Perceptions on the use of pricing strategies to stimulate healthy eating among residents of deprived neighbourhoods: a focus group study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Pricing strategies are mentioned frequently as a potentially effective tool to stimulate healthy eating, mainly for consumers with a low socio-economic status. Still, it is not known how these consumers perceive pricing strategies, which pricing strategies are favoured and what contextual factors are important in achieving the anticipated effects.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted seven focus groups among 59 residents of deprived neighbourhoods in two large Dutch cities. The focus group topics were based on insights from Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations Theory and consisted of four parts: 1) discussion on factors in food selection; 2) attitudes and perceptions towards food prices; 3) thinking up pricing strategies; 4) attitudes and perceptions regarding nine pricing strategies that were nominated by experts in a former Delphi Study. Analyses were conducted with Atlas.ti 5.2 computer software, using the framework approach.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Qualitative analyses revealed that this group of consumers consider price to be a core factor in food choice and that they experience financial barriers against buying certain foods. Price was also experienced as a proficient tool to stimulate healthier food choices. Yet, consumers indicated that significant effects could only be achieved by combining price with information and promotion techniques. In general, pricing strategies focusing on encouraging healthy eating were valued to be more helpful than pricing strategies which focused on discouraging unhealthy eating. Suggested high reward strategies were: reducing the price of healthier options of comparable products (e.g., whole meal bread) compared to unhealthier options (e.g., white bread); providing a healthy food discount card for low-income groups; and combining price discounts on healthier foods with other marketing techniques such as displaying cheap and healthy foods at the cash desk.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This focus group study provides important new insights regarding the use of pricing strategies to stimulate healthy eating. The observed perceptions and attitudes of residents of deprived neighbourhoods can be integrated into future experimental studies and be used to reveal if and how pricing strategies are effective in stimulating healthy eating.</p

Influencing attitudes, changing behaviours and embedding a pro-sustainability mindset in the workplace: An innovation diffusion approach to persuasive communications.

Although several sustainability implementation frameworks have been proposed, researchers have not yet proposed theories or models to help organisations speed up the rate of sustainability diffusion and narrow the gap between what is known and what is put into use. This study sought to fill this gap by proposing a sustainability diffusion model. The model was developed from an exhaustive review of the corresponding literature. It uses Rogers' (1962) diffusion of innovations theory and Ajzen's (1991) theory of planned behaviour as a theoretical foundation. The model was tested and its structural architecture was validated in three different sustainability contexts; namely, duplex printing in UK universities; sustainable computing in service-based businesses; and sustainability culture in UK universities. The primary data was analysed statistically using SPSS, and structural equation modelling (SEM) in particular was used to validate the structural architecture of the proposed model. The SEM results indicate that the structural architecture of the theory of planned behaviour is well-founded. All the hypotheses that underline the theory's paths were supported. In contrast, the structural architecture of the diffusion of innovations theory was weakly supported. Some of the paths were rejected in at least two occasions. For example, the relationship between pro-sustainability knowledge and attitude was neither statistically significant nor directional. Moreover, several components of the 'verified' model turned out to be statistically insignificant or were rejected altogether. These were knowledge, perceived self interest, perceived persuader legitimacy, perceived consequences, perceived argument quality, trialability and perceived source credibility. Accordingly, once these constructs were removed and the model was restructured in accordance with the results of SEM analysis, an entirely new version of the 'sustainability diffusion model' emerged (See Figure IX-2). The architecture of the new model suggests that in order to speed up the rate of sustainability diffusion, change agents must emphasise the relative advantage, compatibility, subjective norm and the urgency of the pro-sustainability initiative under implementation and de-emphasise any complexities or risks associated with its operationalisation. Unexpectedly, the new version of the proposed model relies more on Ajzen's (1991) theory of planned behaviour as a theoretical foundation than on Rogers' (1983) innovation-decision process model. In other words, the new model maintained almost all the features of the theory of planned behaviour, but it only absorbed some, but not all, of the components of Rogers' innovation-decision process model. Nevertheless, the new model maintained its holistic nature. It still takes into account both the person-specific and innovation-specific factors that influence the diffusion, adoption and actualisation of pro-sustainability behaviours/initiatives

Vademecum for innovation through knowledge transfer : continuous training in universities, enterprises and industries

In the current work we present a first state of the art in technology transfer from the university-public-private environment to the enterprises and industries in Spain and Italy and vice versa. In it are described the main causes that boost and damage that two-way relationship. Additionally, a first vademecum is established to avoid those environments where technology transfer is either nonexistent or difficult to carry out because of the human factors this process entails. This short guide allows one to detect easily through the Internet whether we are in a real or false technology transfer process