Download Consumers` Buying Behaviour Towards Local Food in Greece

International Journal of
Strategic Innovative Marketing
Vol. 02 (2015) DOI: 10.15556/IJSIM.02.04.003
Consumers’ Buying Behaviour
Towards Local Food in Greece During
Economic Depression Period
Lambros Tsourgiannis1,a, Efstratios Loizou2, Anastasios Karasavoglou3,
Christos Antonios Tsourgiannis4, Stavros Valsamidis3
1Region
of East Macedonia and Thrace, Regional District of Xanthi and Eastern Macedonia and
Thrace Institute of Technology, Department of Accounting and Finance, School of Business and
Economy, Kavala, Greece, 45 Iraklias street, 67100 Xanthi, Greece
2Technological Educational Institute of Eastern Macedonia and Thrace Institute of Technology,
Dept. of Agricultural Products Marketing and Quality Control, Terma Kontopoulou, 53100,
Florina, Greece
3Technological Educational Institute of Western Macedonia, Department of Accounting and
Finance, School of Business and Economy, Agios Loucas, 65404 Kavala, Greece
4Ministry of Rural Development and Food, Center for Seed Certification, Xanthi, Greece and
Research Fellow in the Department of Agricultural Economy, Democritus University of Thrace
a)Corresponding
author: [email protected]
Abstract: This paper aims to identify the factors affecting consumers’ purchasing behaviour
towards local food amid the economic depression period in Greece. Field interviews were
conducted in a randomly selected sample consisted of 549 consumers. Multivariate
statistical analysis was performed to identify consumers’ behaviour towards local products.
Results indicated that the factors influencing people in Greece to buy local food products
are: (a) marketing issues (b) topicality, (c) hedonism issues, (d) health safety issues and (e)
psychological issues. Consumers with similar buying behaviour towards local food are
classified into two groups: (a) those influenced by product features and (b) those influenced
by marketing issues.
Keywords: Consumer buying behaviour, Local Food, Consumer purchasing attitudes,
Consumer Behaviour during Economic Crisis.
1. Introduction
Consumers' attitudes towards local food products is a subject that attracted the
focus of many studies, among those examining value added and differentiated
products. In the marketing and business literature a large number of studies
examining branding, product differentiation, labeling issues and consumer
behaviour. Booth and Shepherd argued [6] that cultural and economical factors,
consumer’s personality, attitudes, values and emotions, affect consumers’ decision-
32
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC INNOVATIVE MARKETING
33
making process regarding food selection. A decade later, Steenkamp identified [57]
that biological, psychological and socio - demographical consumer’s characteristics,
marketing of the product, economic and cultural environment affect consumers’
purchasing decisions. Kotler identified [28] that consumers’ buying behaviour is
influenced by cultural, social, personal and psychological factors.
In the food sector, food quality characteristics, the high importance given by
consumers in diet and health issues, price, governmental actions, cultural factors,
distribution channels and the dominance of the supermarket chains also affect
consumers buying behaviour within E.U countries [39], [1], [14], [41], [32], [61].
Furthermore, religious prohibitions, cultural beliefs and counterculture attitudes
have a significant influence on Greek consumers’ purchasing decisions towards food
products together with social characteristics, including the size of the family and the
role of the head of the family [37], [33]. Loizou et al investigate [35] the drivers that
influence the adoption of differentiated food products, such as food safety, health,
environmental and societal issues, by clustering consumers into four different
categories.
“Local food systems” movements, practices and writings pose increasingly visible
structures of resistance and counter-pressure to conventional globalizing food
systems [18]. Therefore, the place of food seems to become an important issue. As
Schneider and Francis argued [50], local food systems are emerging as a viable
alternative to the production and marketing models used in the industrialized global
food system. Furthermore, the concept of local food has been launched to describe
local food systems or short food chains where food is produced near the consumer,
and can contribute to rural development and labor markets to promote local
economies [47].
Early work on local food showed a weak preference [27], [59], [22] while later
work (post Omnivore’s Dilemma and books, studies, movies about food and Slow
Food organizations), has shown different trends. In particular, quality, taste,
freshness, cleanness, appearance, shelf life, nutritional value, value for money,
price, environmental friendly production methods, support to the local farmers’
families, support to the local economy, short travel distance and trustworthiness of
food’s origin, consist some of the main factors affecting consumers’ purchasing
behaviour towards local food [21], [48], [9], [45], [64], [50], [47], [13], [15], [8], [40],
[3], [19]. Food shoppers indicate support for particular values, beliefs and norms
about the environment; personal health, religion and economy shape attitudes
towards local foods and motivate consumers to purchase them [65]. Besides,
consumers prefer to buy local food from local outlets such as farmers’ markets or
local shops [15], [9].
Amid the economic crisis in Greece all the above-mentioned factors that affect
the purchasing behaviour of consumers towards local food are questioned. As most
of the knowledge about the consumers’ attitudes regarding local food is mainly
derived from a sample of studies that have been conducted within the last four - five
years, the examination of the factors that affect buying behaviour of Greek
consumers towards local food during the period of economic depression is very
important because different cultural, economical, social and demographical
characteristics affect consumers’ buying behaviour in a different way [31], [37], [28],
[35].
Since 2008, when the economic crisis started in Greece, economy has fallen in
deep recession. The GDP reduction dropped by more then 25%, the unemployment
rate reached 30% in 2013, with more than 55% of the unemployed to be young
people; private and public consumption faced severe reductions affecting all sectors
34
CONSUMERS’ BUYING BEHAVIOUR TOWARDS LOCAL FOOD IN GREECE DURING ECONOMIC
DEPRESSION PERIOD
of the economy, even the food sector [17], [26]. The average household income is
estimated at 13,000 euros, much lower than the OECD average of 26,500. The
income of the top 20% of the population is about 31,500 euro per year, whereas the
bottom 20% lives on 6,500 euros per year [42].
According to the annual research of Boston Consulting Group for 2011, 73% of
the surveyed consumers declared that would purchase only the absolutely necessary
goods. Furthermore, the ranking of consumers’ “values” have changed with the
“savings”, “health”, “value for money”, “cheer”, and “peace” to be in the top of their
hierarchy. More than half of the consumers in Greece answered that they will reduce
food and drink consumption and more particularly spirits and beer consumption.
On the other hand, fresh food, dairy products and home food seem to be in favour of
the new more rational consumption behaviour of Greek people. The same study
indicated that most of the Greek consumers are more interested in products with
substantial technical differences from others, whilst they do not pay attention to the
brand name as they seem to prefer the private labeled products in order to reduce
their expenses. One explanation is Engels Law that predicts an increase of
expenditures shares on necessities such as food in response to a fallen income.
Secondly, in countries which are under economic depression the “value for money”
is the main criterion for consumers and therefore they seek better quality for
rational price [29].
Previous experience from countries that suffered from economic crises such as
Indonesia, West Africa and Latin America countries indicated that poor households
due to rapid income reduction and increase on the food prices switched to cheaper
less preferred or lower quality staples to protect energy intake. They bought less
food, skipped meals, reduced overall food as well as they decreased energy intake of
non staple food such as meat, eggs, dairy, vegetables and fruits [34], [49], [56].
In this notion, the current study examines which of the factors presented in the
literature review affect the attitudes of the consumers to buy local food in Greece
during the recent economic depression period. Local food systems and direct
marketing can increase farmers’ profits and can help to mediate the pains
associated with urban expansion. By marketing food products to urban and
suburban neighbours, farmers can potentially stay in business, while supporting
local economy and farmland in production [50]. Following the above context, the
current study aims to identify the factors that affect consumers’ purchasing
behaviour and classify them into groups with similar behaviour as well as to profile
each group of consumers regarding their personal characteristics.
Many consumer behaviour theories and models have developed during the last
decades. The food-related lifestyle (FRL) has been proposed as a mediator between
values (ways of shopping, quality aspects, cooking methods, consumption
situations, purchasing motives including self –fulfillment in food, security and social
relationships) and behaviour [10], [11], [12], [23], [51]. Social cognition and
Behavioural Decision Theory (BDT) consumer research have tended to build on
different underlying models of buyer behaviour and the communication process [55].
Social consumer research has focused on the communications model and how
judgements and attitudes are formed whilst BDT consumer research has tended to
examine the decision making model (purchasing process). Furthermore, according to
the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), people consider implications of their actions
before they are involved in a given behaviour [2]. Therefore, as Papista and Krystallis
argued [44], people form intentions to perform behaviours that are intercepted by
persons’ attitudes towards that behaviour and social norms.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC INNOVATIVE MARKETING
35
On the other hand, the above mentioned consumer behaviour theories and
models do not take into consideration all the intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics
and values, marketing mix issues (product issues, price related issues, promotion
issues and marketing channel’s issues) and demographic characteristics in
exploring the factors that affect consumers purchasing behaviour but each theory
and model some of them. Therefore, a conceptual model was developed in the
current study to place the intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics and values,
marketing mix issues (product issues, price related issues, promotion issues and
marketing channel’s issues) and demographic characteristics outlined in the
literature into an identifiable framework (Figure 1).
Consumers’
preferences and
opinion towards
the local food
Ho2
Factors
affecting
consumers
buying behavior
towards local
food
Ho4
Ho1
11
Classification of consumers
to groups according to their
buying behaviour
Demographic
consumers’
characteristics
(age, education,
occupation, etc)
Ho3
Consumers’
preferences
regarding
marketing outlet
utilisation in order
to buy local food
Figure 1. The Conceptual Model.
The research hypotheses that this study tests according to the conceptual model below are the
followings:
• Ho1: Consumers in Greece cannot be classified into groups according to the
factors that affect their purchasing behaviour towards locally produced food.
• Ho2: Consumers’ preferences and opinions towards purchases of locally
produced food are not significantly related to particular purchasing behaviour.
• Ho3: Consumers’ purchasing behaviour is not significantly related to their
preferences regarding the utilisation of a particular marketing outlet in order to buy
locally produced food.
• Ho4: Consumers’ purchasing behaviour is not significantly related to their
demographic characteristics
After the introductory section, this study presents the survey and statistical
methodology as well as the results of the analysis and the concluding remarks.
36
CONSUMERS’ BUYING BEHAVIOUR TOWARDS LOCAL FOOD IN GREECE DURING ECONOMIC
DEPRESSION PERIOD
2. Methodology
2.1. Survey Procedure
The researchers undertook an intercept survey to a sample of consumers in order to
gather data necessary to identify the factors that affect consumers’ buying behaviour
in Greece towards local food. Hence, the research focuses on a sample of Greek
consumers, purchasers of local food products. Information was gathered through an
interview survey (the enumerators used a structured questionnaire, asked the
questions to the consumers and filled the answers) as the consumers are familiar
with this kind of research [38], [16], [5]. Moreover, this is a widely used method for
examining consumers’ buying behaviour by many researchers [20], [4]. Furthermore,
as many consumers do not have Internet access, the electronic survey method was
not suitable for surveying a representative to a general population sample.
An effort was made to reach consumers at the same time and place where actual
purchase decisions are made hoping to better elicit their true preferences about
products. Data were collected in locations frequented by consumers such as
supermarkets, groceries, green groceries, open markets. Interviews took place
throughout the day to reduce time of shopping related bias [30]. Hence, one quarter
(25%) of the interviews were conducted between 9:00 – 15:00 during the week
(Monday – Friday), one quarter between 15:00 – 21:00 during the week and 50%
during Saturday (9:00 – 19:00). This survey methodology developed according to the
results of the pilot survey into which the respondents indicated the day and time
they make their shopping.
In this survey, a systematic stratified sampling method was chosen to form the
sample due to the fact that the authors wished to generalize their findings beyond
the sample of consumers covered by the survey. As Errington argued [16], the only
way in which this can be achieved is to ensure that the units for survey are selected
at random from the larger population about which generalization are to be made.
Therefore, consumers were selected randomly, with the criterion that the interviewer
was to solicit every sixth customer (who looked over 20years old) who came into the
survey area [36]. The sample that was selected consists of 600 consumers over 20
years old as the researchers wanted to ensure that would survey household decision
makers (the questionnaires that were answered by consumers who were less than
20 years old were not used in the statistical analysis and were not counted on the
sample size), 549 of which declared that they bought local food at least once. The
sample is covering the whole country that would be reasonably representative of
some larger population about which useful generalization could be made. The size of
the sample is considered reasonable regarding the total population of the area as
this size of samples were mostly used by other researchers in Greece regarding
consumer behaviour towards food purchases [62], [7], [60].
The representativeness of the sample immunized by checking the proportion of
the consumers of the sample who declared that they bought local food with those of
the pilot survey following the methodology proposed by Siardos [52]. In particular,
the proportion of consumers (p) in the pilot survey who indicated that they bought
local food at least once is 92%. Therefore, in order to achieve a representative
sample the sample size should be 265 consumers (in order have z=3 and d=5%). As
the researchers decided to a sample size of 600 consumers (about two times more
than what was needed) in order to have similar size samples with other surveys
presented above, and the proportion of consumers who bought at least one time
local food in this sample is about 92%, the sample is considered representative.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC INNOVATIVE MARKETING
37
2.2. Questionnaire design
Factors that affect the consumers’ behaviour towards local food products were
identified by the researchers after searching the literature. Furthermore, they
designed a questionnaire in order to meet the research objectives and pre-tested it in
academics, food marketing experts and consumers.
In the next stage, the
questionnaire was piloted in February of 2011 to 100 consumers. The pilot survey
indicated that no modification needed to the questionnaire, and therefore, the main
survey was conducted in spring of 2011 as mentioned above.
2.3. Statistical Methodology
Multivariate analysis techniques were used to the 549 consumers to reveal the key
information contained in the responses, and these analyses were applied in three
stages. First, principal component analysis (PCA) was used to identify the variables
that accounted for the maximum amount of variance within the data in terms of the
smallest number of uncorrelated variables (components). The anti-image correlation
matrix was used as well as Bartlett’s test of sphericity and measure of sampling
adequacy (MSA) in order to check the appropriateness of the data for subsequent
factor analysis. The variables that had a high proportion of large absolute values of
anti–image correlations as well as MSA less than 0.5 were removed before analysis.
In this study, PCA reduced the 13 key attitude variables, which relate to various
aspects of consumers’ behaviour towards local food, to a smaller set of underlying
factors (or consumption dimensions).. An orthogonal rotation (varimax method) was
conducted and the standard criteria of eigenvalue = 1, scree test and percentage of
variance were used in order to determine the factors in the first rotation [23].
Different trial rotations followed where factor interpretability was compared. These
PCA scores were then subjected to cluster analysis to group consumers with similar
patterns of scores into similar clusters based on their buying behaviour. In this
study, both hierarchical and non-hierarchical methods were used according to the
recommendations of Hair et al [23] and Punj and Stewart [46] in order to develop a
typology of the consumers’ buying behaviour.
Quadratic discriminant analysis was performed to assess how accurately the
identified key consumption dimensions that were derived from the PCA analysis
could predict and discriminate cluster membership.
Statistical tests based on the outcomes of the multivariate statistical techniques
presented above (factor, cluster and discriminant analysis) employed to test
hypothesis Ho1. PCA and non parametric Mann-Whitney Test and Friedman Test
conducted to test hypothesis Ho2, whilst chi-square analysis performed to test the
hypotheses Ho3 and Ho4.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Factors and attitudes affecting consumers’ buying behaviour towards local
food.
Principal components and factor analyses (through a varimax rotation) were
conducted to identify the key consumption preference variables, and the latent root
criterion (eigenvalue =1) and the percentage of variance were used to determine the
number of factors (Table 1). Several different trial rotations were conducted to
38
CONSUMERS’ BUYING BEHAVIOUR TOWARDS LOCAL FOOD IN GREECE DURING ECONOMIC
DEPRESSION PERIOD
compare factor interpretability as suggested by Tabachnick and Fiddell [58] and Hair
et al [23].
Table 1. The records capacity of institutions (yearly)
%Cumulative
Component
Eigenvalue
%Variance
Variables
1
3.567
27.441
27.441
V1 – Health safety
0.666
2
1.880
14.464
41.905
V2 – Quality
0.706
3
1.225
9.421
51.326
V3 – Taste
0.542
4
1.075
8.271
59.597
V4-Quriosity
0.788
5
1.007
7.749
67.346
V5-Prestige
0.731
6
0.792
6.090
73.436
V6-Freshness
0.661
7
0.740
5.689
79.124
V7-Cleannes
0.735
8
0.560
4.308
83.432
V8-Contribution to the local
0.514
variance
Communalities
economy
9
0.498
3.831
87.264
V9- Existence of labelling
that
refers
origin
-
the
place
of
Certification
of
0.681
origin
10
0.472
3.634
90.897
V10-
Production
methods
0.677
linked to place of origin
11
0.465
3.578
94.475
V11-Appearance
0.686
12
0.420
3.230
97.706
V12- Attractiveness of the
0.761
packing
13
0.298
2.294
100.00
V13-Advertisement
0.607
KMO MSA = 0.742 Bartlett test of Sphericity = 1747.458, P <0.001
PCA identified five key factors that affect consumers’ preferences towards local
food (Table 2).
Table 2. The main factors that affect consumers’ local food buying behaviour derived from Principal
Component Analysis.
Key Consumption Dimensions
Factor loadings
Marketing issues
Attractiveness of Packaging
0.849
Appearance
0.730
Advertisement
0.695
Topicality
Existence of labeling that refers the place of origin - Certification of origin
0.807
Production methods linked to place of origin
0.767
Contribution to the local economy
0.664
Hedonism issues
Cleanness
0.824
Freshness
0.777
Taste
0.547
Health safety issues
Quality
0.795
Health safety
0.773
Psychological Issues
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC INNOVATIVE MARKETING
Key Consumption Dimensions
39
Factor loadings
Curiosity
0.852
Prestige
0.757
In the next stage, hierarchical and non-hierarchical clustering methods were
used to develop a typology of the buying behaviour of the Greek consumers [24],
[25], [23], [53]. Cluster analysis was conducted on the 549 observations, as there
were no outliers. It identified two groups of consumers that were named according to
their buying behaviour patterns towards local food (Table 3). These are: (a) the
“Influenced by the product features” consumers and (b) the “Influenced by
marketing issues” consumers. In particular, the “Consumers influenced by the
product features” comprise 46% of the sample. They are influenced in their buying
decisions by the cleanness, freshness, taste and quality of the product. They are also
influenced by health safety issues, their curiosity and the possible prestige they may
concur by buying such products. On the other hand, the “Consumers influenced by
marketing issues” comprise the 54% of the sample. They are influenced in their
buying decisions by the labeling (that indicated the origin of the product) and
certification of origin of the product, the production methods used for its cultivation
and preparation as well as by the contribution the purchases of local food have to
the local economy. The attractiveness of the packing of the product, its appearance
and the advertisement of the product have a significant impact on the shopping
decision of these consumers.
Table 3. Characteristics of the Four Consumers’ Groups
Key Consumption
Consumers influenced by
Consumers influenced by
Dimensions
the product features
marketing issues
Marketing issues
-0.44133
0.37446
0.001
Topicality
-0.58203
0.49384
0.001
Hedonism issues
0.34806
-0.29532
0.001
Health safety issues
0.24760
-0.21008
0.001
Psychological Issues
0.23966
-0.20335
0.001
252
297
Number of consumers (n=549)
P
Moreover, discriminant analysis was conducted to evaluate the prediction of
group membership by the predictors derived from the factor analysis. Initially the
normality of the key strategic dimensions was checked. The Box’s M test statistic
(Box M= 115.862 approx F= 7.648, df =15 P<0.001) indicated that the variance –
covariance matrices were violated [7]. The summary of the cross validation
classification derived by the quadratic discriminant analysis is shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Summary of Classification with Cross - validation
Predicted Classification
Key Consumption Dimensions
Consumers influenced by the
Consumers influenced
product features
by marketing issues
Marketing issues
0.37446
0.001
Topicality
0.49384
0.001
Hedonism issues
-0.29532
0.001
40
CONSUMERS’ BUYING BEHAVIOUR TOWARDS LOCAL FOOD IN GREECE DURING ECONOMIC
DEPRESSION PERIOD
Health safety issues
-0.21008
0.001
Psychological Issues
-0.20335
0.001
Number of consumers (n=549)
297
Thus, the five consumption dimensions could accurately predict and
discriminate consumers’ group membership.
Therefore, the hypothesis Ho1: Consumers in Greece cannot be classified into
groups according to the factors that affect their purchasing behaviour towards locally
produced food may be rejected.
3.2. The influence of consumers’ preferences and opinion on their local food
purchasing decision
PCA employed also in order to explore consumers’ main preferences towards local
food purchases. The analysis using the latent root criterion (eigenvalue =1) and the
percentage of variance identified two main preferences towards local food purchases
(Table 5).
Table 5. Results of Principal Component Analysis regarding consumers local food preferences
%Cumulative
Component
Eigenvalue
%Variance
1
3.550
44.735
44.735
2
1.748
21.847
66.2222
3
0.711
8.889
75.112
4
0.604
7.555
82.667
5
0.524
6.550
89.217
6
0.384
4.803
94.021
7
0.257
3,214
97.234
8
0.221
2.766
100.00
variance
Variables
Communalities
V14-Purchase
of
local
conventional fruits
V15-Purchase
of
local
conventional vegetables
V16-Purchase
of
local
conventional dairy products
V17-Purchase of local organic
olive oil
V18-Purchase of local organic
wine
V19-Purchase of local organic
fruits
V20-Purchase of local organic
vegetables
V21-Purchase of local organic
dairy products
0.730
0.805
0.527
0.654
0.554
0.738
0.737
0.552
KMO MSA = 0.774, Bartlett test of Sphericity = 1899.474, P <0.001
These two main preferences towards local food purchases are (a) Purchases of
local organic food and (b) Purchases of local conventional food (Table 6).
Table 6. Consumers Main Attitudes and Preferences Towards Local Food Purchases Derived from
Principal Component Analysis.
Key Consumption Dimensions
Factor loadings
Purchases of local organic food
Purchase of local organic fruits
0.857
Purchase of local organic vegetables
0.848
Purchase of local organic olive oil
0.807
Purchase of local organic wine
0.740
Purchase of local organic dairy products
0.729
Purchases of local conventional food
Purchase of local conventional vegetables
0.878
Purchase of local conventional fruits
0.838
Purchase of local conventional dairy products
0.726
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC INNOVATIVE MARKETING
41
The non parametric Mann-Whitney test conducted to identify the main
preferences of the consumers of each group regarding their local food purchases
(Table 7). The test indicated that there is no significant association between
consumers’ group membership and organic food purchases whilst most of the
conventional local food purchases including purchases of local conventional
vegetables, fruits and dairy products are performed by the “Consumers influenced by
marketing issues”.
Table 7. Preferences of each Consumers’ Group regarding local food purchases
Consumers influenced
Consumers influenced
by the product features
by marketing issues
Purchases of local organic food
287.91
264.04
n.s
Purchases of local conventional food
259.63
288.04
0.036
252
297
Key Consumption Dimensions
Number of consumers (n=549)
P
The non parametric Friedman Test was performed to explore the association
between consumers purchasing behaviour towards local food and their opinion
about those products (Table 8). Therefore, both groups of consumers have similar
opinion about local food. In particular, the consumers who are influenced by the
product features believe that local food contribute positively to the local economy,
are healthier, have better quality, are better and more tasteful whilst the consumers
who are influence by marketing issues think that those products contribute
positively to the local economy, are healthier, better, more tasteful and of better
quality.
Table 8. Consumers main opinion about local food
Consumers influenced
by the product
features (X2=327.208,
df=8, P<0.001)
Consumers influenced
by marketing issues
(X2=242.517, df=8,
P<0.001)
Local food are better
5.49
5.55
Local food are more tasteful
5.21
5.46
Local food have better quality
5.68
5.33
Local food are healthier
5.82
5.54
Local food are more expensive
4.99
4.85
Local food do not differ from the remaining food
3.19
3.52
Local food are more nutritious
4.43
4.54
Local food contribute to the environment protection
3.96
4.26
Local food contribute to the local economy
6.26
5.95
Consumers opinion about local food
Therefore, Ho2: Consumers’ preferences and opinions towards purchases of
locally produced food are not significant related to particular purchasing behaviour
may be rejected.
42
CONSUMERS’ BUYING BEHAVIOUR TOWARDS LOCAL FOOD IN GREECE DURING ECONOMIC
DEPRESSION PERIOD
3.3. Consumers’ Marketing Channel Utilisation regarding local food purchases
The researchers in their effort to explore which marketing outlet the consumers of
each group usually prefer conducted the chi-square analysis. According to the
results of the test (Table 9), the consumers of both groups have similar behaviour
regarding the marketing outlets they use in order to buy local food. In particular,
most of them usually buy local food once a week, make their local food shopping
from the local market often whilst they rarely use the special shops that sell local
food.
Table 9. Consumers’ Marketing Channel Utilisation regarding local food purchases
Marketing
channels
Eigenvalue
Consumers influenced by
Consumers influenced by marketing
the product features
issues
Once a month
Frequency of
buying local
food
Local
groceries
Once a week
More
than
once a week
Never
Once a month
Often
34.5%
(x2=60.857,
df=3, P<0.001)
Special shops
that sell local
food
Open market
Not very often
Rarely/Never
Often
Not very often
Rarely/Never
Often
Not very often
Rarely/Never
n.s
35.7%c
(x2=66.928, df=3,
P<0.001)
25.9%n.s
5.6%c
34.5%c
n.s
n.s
Not very often
Rarely/Never
Often
Supermarkets
36.5%c
23.4%
33.0%b
c
n.s
(x2=60.071,
df=3, P<0.001)
(x2=28.167,
df=3, P<0.001)
a P<0.001, b P<0.01, c P<0.05, n.s
5.4%c
33.0%b
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
21.8%c
21.8%
56.3%c
48.4%c
c
29.8n.s
21.8%c
(x2=33.717, df=3,
P<0.001)
(x2=78.626, df=3,
P<0.001)
n.s
n.s
26.6%a
24.2%b
49.2%c
57.6%c
21.9c
20.5%c
P>0.05
Hence the hypothesis Ho3: Consumers’ purchasing behaviour is not significantly
related to their preferences regarding the utilisation of a particular marketing outlet in
order to buy locally produced food maybe rejected.
3.4. Profiling each consumer group according to consumers’ demographic
characteristics.
A chi-square analysis was also performed for each consumer group in order to
develop the profile of the consumers who have a particular buying behaviour
towards local food regarding their demographic characteristics. As Table 10
indicates, both groups of consumers have similar profiles. In particular, most of
them hold a bachelor degree, are married, have 1-2 children and are private
employees. Moreover, most of the consumers who are “influenced by the product’s
features” are male.
Table 10. Profile of each consumer group regarding consumers’ personal characteristics
Demographic Characteristics
Sex
Male
Consumers influenced by
the product features
(x2=9.143, df=1,
59.5%a
Consumers influenced by marketing
issues
(x2=4.609, df=1,
56.2%n.s
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC INNOVATIVE MARKETING
P<0.01)
Female
Education
Number of
Children
Age
Special shops
that sell local
food
Occupation
40.5%a
P<0.05)
43
43.8%n.s
Primary
school
23.4%n.s
21.2%n.s
Secondary
school
21.0%b
17.2%n.s.
High school
(x2=89.071,
df=4, P<0.01)
25.0%n.s.
(x2=62.579, df=4,
P<0.01)
19.5%n.s.
Bachelor
degree
40.5%c
35.4%c
Postgraduate
degree
6.3%c
6.7%c
No children
1-2 children
3+ children
20-29
n.s
30-44
45-64
Often
Not very often
Rarely/Never
Private
employee
Civil servant
Free Licence
Retiree
Student
Unemployed
Other
(x2=16.167,
df=2, P<0.001)
n.s
(x2=60.071,
df=3, P<0.001)
21.8%c
21.8%c
56.3%c
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
21.8%c
21.8%c
56.3%c
(x2=25.475, df=2,
P<0.001)
n.s
(x2=33.717, df=3,
P<0.001)
24.2%c
(x2=74.778,
df=6, P<0.001)
a P<0.001, b P<0.01, c P<0.05, n.s
20.2%a
14.3%n.s
21.8%c
10.3%n.s
83%.a
0.8%c
33.0%n.s
45.5%c
21.5%c
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
26.6%a
24.2%b
49.2%c
29.3%c
(x2=131.550, df=6,
P<0.001)
26.3%c
13.5%n.s
14.8% n.s
9.1%a
5.1%.c
2.0%c
P>0.05
Therefore the hypothesis Ho4: Consumers’ purchasing behaviour is not significant
related to their demographic characteristics maybe rejected.
4. Discussion and Conclusions
This study indicated that there was a significant association between the adoption of
a buying behaviour and the factors, preferences, opinions and personal
characteristics that influence consumers to choose locally produced food.
It was also found that the consumers who prefer local food wittingly consider
them better (superior) and healthier and that their consumption contribute to the
strengthening of the local economy by psychological issues such as curiosity and
prestige.
There are some limitations that have been stated in the relevant sections of the
study and are the followings:
(a) Some answers in the questionnaire may not represent the true beliefs and
attitudes of consumers due to the fact that they are asked (in the place and at the
time) while they are doing their shopping and therefore, their time to answer the
questionnaire is limited. Of course, this limitation exists in most of consumers’
preferences surveys.
(b) The samples in such surveys cannot be quite large due to financial
constrains.
(c)The adopted statistical methodology despite the fact that it explores the factors
that affect consumers’ buying behaviour and create a taxonomy of consumers with
similar buying behaviour (which is the purpose of the current study) useful for
44
CONSUMERS’ BUYING BEHAVIOUR TOWARDS LOCAL FOOD IN GREECE DURING ECONOMIC
DEPRESSION PERIOD
marketing analysis and strategy development cannot measure the demand of a
product or determine the importance of the characteristics of a product that affect
consumers’ behaviour. These measurements can be made with the use of other
statistical techniques such as conjoint analysis and contingent valuation.
Nevertheless, the value of the current study is incontestable. It is the first study
(to the knowledge of the authors) that explores consumers’ attitudes towards locally
produced food in a South European country that its economy is under depression,
and more particular in Greece, by providing managerial and theoretical implications.
From a theoretical perspective, this study further contributes to the
understanding of the consumers’ local food purchasing behaviour mainly during an
economic depression period. Specifically, it supports the findings of other studies
[21], [48], [8], [45], [64], [50],[47], [65] according to which consumers are mainly
affected in their preferences towards local foods by the contribution to the local
economy, quality, taste and freshness of the product as well as by environmental
issues. In particular, Greek consumers are motivated in their local food purchases
by quality and hedonism related factors such as taste, freshness, healthiness as well
as psychological issues such as curiosity and prestige and other factors like support
to the local economy, protection of the environment [9], [19], [40], [3]. Furthermore,
their opinion on local food and their purchasing preferences also affect consumers’
local food buying behaviour. This study indicated that consumers’ demographic
characteristics and marketing channel selection found to be significant associated
with a particular buying behaviour. Generally, this study indicated that the factors
affecting Greek consumers to buy local food within the economic crisis period are
almost the same with those influenced consumers to purchase local food before.
This can be explained by Engels Law which predicts an increase of expenditures
shares on necessities such as food in response to a fallen income and by the fact
that in countries which are under economic depression the “value for money” is the
main criterion for consumers and therefore, consumers seek the better quality for
rational price [29]. On the other hand, Greek local food shoppers even amid
economic crisis have different consumption behaviour compared to consumers of
countries that suffered from economic crises such as Indonesia, West Africa
countries and Latin America countries. Some studies indicated that poor households
in those countries due to rapid income reduction and increase of the food prices
switched to cheaper, less preferred or lower quality staples to protect energy intake
[34], 49], [56]. Greek local food consumers on the other hand, are interested to
“value for money” and “health” issues as they are not poor (most of them are either
private employees or civil servants) and very well educated.
This study also indicated that Greek local food consumers are not influenced by
the proximity to the rural areas but they take into consideration marketing issues
such as advertisement, packing, and appearance, their buying behaviour is also
affected by the existence of children and their age and apart from local conventional
food they also buy local organic food. Education, marital status and occupation are
some other personal characteristics that have an impact on their buying behaviour
towards local food.
The fact that the finding of this study is in accordance with the existent
literature as well as the fact that the mentioned in the literature review consumer
behaviour theories and models including the food-related lifestyle (FRL), social
cognition and behavioural decision theory (BDT), theory of reasoned action (TRA)
and theory of planned behaviour (TRB) [2], [10], [11], [12], [23], [51], [55] do not take
into consideration all the above mentioned attitudes, values and characteristics
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC INNOVATIVE MARKETING
45
supports the validity and novelty of the conceptual model developed and used in
this study.
From the managerial perspective, this study provides a market segmentation of
the local food buyers. Therefore, the local food producers who mainly produce and
market local organic products and more particular olive oil, fruits, vegetables wine
and dairy products should focus on hedonism issues including freshness, cleanness
and taste; quality of the product, and its contribution to the human health
protection as well; and psychological factors such as prestige and curiosity affecting
the consumers of local foods. In their marketing plan conduction should consider
that those consumers are mainly well educated, married with children and usually
prefer open markets for their shopping. On the other hand, the producers of local
conventional vegetables, fruits and dairy products should take into consideration
that the consumers who buy those food are influenced by the attractiveness of the
packing of the product, its appearance, advertisement, existence of labeling that
refers the place of origin, certification of its origin, the production methods used,
and the contribution of those products to the local economy. Hence, they should
certify and label their products for their origin and differentiate them according to
this quality certification. Important elements for the marketing strategies of those
producers consist of the fact that these consumers are well educated, married with
one or two children, private employees, men and usually buy from open markets.
Moreover, a systematic promotion of the local food products should be
undertaken by all the involved stakeholders within the value chain of the products
in order to motivate consumers to prefer such products. This systematic promotion
should include advertisement and campaigns organised by the local authorities and
consumers’ organisations.
Therefore, consumers may spend their money within the framework of the local
economy buying local produced products instead of imported contributing in this
way to the reflection of the local economy that suffers so much due to the recent
economic crisis.
References
[1] Allen, D. (1997). Planned beef production and marketing. BSP Professional
Books, Oxford.
[2] Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
[3] Almli, V.L., Verbeke, W., Vanhonacker, F., Naes T. and Hersleth, M., (2011).
General image and attribute perceptions of traditional food in six European
Countries, Food Quality and Preference, 22, 129-138.
[4] Arvanitoyiannis, I. and Krystallis, A. (2005). Consumers’ Beliefs, Attitudes and
Intentions towards GM foods, from the “Perceived Safety vs Benefits” Point of
View, Applied Biotechnology Food Science and Policy, 40, 343-360.
[5] Barnett, V, (1991). Sample survey, principles and methods. Edward Arnold, Kent.
1-173 pp.
[6] Booth, D.A. and Shepherd, R. (1988). Sensory Influences on Food Acceptance:
the Neglected Approach to Nutrition Promotion in British Nutrition. Foundation
Nutrition Bulletin, 13:39-54.
[7] Botonaki, A. and Tsakiridou E. (2004). Consumers response evaluation of a
Greek quality wine. Food Economics - Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section C, 1
(2) 91-98.
46
CONSUMERS’ BUYING BEHAVIOUR TOWARDS LOCAL FOOD IN GREECE DURING ECONOMIC
DEPRESSION PERIOD
[8] Brown, C.(2003). Consumers' preferences for locally produced food: A study in
southeast Missouri. American Journal of Alternative Agribulture 18, (4), 213-224.
[9] Brown, E., Dury, S. and Holdsworth M., (2009). Motivation of consumers that
use local, organic fruit and vegetable box schemes in Central England and
Southern France. Appetite 53, 183-188.
[10] Brunso, K. and Grunert, K. G. (1995). Development and testing of a crossculturally valid instrument: food-related life style. Advances in Consumer
Research, 22. 475- 480.
[11] Brunso, K., Scholderer, J. and Grunert, K. G. (2004a). Closing the gap between
values and behaviour - a means -end theory of lifestyle. Journal of Business
Research, 57, 665-670.
[12] Brunso, K., Scholderer, J. and Grunert, K. G. (2004b). Testing relationships
between values and food related lifestyle: results from two European countries.
Appetite, 43, 195-205.
13] Chambers S., Lobb, A., Butler, L., Harvey, K. and Traill, W.B. (2007). Local,
national and imported foods: A qualitative study, Appetite 49 (1)208-13.
[14] Davies, D., Eddison, J., S, C. and Kirk, J.(2000). Does farm business marketing
behaviour effect livestock channel utilisation. Proceedings of the Agricultural
Economic Society Conference. Manchester. April, 14-17 2000. pp 1-22.
[15]Dury S., (2008). Les consommateurs de l' Herault face aux courts de
commercialisation et aux produits locaux. Montpellier: Cahiers de l' Observatoire
CROC.
[16] Errington, A. (1985). Delegation on farms: An examination of organisation
structure and managerial control on farms in the vale of the white horse. PhD
Thesis University of Reading.
[17] ELSTAT (2012). Greek National Accounts, http://www.statistics.gr/ (last
accessed 18 December 2014).
[18] Feagan, R. (2007). The place of food: mapping out the "local" in local food
systems. Progress in Human Geography, 31 (1) 23-42.
[19] Font i Furnols, M., Realini, C., Montossi, F., Sanudo, C., Campo, M.M., Oliver,
M.A., Nute G.R. and Guerrero L. (2011). Consumer's purchasing intention for
lamb meat affected by country of origin, feeding system and meat price: A
conjoint study in Spain, France and United Kingdom. Food Quality and
Preference, 22 443-451.
[20] Fotopoulos, C. and Krystallis A. (2002). Historical Evolution of Consumer's
Behaviour and Qualitive Marketing Studies, Stamulis Edition, Athens.
[21] Gallons, J., Toensmeyer, U.C., Bacon, J.R., and German, C.L., (1997). An
analysis of consumer characteristics concerning direct marketing of fresh
produce in Delaware: a case study. Journal of Food Distribution Research, 28 (1)
98-106.
[22] Govindasamy, R., Italia, J. and Liptak, C., (1997). Quality of agriculture
produce: consumer preferences and perceptions. New Jersey Agricultural
Experiment Station, Rutgers University, New Jersey.
[23]Grunert, K., Brunso, K. and Bisp, S. (1997). Food-related lifestyle: development
of a cross-culturally valid instrument for market surveillance. In L.R. Kahle, & L.
Chiagouris (Eds), Values, Lifestyles, and Psychographics, (pp. 337-354). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
[23] Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. and Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate
data analysis. Prentice Hall Inc, New Jersey.
[24] Harrigan, K. R. (1985). An application of Clustering for Strategic Group Analysis.
Strategic Management Journal, 6, 55-73.
[25] Helsen, K. and Green, P. E. (1991). A Computational Study of Replicated
Clustering with an Application to Market Segmentation. Decision Sciences, 22,
1124-1141.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC INNOVATIVE MARKETING
47
[26] Karelakis C., Abas Z., Galanopoulos K. and Polymeros K. (2013). Positive
effects of the Greek economic crisis on livestock farmer behaviour. Agronomy for
Sustainable Development, 33 (3) 445-456
[27] Kezis, A., King, F.R., Toensmeyer, U.C., Jack, R. and Kerr H.W., (1984).
Consumer acceptance and preference for direct marketing in the northeast.
Journal of Food Distribution Research, 15 (3) 38- 46.
[28] Kotler, P. (1994). Marketing management - analysis, planning, implementation,
and control. Prentice-Hall Inc, Englewood Clifts. 1-801 pp.
[29] Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Saunders, J. and Wong, V. (2001). Principles of
Marketing, European Edition, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
[30] Krystallis, A. and Chryssohoidis, G. (2005). Consumers willingness to pay (WTP)
for organic food: Factors that affect it and variation per organic product type.
British Food Journal, 107 (5) 320-343.
[31] Kupiec, B. and Revell, B. (1998). Speciality and artisanal cheeses today: The
product and the consumer. British Food Journal, 100, 236-243.
[32] Kyriakidis, S. (2015). Theory of planned behaviour: The intention-behaviour
relationship and the perceived behavioural control (PBC) relationship with
intention and behaviour. International Journal of Strategic Innovative Marketing,
3, 40-51.
[33] Lazaridis, P. (2003). Household meat demand in greece: A demand system
approach using microdata. Agribusiness, 19, 43-59.
[34] Levinsohn, J., Berry, S. and Friedman, J. (2003). Impacts of the Indonesian
Economic Crisis. Price Changes and the Poor. In Dooley M., Frankel J. (Eds)
Managing Currency Crisis in Emerging Markets, University of Chicago Press
[35] Loizou E., Michailidis A. and Chatzitheodoridis, F. (2013). Investigating the
drivers that influence the adoption of differentiated food products: The case of a
Greek urban area. British Food Journal, Vol. 115(7), pp. 917-953.
[36] McCluskey, J., Grimsrud, K., Ouchi, H,. and Wahl, T. (2003). Consumer
Response to Genetically Modified Food Products in Japan., Agricultural and
Resource Economic Review, 32 (2), 222-231.
[37] Michalopoulos, V. G. and Demoussis, M. P. (2001). Greek household
consumption of food away from home: A microeconometric approach. European
Review of Agricultural Economics, 28, 421-432.
[38] Moser, C. A. (1958). Survey methods in social investigation. Heinemann, London.
1-268 .
[39] Murray, K., Cullinane, S., Eddison, J. and Kirk, J. (1996). Agriculture in the far
south west. Seale Hayne Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Land Use, University of
Plymouth, 1-102 pp.
[40] Ness, M., Ness, M., Brennan, M., Oughton, E., Ritson, C. and Ruto, E., (2010).
Modelling consumer behaviour intentions towards food with implications for
marketing quality low-input and organic food, Food Quality and Preference, 21,
100 -111.
[41] OECD (2000). Oecd agricultural outlook 2000-2005. OECD, Paris, 29-93 pp.
[42] OECD (2011) http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/topics/income/(last accessed
15 Npvember 2014).
[43] Oppenheim, A. N. (2000). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude
measurement. Continuum, New York.
[44] Papista, E. and Krystallis A., (2012). Investigating the Types of Value and Cost of
Green Brands: Proposition of a Conceptual Framework, Journal of Business
Ethics, June 2013, 1-18
[45] Pirog, R. (2003). Ecolabel value assesment consumer and food business
perceptions of local foods. Iowa: Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture and
the Iowa State University Business Analysis Laboratory. Iowa.
[46] Punj, G. and Stewart, D. (1983). Cluster analysis in marketing research: Review
and suggestions for application. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 20, 134-48.
48
CONSUMERS’ BUYING BEHAVIOUR TOWARDS LOCAL FOOD IN GREECE DURING ECONOMIC
DEPRESSION PERIOD
[47] Roininen, K., Arvola, A. and Lahteenmaki, L. (2006). Exploring consumers'
perceptions of local food with two different qualitative techniques: Laddering and
world association. Food Quality and Preference, 17, 20-30.
[48] Ross, N.J., Anderson, M.D., Goldberg, J.P., Houser, R. and Lorge Rogers, B.
(1999). Trying and buying locally grown produce at the workplace: results of a
marketing intervention. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 14 (4) 171179.
[49] Ruel, M., Garret, J., Hawkes, C. and Cohen, J. (2010). The food, fuel, and
financial crises affect the urban and rural poor disproportionately: a review of the
evidence, Journal of Nutrition,140 (1) 170S - 176S.
[50] Schneider, M. and Francis, C. (2005). Marketing locally produced foods:
Consumer and farmer opinions in Washington County, Nebraska. Renewable
Agriculture and Food Systems, 20(4): 252-260.
[51] Scholderer, J., Brunso, K. and Grunert, K. G. (2002). Means - end chain theory
of lifestyle - A replication in the U.K. Advances in Consumer Research, 29, 551557.
[52] Siardos, G. (1997). Methodology of Agricultural Sociological Research. Ziti
Publications, Thessaloniki.
[53] Siardos, G. (1999). Methods of Multivariate Statistical Analysis. Examination of the
association between variables, Part One, Ziti Publications, Thessaloniki
[54] Siardos, G. (2000). Methods of Multivariate Statistical Analysis. Examination of the
association between variables, Part Two, Thessaloniki. 639 pp.
[55] Simonson, I., Carmon, Z., Dhar, R., Drolet A. and Nowlis S. (2001). Consumer
Research: In search of identity. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 249-275.
[56] Skoufias E., (2003). Economic Crises and Natural Disasters: Coping Strategies
and Policy Implications, World Development, 31 (7) 1087-1102.
[57] Steenkamp, J.E. (1997). Dynamics in Consumer Behaviour with Respect to
Agricultural and Food Products. In B. Wierenga, A. VanTilburg, K.. Grunert, J.
Steenkamp, and M. Webel (eds), Agricultural Marketing and Consumer Behaviour
in a Changing World, Kluwerd Academic Publishers, London.
[58] Tabachnick, B. G. and Fidell, L. S. (1989). Using Multivariate Statistics, Harper
Collins, New York.
[59] Thomson, J.S. and Kelvin, R.E. (1996). Suburbanites' perceptions about
agriculture: the challenge for media. Journal of Applied Communications, 80 (3)
11-20.
[60] Tsakiridou, E., Boutsouki, C, Zotos Y. and Mattas, K. (2008). Attitudes and
behaviour towards organic products: an exploratory study, International Journal
of Retail and Distribution Management, 36 (2) 158-175.
[61] Tsourgiannis, L. (2008). The marketing strategies of livestock enteprises in
objective one regions: A comparitive study between Greece and United kingdom.
Ph.D Thesis, University of Plymouth.
[62] Tzimitra-Kalogianni, I., Papadaki-Klavdianou A., Alexani, A. and Tsakiridou E.
(1999). Wine Routes in Northern Greece: consumer perceptions, British Food
Journal, 101, (11), 884-892.
[63] Vermeir, I. and Verbeke, W. (2008). Sustainable food consumption among young
adults in Belgium: Theory of planned behaviour and the role of confidence and
values. Ecological Economics, 64, 542-553.
[64] Winter, M. (2003). Embeddedness, the new food economy and defensive
localism. Journal of Rural Studies, 19, 23-32.
[65] Zepeda, L. and Deal, D. (2009). Organic and local food consumer behaviour:
Alphabet Theory. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33, 697-705.