| Literature DB >> 35162164 |
Julia Wojciechowska-Solis1, Aleksandra Kowalska2, Milena Bieniek3, Monika Ratajczyk3, Louise Manning4.
Abstract
The main objective of the study was to compare young consumer purchasing behaviour towards organic food in Poland (PL) and the United Kingdom (UK), countries with different levels of organic market maturity. The study was conducted by means of an online survey questionnaire during the COVID-19 pandemic between December 2020 and February 2021. The sample consisted of 862 PL and 161 UK consumers. 31% of PL respondents and 58.4% of UK respondents indicated they purchase organic products. Descriptive statistics, the Mann-Whitney U test and the two proportion Z test were used for statistical analyses. The results indicate that young consumers pay particular attention to the freshness and quality of consumed products. Concern for their own health and that of their loved ones, as well as the desire to eat better-quality products were the main motivations for the respondents to purchase organic products. Organic vegetables and fruits, eggs, dairy products, and meat and meat products, were among the most frequently purchased products in the studied cohorts. Experts (e.g., a dietitian, physician) were declared to be the first source of information concerning food products for young consumers. Next, family members were indicated. Social media content (PL respondents) and information from websites managed by institutions (UK respondents) were mentioned as the third source. UK consumers preferred short supply chains. The present study can be used by government bodies and companies to select the most effective communication channels for education and advertising and to develop effective commercial strategies aimed at young consumers.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; buying motives; healthy food choices; information sources; organic products; sustainable food consumption
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35162164 PMCID: PMC8834575 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19031137
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Demographic structure of the sample from the UK and the PL populations.
| Variables | PL | UK | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Study sample | N | 812 | 161 |
| Gender | Female | 72.5% | 75% |
| Male | 27.5% | 25% | |
| Age | Generation Z | 66.1% | 37.9% |
| Generation Y | 33.9% | 62.1% | |
| Place of residence | Lublin/Cirencester | 39.8% | 19.9% |
| Another town in PL/UK | 58.7% | 68.3% | |
| Another town outside PL/UK | 1.5% | 11.8% | |
| Student status | Yes | 84.2% | 62.1% |
| No | 15.8% | 37.9% | |
| University | Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin/Royal Agricultural University in Cirencester | 66.2% | 45.9% |
| Other | 33.8% | 54.1% | |
| Perceived financial situation | Very bad (I am not able to meet my basic needs) | 0.1% | 1.2% |
| Bad (I am only able to meet my basic needs) | 7.0% | 8.1% | |
| Average (I can afford to buy most of the things I would like to have) | 53.5% | 45.3% | |
| Good (I can afford to buy what I want) | 28.1% | 19.9% | |
| Very good (I can afford to buy what I want and save/invest some money) | 11.2% | 25.5% | |
| Nationality | PL/UK | 93.7% | 65.2% |
| Other | 6.3% | 34.8% | |
| Food allergy | Yes | 16.6% | 19.9% |
| No | 84% | 80.1% | |
The meaning of the term “healthy eating” in the surveyed groups—averages and p-values in the Mann–Whitney U test for the differences between respondents from PL and the UK.
| Response | Mean |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| PL | UK | ||
| Ensuring the freshness of my food | 4.53 | 4.4 |
|
| Making sure that I eat foods that are good for me and avoid foods that are bad for me | 4.32 | 4.37 | 0.095 |
| Ensuring the quality of my food | 4.3 | 4.26 | 0.414 |
| Ensuring the safety of my food | 4.06 | 4.21 |
|
| Ensuring that my diet is adapted to my lifestyle (physical activity, occupation, etc.) | 3.9 | 4.19 |
|
| Ensuring the appropriate nutrient balance of my food intake | 3.84 | 4.28 |
|
| Ensuring the provenance of my food | 3.73 | 3.62 | 0.143 |
| Ensuring the appropriate calorific balance of my food intake | 3.67 | 3.99 |
|
| Eating at appropriate meal times | 3.57 | 3.7 | 0.085 |
| Trying to reduce the environmental impact of my food choices | 3.41 | 3.81 |
|
Note: The average calculated on a rating scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Statistically significant differences were highlighted in bold (* p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001). PL group: n = 812, UK group: n = 161.
Prominent sources of food and nutrition-related information for the UK and PL samples—fractions of groups, two-proportions Z-test statistics and p-values.
| Type of Information Source | N | Percentage | Z |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PL | UK | PL | UK | |||
|
| ||||||
| Experts, e.g., dietitians, physicians | 206 | 70 | 25.5% | 43.5% | −4.6266 |
|
| Family | 158 | 25 | 19.5% | 15.5% | 1.1854 | 0.234 |
| Websites managed by institutions | 131 | 16 | 16.2% | 9.9% | 2.0213 |
|
| Social media, e.g., Facebook | 106 | 3 | 13.1% | 1.9% | 4.1238 |
|
| Bloggers | 53 | 3 | 6.6% | 1.9% | 2.3291 |
|
| Professional literature | 53 | 12 | 6.6% | 7.5% | −0.4181 | 0.674 |
| Friends | 43 | 5 | 5.3% | 3.1% | 1.1806 | 0.238 |
| Mass media (radio, TV) | 29 | 5 | 3.6% | 3.1% | 0.3019 | 0.764 |
| Cookbooks | 9 | 15 | 1.1% | 9.3% | −6.1202 |
|
| Newspapers and magazines (in paper) | 4 | 1 | 0.5% | 0.6% | −0.205 | 0.841 |
| Other | 17 | 6 | 2.1% | 3.7% | −1.2379 | 0.215 |
|
| ||||||
| Experts, e.g., dietitians, physicians | 385 | 110 | 47.6% | 68.3% | −4.8061 |
|
| Websites managed by institutions | 368 | 59 | 45.5% | 36.6% | 2.0641 |
|
| Family | 351 | 75 | 43.4% | 46.6% | −0.7465 | 0.453 |
| Social media, e.g., Facebook | 313 | 24 | 38.7% | 14.9% | 5.7879 |
|
| Friends | 232 | 40 | 28.7% | 24.8% | 0.9887 | 0.322 |
| Bloggers | 205 | 14 | 25.3% | 8.7% | 4.6131 |
|
| Professional literature | 185 | 47 | 22.9% | 29.2% | −1.7181 | 0.085 |
| Mass media (radio, TV) | 118 | 14 | 14.6% | 8.7% | 1.9907 |
|
| Cookbooks | 107 | 61 | 13.2% | 37.9% | −7.552 |
|
| Newspapers and magazines (in paper) | 51 | 11 | 6.3% | 6.8% | −0.2502 | 0.80258 |
| Other | 91 | 24 | 11.2% | 14.9% | −1.3114 | 0.1902 |
Note: Two-tailed hypothesis was tested. Statistically significant differences between groups were highlighted in bold (* p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001). PL group: n = 812, UK group: n = 161.
The differences in significance of selected attributes of purchased food products between respondents from PL and the UK.
| Product Attribute | Mean |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| PL | UK | ||
| The UK/PL provenance | 3.44 | 3.76 |
|
| Food is produced in a traditional manner | 3.30 | 3.25 | 0.387 |
| The food is organically certified | 3.14 | 3.22 | 0.380 |
| Food products are produced in the region I live in | 2.99 | 3.38 |
|
| The food is a ‘low food miles’ product | 2.89 | 3.63 |
|
Note: The average calculated on a rating scale from 1 (completely insignificant) to 5 (very significant). The Mann–Whitney U test was used to calculate the probability value (p). Statistically significant differences are highlighted in bold (*** p < 0.001).
Figure 1Attitude towards organic products among people purchasing organic food in the surveyed countries.
The differences in motivations for purchasing organic products between respondents from PL and the UK.
| Motivations | Mean |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| PL | UK | ||
| Taking care of your health generally and/or health of your close family members | 4.09 | 4.12 | 0.595 |
| Wishing to eat higher-quality food products | 4.06 | 4.16 | 0.127 |
| Taking care of the environment | 3.76 | 4.32 |
|
| Willingness to try something new | 3.63 | 3.24 |
|
| You feel organic food is fresher than other foods | 3.55 | 3.40 | 0.183 |
| Wishing to live a specific lifestyle | 3.52 | 3.19 |
|
| A lack of confidence in conventional food | 3.41 | 3.22 | 0.163 |
| Your health problems and/or health problems of your close family members | 3.07 | 3.03 | 0.804 |
| The influence of what you have seen on social media | 2.83 | 2.27 |
|
| The influence of people you live with | 2.71 | 2.67 | 0.794 |
| Organic food consumption has become fashionable | 2.4 | 2.39 | 0.980 |
Note: The average calculated on a rating scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The Mann–Whitney U test was used to calculate the probability value (p). Statistically significant differences were highlighted in bold (** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001).
The differences in frequency of purchasing certain organic product categories between respondents from PL and the UK.
| Product Category | Mean |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| PL | UK | ||
| Eggs | 3.65 | 3.91 | 0.223 |
| Fresh fruits and vegetables | 3.62 | 3.89 |
|
| Olive oil | 2.95 | 3.16 | 0.241 |
| Meat and meat preparations | 2.92 | 3.46 |
|
| Dairy products | 2.85 | 3.61 |
|
| Groats (e.g., buckwheat) | 2.78 | 2.38 |
|
| Coffee and tea | 2.74 | 3.26 |
|
| Pasta | 2.72 | 2.91 | 0.307 |
| Bread | 2.69 | 2.85 | 0.246 |
| Rice | 2.49 | 2.76 | 0.079 |
| Butter and margarine | 2.46 | 3.22 |
|
| Frozen fruits and vegetables | 2.34 | 2.41 | 0.713 |
| Chocolate | 2.11 | 2.84 |
|
| Cookies and pastries | 2.05 | 2.23 | 0.064 |
| Wine | 2.01 | 2.47 |
|
| Crisps and salty biscuits | 1.88 | 2.09 |
|
| Sweets and candy | 1.88 | 1.91 | 0.313 |
| Soft drinks | 1.84 | 1.85 | 0.289 |
| Beer | 1.79 | 1.83 | 0.082 |
Note: The average calculated on a rating scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always). The Mann–Whitney U test was used to calculate the probability value (p). Statistically significant differences were highlighted in bold (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001).