 2013a).

Organic foods have started to be recognized in the domestic market; which is closely related to the increase in the household incomes and the concern of food security (Scherer, 2013b). The positive dynamics of the domestic market has generat-ed the interest of large supply chains. Although the short chains are predominant (i.e. local markets, fairs or small specialized stores), large retails are beginning to adopt some local organic foods (Flores, 2015).

Considering the social and political Ecuadorian context, it is probably that both supply and demand for organic food will increase in the coming years. It is neces-sary identifying the consumer’s preferences and the underlying values of the organic foods for the producers and other stakeholders of supply chain to produce processes and sell these foods in the markets (Feldman & Hamm, 2015). From a political perspective, if the organic production support is not addressed to the demand and consumption profiles, negative results in higher financial resources and inefficiency

266 Juan Carlos Castro Analuiza, Cristina Checa and José Perea

of the system appear (Weatherell et al., 2003). Therefore, it is necessary to properly link the organic production with consumers’ attitudes for its growth and economical strengthen.

Although there are several studies about organic consumers in Europe or USA, the perception of organic foods is little known outside the West. Previous studies in developed countries suggest that organic food consumption follows similar pat-terns resulting of its common values (Zagata, 2012). Nevertheless, the consumer’s value system depends on its cultural background, which has been tested in different context, including the organic food consumption. Therefore, the aim of this study is to analyze the factors that explain the buying behavior of organic foods and the adoption of a specific purchasing behavior.

Materials and methods

The applied conceptual model is showed in figure 1, where key concepts described in the literature are implemented into a framework. A similar conceptual model has been previously used by Tsourgiannis et al. (2011) for analyzing consum-er’s attitudes regarding genetically modified food. From the conceptual model, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H1. The factors that explain the purchasing behavior of Ambato’s consumers who buy or try to buy organic foods are different to the factors that explain the purchasing behavior of consumers who prefer conventional foods.

H2. The consumers from Ambato might be classified into different groups, accord-ing to the factors which affect their purchasing behavior of organic foods.

H3. The organic food consumers’ opinion is significantly related to a specific purchase behavior.

H4. The customary place for buying foods is significantly related to a specific purchase behavior.

H5. The socio–demographic consumer’s characteristics are significantly related to a specific purchase behavior.

The data needed to test the hypotheses were collected by a survey applied to consumers of Ambato, Ecuador. The surveys were carried on through face to face interviews. This system has been widely used to test consumers purchase behaviors (Arvanitoyiannis & Krystallis, 2005; Oppenheim, 2000). Data were collected in usual sale points, boarding consumers at the buying moment and place where actual purchase decisions are made, according to Tsourgiannis et al. (2011) Interviews took place throughout the day to reduce time of shopping – related bias (Chryssohoidis & Krystaillis, 2005). A 30% of the interviews were conducted from Monday to Friday, from 9:00 to 15:00, other 30% was conducted from 15:00 to 21:00 and the rest took place on Saturday.


Figure 1. Conceptual model

H1

H2

H3 H4

H5

Factorsaffecting

Consumtionattitude

Price

Quality

Brand

Availability

Labelling

Container

Certification

Local Origin

Environment

Health

Grouping classification according to the purchasing

behavior

Opinionregarding

organic foods

Regular foodpurchasing

place

Personal characteristics

(age, ocupation, etc.)

Nutritional

Taste

A systemic sampling stratified method was used. The sampling system consists of selecting one of six consumers who came into the survey area (Mccluskey, Grimsrud, Ouchi & Wahl, 2003). The sample was composed by 3,000 consumers above 20 years old; 1,500 who prefer organic foods and 1,500 who prefer conventional ones. Demographic population data from Ambato is not available, so it is not possible to verify the sample representativeness. However, the sample size is reasonable in relation to the total population area (178,000 inhabitants), and it is similar to other studies on the same subject (Alibabic, Jokic, Mujic, Rudic, Bajaramovic & Jukic, 2011; Roitner-Schobesberger, Darnhofer, Somsook & Vogl, 2008).


The survey was integrated by six questions related to consumer knowledge about organic foods, usual purchase place, and regular food purchases; twelve attitudinal statements on a 5 point Likert scale relating to their buying behaviour; five questions related to consumer opinion regarding organic foods; and nine questions about con-sumer personal information.

The survey was pre–tested in January 2014 by five researchers and ten consum-ers. The pilot survey indicated that no modification needed to the questionnaire and therefore the main survey was conducted in March to May 2014.

Subsequently, multivariate techniques were used for analyzing organic food con-sumers in two stages. Firstly, principal component analysis (PCA) was used to iden-tify purchase behavior factors. Only factors with eigenvalues greater than one were retained. Likewise, the orthogonal rotation varimax was applied for relating more easily retained components with original variables. In order to compare the factors that affect the purchase behavior between conventional and organic food consumers, a PCA was applied for every consumer group (Tsourgiannis et al., 2011).

In the second stage, cluster analysis was used to group organic consumers into similar purchase patterns. A sequential cluster analysis was applied based on scoring from components retained by PCA. Firstly, hierarchical groupings were used with Ward method and euclidean distance, squared Euclidean and Manhattan (Köbrich, Rehman, Khan, 2003). In each sequence, the optimal number of groups was defined by the rate of change of clustering coefficient and the square root of the average of the standard deviations (Gelasakis, Valergakis, Arsenos & Banos, 2012). Subse-quently, non–hierarchic groupings were developed using the centroids and number of groups obtained in the hierarchic groupings. The three consequent groups were studied by ANOVA using post hoc SNK test. This procedure maximizes the homo-geneity within groups and the heterogeneity between them (Toro-Mujica, García, Gómez-Casto, Perea, Rodríguez-Estévez & Angón, 2012).

The previous hypotheses were contrasted by nonparametric Kruskal Wallis and chi–square tests based on results of the multivariate techniques described. All statis-tics were analyzed using SPSS v.14.

Results

PCA results for organic consumers and non-organic consumers are showed in Table 1. For organic consumers, PCA retained 4 factors with eigenvalues over 1. The first factor indicated the belief in expected health benefit. It showed a positive relation amongst the interest for the nutritional value, health, label and certification process. The second factor showed a positive relation between the taste and the qual-ity of the product. The third considered factor, the belief in environmental benefits, showed positive loading with the interest on environment protection and local origin of foods. The fourth factor was composed by contextual variables dealing with the promotional aspect, the image and the price of the product.


Table 1. Key consumption dimensions derived from principal component analysis

Key consumption dimensions for organic buyers

Factorloading

Key consumption dimensions for non-organic buyers

Factorloading

Expected health benefits Price and quality

Product labelling 0.808 Price of the product 0.893

Interest about nutrition values 0.801 Quality of the product 0.885

Health safety 0.738 Taste 0.757

Certification of the product 0.652 Context

Taster and quality Attractiveness of the product’s packing 0.826

Quality of the product 0.875 Brand name 0.671

Taste 0.702 Availability in outlets for food 0.598

Environmental expected benefits Information

Interest on environment protection 0.843 Product labelling 0.821

Interest on the local origin of the product

0.816 Product certification 0.764

Context Organic attributes

Brand name 0.840 Health safety 0.858

Attractiveness of the product’s packing 0.760 Interest on environment protection -0.789

Price of the product 0.682 Interest on nutrition values 0.673

Availability for food in outlets 0.580 Interest about the local origin of the product

-0.537

KMO = 0.707 KMO = 0.674

Bartlett test of sphericity, P < 0.000 Bartlett test of sphericity, P < 0.001

The PCA resulting for non–organic consumers retained 4 factors with eigenvalues over 1. The first factor is positively related to price and quality of the food. In the second factor, promotional aspect and product image had a positive loading regard to the attractiveness of the packing, the labels’ name and food availability. The third factor indicated the information disposal of product through the relation between labeled and certification of the product itself. The fourth factor referred to organic attributes and showed positive loadings to health and nutritional value interest and negative to the environmental protection and the origin of the product.

The relationships established in organic consumers are different to conventional consumers. This defines different variables that explain the purchase process. There-fore, the hypothesis H1 is validated.

The organic consumer’s typology was developed according to the factors that explain their purchasing behavior. The most significant result of cluster analysis was a non–hierarchical clustering of three groups with squared Euclidean distance (Table 2). The results identified three types of consumers according to their purchase


behavior patterns. A 33.6% of the sample represents organic consumers interested in self benefit and highly influenced by contextual aspects (Group I). These consumers obtained the highest scores in the contextual factor. Organic consumers interested in expected environment benefits (Group II) represented the 23.8% of the sample. These consumers obtained the highest scores in the environmental benefit factor. Organic consumers very interested in self benefits and less affected by contextual aspects (group III) represented the biggest size group, a 42% of the sample. They are interested in buying tasty and quality foods, and health was also very important for them.

Table 2. Characteristics of the three consumer´s groups that buy organic products (mean + standard deviation) obtained through non-hierarchical cluster analysis

Key consumption dimensions (first four principal components)

Organic consumers’ groups

IConsumers interested in altruistic and self-benefits

IIConsumers interested

in altruistic benefits

IIIConsumers interested in self-benefits

P value

Expected health benefits 1.35 + 0.09b -0.37 + 0.07a 1.42 + 0.19b 0.000

Taste and quality 1.29 + 0.09b -0.42 + 0.07a 1.63 + 0.12c 0.000

Environment expected benefits 0.06 + 0.09b 1.30 + 0.07c -0.68 + 0.12a 0.000

Context 1.97 + 0.07c -0.18 + 0.05b -2.07 + 0.09a 0.000

Means with different letters are significantly different (P<0.000).

In order to assess the verisimilitude of the organic consumers’ typology, the pre-dictive capability of the scores obtained in the PCA in relation to identified groups was tested. The obtained scores in PCA classified correctly a 98.7% of the consum-ers. Thereby, the four identified purchase factors can predict and accurately discrim-inate the type of organic consumer. Therefore, the hypothesis H2 has been validated.

Non-parametric Kruskal Wallis tests were used for comparing the opinion of the different types of consumers on organic foods (Figure 2). All the consumer’s groups highly agreed with the statement “organic foods are more expensive”. The statement “Organic foods do not have negative effects on environment” is accepted for all consumers groups, although non–organic buyers were less convinced than organic consumers (P<0.05). Also, organic consumers from groups I and III believe it more firmly than group II (P<0.05). The non–organic food buyers do not believe that “Organic foods are tastier”, neither “Organic foods have better nutritional level”; in opposite to organic buyers (P<0.05). Likewise, organic buyers from groups I and III believe more firmly than group II in the affirmation “Organic foods are tastier” (P<0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis H3 could be accepted.


Personal and consumption characteristics between organic and conventional con-sumers groups were compared by chi–square tests. The knowledge on organic foods was not associated to any purchase behavior (Table 3). No significant differences were found between the adoption of a specific purchase behavior and the regular purchase place. Therefore, the hypothesis H4 could not be validated.

Table 3. Profile of each consumer´s group regarding consumer´s characteristics

Consumer’s characteristicsOrganic consumers

Non-organic consumers P valueI II III

First retail outlets for foods (%)

0.704

Supermarkets 41.7 43.7 45.9 45.4

Public markets 47.9 41.1 37.7 40.6

Corner shops 9.4 14.6 16.4 13.3

Other markets 1.0 0.6 0.0 0.7

Purchase frequency (%) 0.036

Dairy 5.2 12.0 11.5 4.8

Weekly 61.5 54.4 62.3 22.6

Monthly 11.5 9.5 11.5 51.2

As needed 21.9 24.1 14.7 21.4

Level of knowledge about organic foods (%)

0.821

None 8.3 10.1 6.6 9.3

Low 39.6 36.1 31.1 36.6

Intermediate 42.7 38.0 49.2 40.8

High 9.4 15.8 13.1 13.3

Gender 0.000

Male 38.5 40.5 24.9 65.5

Female 61.5 59.5 75.1 34.5

Age (%) 0.895

20 – 25 years 52.1 51.3 47.5 51.1

26 – 35 years 22.9 20.9 24.6 21.8

36 – 45 years 11.5 18.3 16.4 15.3

46 + years 13.5 9.5 11.5 11.8

Residence (%) 0.476

North 38.5 36.1 45.9 36.3

South 35.4 43.7 32.8 40.6

East 18.7 13.9 14.7 15.5


Consumer’s characteristicsOrganic consumers

Non-organic consumers P valueI II III

West 7.3 6.3 6.6 7.5

Marital status (%) 0.702

Single 40.6 40.5 44.3 34.5

Married 55.2 50.0 49.2 59.5

Divorced 4.2 6.3 4.9 4.8

Widowed 0.0 3.2 1.6 1.2

Housing property (%) 0.130

Homeowner 81.2 71.5 75.4 83.3

Rented house 18.8 28.5 24.6 16.7

Household size (%) 0.394

1 – 2 persons 4.2 7.8 3.3 7.3

3 – 4 persons 52.1 50.6 54.1 53.9

5 + persons 43.7 41.8 42.6 38.8

Education (%) 0.161

Primary school 50.0 53.2 57.4 56.4

Secondary school 5.21 8.9 8.2 7.3

High school 41.7 36.7 34.4 35.1

Occupation (%) 0.015

Free licence 38.1 51.1 34.0 17.9

Private employee 29.8 16.4 34.7 36.9

Student 23.7 22.6 24.3 41.7

Other 8.3 9.8 7.0 3.6

Household income (%) 0.496

0 – 500 $ 33.3 31.0 26.2 30.8

501 – 1,000 $ 39.6 39.9 45.9 42.1

1,001 – 1,500 $ 18.7 20.9 18.0 18.5

1,501 $ + 8.3 8.2 9.8 8.5

Socio–demographic profiles of all consumer’s groups is showed in Table 3. The profiles were similar in age, residence, marital status, housing property, education, household size and household income. However, the profiles were different in gender and occupation. Women and free license workers were more frequently interested in buying organic foods (P<0.05). Therefore, the hypothesis H5 can be partially accepted.

Table 3. (continuation)


Figure 2. Consumer´s opinion about organic food products (*p<0,05)

0

1

2

3

4

Organic foods aremore expensive

Organic foods aremore tasteful*

Organic foods arehealthier*

Organic foods havebetter nutrition

value*

Organic foods donot have negative

impact on theenvironment*

Ave

rage

Ran

k

Group I Group II Group III Non organic buyers

Discussion

Several studies have examined the consumption of organic foods and the factors that determine it. Utility theory and the Theory of Planned Behavior have been the most utilized for evaluating the organic foods purchase process and understanding how the consumers make their buying decisions. Available evidence indicated that individual attitudes towards organic foods were mainly based on beliefs about organic food benefits and they are one of the main determinants of the purchasing behavior of organic consumers (Aertsens et al., 2009). The identified beliefs included the best taste of the organic foods, environmental aspects, health issues and the cer-tification of the origin (Botonaki, Polymeros, Tsakiridou & Mattas, 2006; Loureiro, McClusey & Mittelhammer, 2001; Magistris & Gracia, 2008).

The three main factors identified for purchasing organic foods in Ambato were related to the beliefs about benefits in expected health, better taste, general quality, and environment. In the Western countries the belief in private attributes (i.e. health contribution) is more relevant than the interest in public attributes (i.e. environment) (Aldondo-Ochoa & Almansa-Saez, 2009). Results obtained in Ambato point to the same direction because the first two identified factors were related to self-beliefs while the third one was related to altruistic benefits.


In most of studies, the expected benefits for health have been reported as the main reason to purchase organic foods (Botonaki, Polymeros, Tsakiridou & Mattas, 2006; Chen, 2009; Zagata, 2012). This study confirmed the relevance of health as the main reason to purchase organic foods in Ambato. Organic consumers believe that organic foods are healthier; also, PCA results showed a strong relationship between health and healthy food. The second reason to buy organic foods in Ambato is their best taste and general quality; organic consumers also believe that organic food is tasty. The belief in the best taste is one of the key drivers to buy organic fruits and vegetables, which are the most kind of commercialized organic foods in Ecuador. (McEachern & McClean, 2002; Zhao, Chambers, Matta, Loughin & Carey, 2007).

The third determinant for the organic consumption in Ambato was the expect-ed environmental benefits. Different studies have showed a clear positive relation between environment compromise of the consumers and their positive attitude towards organic foods’ consumption (Lea & Worsley, 2005; Mondelaers, Verbeke & Van Huylenbroeck, 2009). Nevertheless, the relationship between local origin and organic purchase is generally weak. Even, there is more interest and more favorable attitude towards local food than to organic food (Adams & Salois, 2010; Padel & Foster, 2005). In this way, In Ecuador the differences between local origin and organic foods are not clearly perceived, due to the fact that the most commercialized organic foods come from local origin and they are sold in short food supply chains, where they are directly sent from the local producer to the final consumer. This explains the strong relation between environment and local origin.

According to Aertsens et al. (2009), positive attitudes towards organic foods do not always lead to the purchase behavior. This is explained by the influence of other factors which take part as intermediaries between attitudes and behaviors besides modulate the formation of both (Zepeda & Deal, 2009). These groups of factors are considered by the Alphabet Theory as “context factors”. The context is made up by external positive or negative influences on food purchases, such as price or seasonal availability (Morales, Carrigan & Szmigin, 2012). The fourth determinant factor for the organic consumers was the context, comprising brand, packing, availability, and price. The current context has a moderate influence on the purchasing behavior of Ambato’s consumers, except in group I. The purchasing behavior of organic consum-ers should be aligned with the attitudes and beliefs previously described.

The price and price differences between conventional and organic foods were among the main factors for not purchasing organic foods (Aertsens et al., 2009; Padel & Foster, 2005). Organic food prices are higher than conventional ones according to all consumers’ beliefs; nevertheless, PCA results showed that this is not the key factor to organic consumers. For conventional consumers, the price–quality relation is the main determinant purchasing factor, which showed a more sensibility regarding price than organic consumers. These results support that strong preference of consumers to organic foods is not explained by high prices; while conventional consumers showed a high sensibility to price (Enneking, 2002; Stolz, Stolze, Jans-sen & Hamm, 2011). Moreover, the positive relation between price and quality of


conventional consumers suggest a positive attitude towards “high price for high quality”. In consequence, the strategy of decrease in the price of organic foods could be considered as a low quality for non–organic consumers.

About half of consumers in Ambato did not properly understand the differences between organic and conventional foods. Consequently, one strategy for enhancing the consumption will be to promote the specific organic foods benefits. Organic con-sumers are interested in both self and altruistic benefits: For group III, self-benefits are more important, for group II, the altruistic ones, and both for the group I. For non–organic consumers is interesting to improve their perception about the price–quality relation of organic foods.

In this study, the evaluated socio–demographic factors presented a low influence in organic foods purchase. The identified consumer’s groups were differenced by their attitudes and purchase preferences, although, concrete socio–demographic profiles were not showed, except gender and occupation. The socio–demographic characteristics of the consumers are not useful to explain attitudes or positive beliefs on organic foods and to predict the intention or purchasing behavior, according to Aertsens et al. (2009). The women from Ambato showed a higher tendency to purchase organic foods similar to what occidental literature reports (Lea & Worsley, 2005). Different studies have showed that women present a more positive attitude regarding organic foods, due to the fact that they have a greater awareness towards healthy food (Stobbekaar, Casimir, Borhuis, Marks, Meijer & Zebeda, 2006). In Ecuador, this could be the main reason why the consumers of group III were most interested in health and nutritional value.

This study has been conducted in Ambato for its social and economics character-istics, which could be considered representative to Ecuadorian urban society. Never-theless, Ecuador is a heterogeneous developing country, with a notorious imbalance socioeconomic situation especially between rural and urban zones. Anyway, this is the first study focused on the organic market in Ecuador that explores determinants of organic purchasing decision according to types of consumers. These results should be completed with future studies focused on other cities or rural areas.

Conclusions

Despite the different socio–economical context in the developing countries from Latin America the findings suggest that the Ecuadorian organic sector follows the developing patterns identified in the Western countries. This implies that the promo-tion and practical support for the organic sector should be focused on strengthening positive attitudes towards organic purchases. Both self and altruistic beliefs are interesting dimensions to be considered in organic consumers while contextual fac-tors have a moderate influence on the purchasing behaviour. Regarding non–organic consumers, it is necessary improving their perception of the price–quality relation of organic foods. The socio–demographic characteristics are not useful to predict the purchasing behaviour.


Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declare that there is no potential conflict of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Adams, D. C., & Salois, M. J., 2010, Local versus organic: A turn in consumer pref-erences and willingness–to–pay. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems. 25, 331–341. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170510000219

Aertsens, J., Verbeke, W., Mondelaers, K., & Van Huylenbroeck, G., 2009, Person-al determinants of organic food consumption: a review. British Food Journal, 111(10), 1140–1167. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700910992961

Aldondo-Ochoa, A., & Almansa-Saez, M., 2009, The private provision of public environment: Consumer preferences for organic production systems. Land Use Policy, 26(3), 669-682. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.09.006

Alibabic, V., Jokic, S., Mujic, I., Rudic, D., Bajaramovic, M., & Jukic, H., 2011, Atti-tudes, behaviors, and perception of consumers’ from northwestern Bosnia and Herzegovina toward food products on the market. Procedia - Social and Behav-ioral Sciences, 15, 2932-2937. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.217

Arvanitoyiannis, I., & Krystallis, A., 2005, Consumers’ beliefs, attitudes and inten-tions towards GM foods, from the “Perceived Safety vs. Benefits” point of view. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 40(4), 343–360.

Botonaki, A., Polymeros, K., Tsakiridou, E., & Mattas, M., 2006, The role of food quality certification on consumers’ food choices. British Food Journal, 108(2), 77-90. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700610644906

Chen, M. F., 2009, Attitude toward organic foods among Taiwanese as related to health consciousness, environmental attitudes, and the mediating effects of a healthy lifestyle. British Food Journal, 111(2), 165-178. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700910931986

Chryssohoidis, G., & Krystallis, A., 2005, Organic consumers’ personal values research. Testing and validating the list of values (LOV) scale and implementing a value–based segmentation task. Food Quality and Preference, 16(7), 585-599. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.01.003

Enneking, U., 2002, Analysis of food preferences using discrete choice modelling – The case of organic sausages. Agrarwirtschaft, 52, 254–267.

Feldman, C., & Hamm, U., 2015, Consumer’ perceptions and preferences for local food: A review. Food Quality and Preference, 40, 152–164. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.09.014

Flores, P., 2015, Organic Agriculture in Latin America and the Caribbean. The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and emerging trends 2014. Ed. IFOAM–Organics International, Bonn, Pp. 226-232.


Gelasakis, A. I., Valergakis, G. E., Arsenos, G., & Banos, G., 2012, Description and typology of intensive Chios dairy sheep farms in Greece. Journal of Dairy Sci-ence, 95(6), 3070-9. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2011-4975

Huang, J., & Wang, Y., 2014, Financing sustainable agriculture under climate change. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 13(4), 698–712. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-

Köbrich, C., Rehman, T., & Khan, M., 2003, Typification of farming systems for constructing representative farm models: two illustrations of the application of multivariate analyses in Chile and Pakistan. Agricultural Systems, 76(1), 141-157.

Lea, E., & Worsley, T., 2005, Australians’ organic food beliefs, demographics and values. British Food Journal, 107(11): 855–869. 2005. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700510629797

Lernoud, J., Willer, H., & Schlatter, B., 2015, Latin America and the Caribbean: Current statistics. The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and emerging trends 2014. Ed. IFOAM–Organics International, Bonn, Pp. 233-238.

Loureiro, M. L., McClusey, J. J., & Mittelhammer, R. C., 2001, Assessing consumer preferences for organic, eco–labelled, and regular apples. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 26, 404–416.

Magistris, T., & Gracia, A., 2008, The decision to buy organic food products in Southern Italy. British Food Journal 110(9):929-947. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700810900620

McCluskey, J., Grimsrud, K., Ouchi, H., & Wahl, T., 2003, Consumer response to genetically modified food products in Japan. Agricultural and Resource Econom-ics Review, 32, 222–231. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1068280500005992

McEachern, M., & McClean, P., 2002, Organic purchasing motivations and atti-tudes: are the ethical? International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26, 85–92. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1470-6431.2002.00199.x

Mondelaers, K., Verbeke, W., & Van Huylenbroeck, G., 2009, Importance of health and environment as quality traits in the buying decision of organ-ic products. British Food Journal, 111(10), 1120-1139. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700910992952

Morales, C., Carrigan, M., & Szmigin, I., 2012, The coherence of inconsist-ences: Attitude–behaviour gaps and new consumption communities. Journal of Marketing Management, 28(1), 103-128. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2011.615482

Oppenheim, A. N., 2000, Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measure-ment. New York: Continuum.

Padel, S., & Foster, C., 2005, Exploring the gap between attitudes and behaviour–understanding why consumers buy or do not buy organic food. British Food Journal, 107(8), 606–625. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-07169-200106

Padgham, J., Jabbour, J., & Dietrich, K., 2015, Managing change and building resilience: A multi–stressor analysis of urban and peri–urban agriculture in Africa and Asia. Urban Climate, 12, 183–204. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2015.04.003


Polman, P., 2014, Landscapes for climate and development. Global landscape Forum. Climate Change Conference. Lima (Perú) 8th December. http://www.landscapes.org/paul-polman-opening-keynote-landscapes-climate-development/.

Roitner-Schobesberger, B., Darnhofer, I., Somsook, S., & Vogl, C. R., 2008, Con-sumer perceptions of organic foods in Bangkok, Thailand. Food Policy, 33, 112–121.Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.09.004

Scherer, A., 2013a, Exporting organic products to the United States. Organic food market in the United States. Market access opportunities for Latin American and Caribbean producers. Ed. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean of United Nations, Washington, pp. 19–24.

Scherer, A., 2013b, The organic market in Latin America and the Caribbean. Organ-ic food market in the United States. Market access opportunities for Latin Ameri-can and Caribbean producers. Ed. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean of United Nations, Washington, pp. 25–28.

Stobbekaar, D. J., Casimir, G., Borhuis, J., Marks, I., Meijer, J., & Zebeda, S., 2006, “Adolescents” attitudes towards organic food: a survey of 15– to 16– year old school children. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31, 349–356. 2007.Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2006.00560.x

Stolz, H., Stolze, M., Janssen, M., & Hamm, U., 2011, Preferences and determinants for organic, conventional and conventional–plus products – The case of occasion-al organic consumers. Food Quality and Preference, 22(8), 772-779. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.06.011

Toro-Mujica, P., García, A., Gómez-Casto, G., Perea, J., Rodríguez-Estévez, V., & Angón, E., 2012, Organic dairy sheep farms in south central Spain: Typologies according to livestock management and economic variables. Small Ruminant Research, 104(1-3), 28-36. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2011.11. 005

Tsourgiannis, L., Karasavvoglou, A., & Florou, G., 2011, Consumers’ attitudes towards GM Free products in a European Region. The case of the Prefecture of Drama–Kavala–Xanthi in Greece. Appetite, 57(2), 448-458. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2011.06.010

Wheatherell, C., Tregear, A., & Allinson, J., 2003, In search of the concerned con-sumer: UK public perceptions of food, farming and buying local. Journal of Rural Studies, 19(2), 233-244. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(02)00083-9

Zagata, L., 2012, Consumers’ beliefs and behavioural intentions towards organic food. Evidence from Czech Republic. Appetite, 59, 81–89. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2012.03.023

Zepeda, L., & Deal, D., 2009, Organic and local food consumer behav-iour: Alphabet Theory. International IJC, 33(6), 697–705. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00814.x

Zhao, X., Chambers, E., Matta, Z., Loughin, T., & Carey, E., 2007, Consumer sen-sory analysis of organically and conventionally grown vegetables. Journal of Food Science, 72(2), S87-9. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2007.00277.x


Notes on Contributors

Name: Juan Carlos Castro AnaluizaPosition: Coordinador Carrera de Márketing y Gestión de NegociosSchool / Faculty: University: Universidad Técnica de Ambato (Ecuador)Address: Av. Julio Jaramillo y Pasaje Custodio Sánchez, Ambato, EcuadorPhone: 033 700 090Email: [email protected]: 0000-0002-5371-9727

Name: Cristina Checa MoralesPosition: InvestigadoraSchool / Faculty: Departamento de Producción AnimalUniversity: Universidad de Córdoba (España)Address: Edificio Producción Animal, Campus Rabanales, 14071 Córdoba (España)Phone: +34 957 218 745Email: [email protected]: 0000-0002-7198-4161

Name: José PereaPosition: Profesor Titular de UniversidadSchool / Faculty: Departamento de Producción AnimalUniversity: Universidad de Córdoba (España)Address: Edificio Producción Animal, Campus Rabanales, 14071 Córdoba (España)Phone: +34 957 218 745Email: [email protected]: 0000-0002-7496-6794

consumer’s perceptions of organic foods in ambato, ecuador · universidad técnica de ambato...

Documents