Consumer Response to Integrated Pest Management and Organic Agriculture: An Econometric Analysis

While several studies have presented aggregate, descriptive illustrations of consumer response to IPM, the willingness-to-purchase and willingness-to-pay for IPM produce as a function of demographic characteristics has not received the exhaustive research attention that has focused on organic produce. The objective of this study was to empirically evaluate which demographic characteristics cause consumers to be more likely to purchase IPM grown produce. A hypothetical willingness-to-purchase model for IPM produce as well as willingness-to-pay models for both IPM and organic produce are presented. A non-hypothetical analysis also predicts consumers who strictly purchase only conventional produce. Income was found to be the most significant determinant of willingness-to-purchase IPM grown produce. Participants with higher annual incomes were more likely to express an interest in purchasing IPM produce and also appeared less likely to strictly purchase conventional produce. Those whose frequently purchase organic produce, those who visit farmers markets and those who live in suburban areas were all found to be more likely to purchase IPM grown produce. The results also indicate that females, those with higher annual incomes, younger individuals, and those who frequently purchase organic produce are all more likely to pay a premium for both IPM and organically grown produce. Overall, the results of this survey give insight into the likely consumer response to produce that is labeled as “IPM Grown.” However, before the average consumer exhibits the same level of interest in IPM as the sample in this study, some mechanism must be developed to educate the public about IPM.Consumer/Household Economics, Crop Production/Industries, Farm Management,

The Influence of Socio-Economic Characteristics on Food Advertisement Usage

Only 22 percent of surveyed consumers reported making frequent use of food advertisements when purchasing food products. However, certain demographic segments appear to place a greater emphasis on food advertisements than others. This study empirically evaluates which socio-economic characteristics encourage consumers to be more likely to take food advertisements into account when purchasing grocery products. The results indicate that those with lower annual incomes, those with lower levels of education, and those living in suburban and rural areas are the most likely to make use of food advertisements in the newspaper. The results also indicate that households with children, single individuals, and those over 65 years of age are less likely to use food advertisements.Consumer/Household Economics, Marketing,

Evaluating Consumer Usage of Nutritional Labeling: The Influence of Socio-Economic Characteristics

The majority of consumers report making frequent use of nutritional labeling when purchasing food products. However, certain segments appear to place a greater emphasis on food product labels than others. This study empirically evaluates which demographic characteristics encourage consumers to be more likely to take nutritional labels into account when purchasing grocery products. The results indicate that females, older individuals, and those living in suburban and rural areas are the most likely to make use of nutritional labeling. The results also indicate that larger households were less likely to use nutritional labeling.Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety,

PREDICTING WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY A PREMIUM FOR ORGANICALLY GROWN FRESH PRODUCE

Consumers were surveyed at various grocery retail establishments in New Jersey to provide opinions on organic produce. The objective of this study was to empirically evaluate which demographic characteristics cause consumers to be more likely to pay a premium to obtain organically grown produce. The results indicate that females, those with higher annual incomes, younger individuals, and those who usually or always purchase organic produce are all more likely to pay a premium for organic produce. The results also indicate that the likelihood of paying a premium for organic produce decreases with the number of individuals living in the household.Consumer/Household Economics,

Quality of Agricultural Produce: Consumer Preferences and Perceptions

The purpose of this research was to gain a greater insight into the characteristics and beliefs consumers draw upon while selecting the produce they purchase. Health and environmental risk perceptions of many agricultural inputs and products were also collected as well as demographic information. Nineteen produce characteristics were ranked by consumers. Locally grown produce and the country of origin were among the least important characteristics while freshness, taste/flavor, cleanliness, health value and absence of pesticides were among the most important characteristics. The survey also showed that most consumers made use of nutritional information and labeling while shopping for food and those who did, felt it aided them in making better purchase decisions. Consumers exhibited a clear preference for low-input methods of agricultural production which minimize the use of pesticides. They believed that there were health benefits to organic produce and that they would purchase more organic produce if it were more readily available. Respondents also indicated that they believed pesticides in general, herbicides, fungicides and insecticides all had significant health and environmental risks. Consumers believed on average that the use of pesticides positively contributes to the cosmetic appearance, quality, and supply of produce. Conversely, they believed that a reduction in pesticide usage would increase both the healthfulness and prices of produce. The results show where consensus and discord exist among consumers beliefs. Issues which have been the result of media campaigns and advertising such as oils used in cooking, tobacco products and alcoholic beverages show a greater degree of consensus than issues which are not often in the public spotlight. There were also areas in which consumers believed that there were inadequacies in the current produce market. Participants did not believe government food safeguards were sufficient to 2 protect public health nor did they believe the experts know enough about the long term effects of pesticide residues. The goal of this research was to provide food marketing agents with a better understanding of consumer purchase behavior, preferences and beliefs. The results are especially encouraging to those developing marketing endeavors for low input produce such as organic and IPM produce.Consumer/Household Economics,

CONSUMER AWARENESS OF STATE-SPONSORED MARKETING PROGRAMS: AN EVALUATION OF THE JERSEY FRESH PROGRAM

The majority of consumers surveyed (77 percent) report awareness of the Jersey Fresh, state-sponsored promotional program. However, certain segments appear more likely to be familiar with Jersey Fresh and its logos than others are. Behavioral and demographic models were constructed to evaluate which characteristics influence consumer awareness of Jersey Fresh. The results indicate that those who shop at more than one supermarket, those who frequently shop at direct marketing facilities, and those who frequently read food advertisements are more likely to exhibit a preexisting awareness of the Jersey Fresh Program. The results also indicate that the period of residence in the state positively contributed to the awareness of the program.Consumer/Household Economics, Marketing,

Predicting Consumer Risk Aversions to Synthetic Pesticide Residues: A Logistic Analysis

Growing concerns about pesticide residues in fresh produce could result in increased demand for low-input agriculture with reduced pesticide residues, and decreased demand for conventional fresh produce. The objective of this study was to empirically evaluate consumer concern about pesticide residues and analyze the effect of sociodemographic factors on pesticide residue concern. Two separate surveys were used to provide data about consumer risk perceptions and demographic characteristics. Statistical models using data from both surveys show that females are approximately 9 to 14 percent more likely to be risk averse toward pesticides than males. Furthermore, both surveys indicate that households with children are more likely to be risk averse than those without children. Specifically, the earlier survey (1990) indicates that households with at least one child were 11 percent more likely to be risk averse than households without children. The more recent survey (1997) shows households with two or more children to be 22 percent more likely to be risk averse. Those who frequently purchase organic produce and those who grew vegetables for consumption in their home were both found to be at least 18 percent more likely to be risk averse than those who did not. Individuals over 35 years of age are more likely to have high levels of risk aversion toward pesticide residues and suburban households were found to be 10 percent more likely than rural or urban households to be risk averse. The result also indicated that households with higher levels of income and education generally exhibit lower risk aversions. With sustainable and environmentally safer forms of agriculture likely to comprise a more significant share of the nation’s food production, marketing research must be implemented to ascertain public willingness-to-purchase of such produce. Predicting which consumers are likely to have high concerns about synthetic pesticide residues should be beneficial to identifying those who are more likely to purchase low-input agriculture such as IPM and organically grown produce.Consumer/Household Economics, Crop Production/Industries, Risk and Uncertainty,

Retailer-Wholesaler Response to State-Sponsored Marketing Programs: The Case of Jersey Fresh

Jersey Fresh retailers and wholesalers feel that the logos are effective in increasing sales. Most feel that the popularity of the logo among the consumers is moderate. The results of this study indicate that the promotional aspect of the program was more popular among all the participant groups than the quality control aspect. The mail surveys indicated that a greater number of participants were aware of and were using the promotional logo than the quality grading logo. Only a fifth of the wholesalers who were aware of the quality-grading program were enrolled in the program. The results also indicated that participants who thought that consumer awareness of the program was high were more likely to be enrolled. This study also illustrates that most retailers and wholesalers participating in the program prefer the colorful Jersey Fresh Promotional Logo (Logo A in Appendix) and would like to have one common logo for both promotion and quality grading. Retailers who believed that consumers were highly aware of Jersey Fresh were found more likely to have been using the Jersey Fresh Logos. Retailers who used other logos to identify their fresh produce were found more likely to use Jersey Fresh Logos in the future. Willingness to use Jersey Fresh Logos in the future was found to be lower among retailers who sell more than 75 percent of their sales in retailing. Willingness to use the logos was also found to decrease with the age of retailers. Retailers with outlets in the urban areas of New Jersey and with retail outlets that were open for more than 8 months during the year were more likely to be use Jersey Fresh Logos. Farmers with more experience in retailing produce were more likely to use the logos. Wholesalers who used other logos, who advertised through signs and used word of mouth to identify their produce were more found more likely to use the Jersey Fresh Logos. Wholesalers who sell more than 75 percent of their annual trade to other wholesale buyers, were found less likely to use the logos and less willing to use the logos in the future.Agribusiness, Marketing,

Producer Response to State-Sponsored Marketing Programs: The Case of Jersey Fresh

New Jersey agricultural growers were surveyed to understand their willingness to patronize the Jersey Fresh promotional and quality grading program. Growers’ perceptions of the premium logo and their opinions of the quality grading aspect of the Jersey Fresh Program were collected. Possible causes for the fluctuating participation of farmers in the quality-grading program were also explored. The results of this study should provide valuable information that can be applied not only to expand the Jersey Fresh Program, but also in other states which have similar promotional programs. Specific objectives of this analysis were to examine the general attitudes of participating farmers towards the effectiveness of the Jersey Fresh Logos and to identify the characteristics of farmers participating or interested in participating in the Jersey Fresh Promotional and Quality Grading Programs. Of the farmers who responded, 93.1% indicated that they were aware of the Jersey Fresh Program and 51.4% indicated that they did use the Jersey Fresh Logos. Over three-quarters of the farmers (76.4%) were of the opinion that the logos had a medium to high awareness among consumers. The majority of farmers indicated that the most important reason for using the Jersey Fresh Logos was to add locally grown value (46.9%) and freshness value to their produce (26.6%). Farmers who believed that consumer awareness of the Jersey Fresh Logos was high and who used logos other than Jersey Fresh were found to be more likely to have used the Jersey Fresh Logos and also more likely to use them in the future. Farmers with high gross sales of produce and with higher levels of education were found more likely to have used the Jersey Fresh Logos and also more likely to use the logos in the future. The number of acres being farmed and the age of the farmers, however, were found to have a negative effect on both the current usage and willingness to use the logos in the future. v Growers with farms located in the southern New Jersey were found more likely to be Jersey Fresh participants and also more willing to use Jersey Fresh Logos in the future, compared to farmers in the central or northern regions of the state. Farmers who believed that consumers were highly aware of the program and those who used other logos to identify their quality fresh produce were more likely to be registered in the Jersey Fresh Quality Grading Program. Growers with farms in southern New Jersey and who had more than a four year college education were also found to be more likely to be registered in the Quality Grading Program. Among the most cited reasons for not participating in the program were not wanting their produce to be inspected, not knowing about the program, and not finding the grading logo to be effective in obtaining a premium price.Agribusiness, Marketing,

Consumer Response to State-Sponsored Marketing Programs: The Case of Jersey Fresh

The Jersey Fresh Program is a leading example of state sponsored agricultural promotion. The program attempts to create consumer awareness through billboards, radio and television advertising, special promotions, and distribution of attractive point-of-purchase materials. This study empirically evaluates the effectiveness of the Jersey Fresh Program in terms of the impact the promotional logos have on consumers. This report includes a descriptive and logit analysis performed to predict the likelihood of consumers patronizing Jersey Fresh produce given certain behavioral and demographic characteristics. Participants exhibited a clear preference for Jersey Fresh produce and indicated that they believed it to be better than other produce in terms of quality and freshness. The study indicates that the Jersey Fresh Logo is perceived with a positive attitude among consumers. Awareness of Jersey Fresh was also found to be high among consumers and participants indicated that they would be willing to purchase Jersey Fresh produce if available. Produce displays in stores and television advertisements were most often cited to be the places in which the logos were seen. Consumers who frequently shop at direct marketing facilities such as farmers’ markets and roadside stands were more likely to be aware of Jersey Fresh, more likely to have bought Jersey Fresh labeled produce, and more willing to buy Jersey Fresh produce in the future. Consumers who read food advertisements in newspapers or brochures and who shop at more than one place in order to buy advertised specials, were more likely to be aware of Jersey Fresh than consumers who do not. Females, those who were over 35 years of age, and those had completed high school or higher levels of education were more likely to have purchased Jersey Fresh labeled produce. The results of this study may provide valuable information that can be applied not only to improve the Jersey Fresh Program but also in the promotion of other products of the state and in other states which have similar promotional programs.Consumer/Household Economics, Marketing,