| Literature DB >> 35885288 |
Scott C Hutchings1, Luis Guerrero2, Levi Smeets3, Graham T Eyres4, Patrick Silcock4, Enrique Pavan1,5, Carolina E Realini1.
Abstract
This study investigated differences between general New Zealand consumers and ethnic Chinese consumers living in New Zealand regarding the importance of lamb attributes at the point of purchase and opinions of New Zealand lamb. A central location test survey was undertaken with 156 New Zealand consumers living in Dunedin, New Zealand, and 159 Chinese consumers living in Auckland, New Zealand. In terms of importance at the point of purchase, Chinese consumers rated a number of attributes as more important than New Zealand consumers by a difference of >1.0 on a 9-point Likert scale for importance: animal origin, feeding, age, presence of hormones/residues, traceability, food safety, place of purchase, brand/quality label, and label information (p < 0.05). New Zealand consumers rated the price of other meats and animal welfare as more important than Chinese consumers (p < 0.05); however, the differences in scores were <1.0. In terms of opinions, Chinese consumers also considered New Zealand lamb to be better value for money, more additive-free, and more likely to make people feel good (p < 0.05), by scores >1.0 on a 7-point Likert scale for agreement. New Zealand consumers considered New Zealand lamb more traditional and boring (p < 0.05); however, the differences in scores were <1.0.Entities:
Keywords: China; New Zealand; consumer; cross-cultural; lamb; preference
Year: 2022 PMID: 35885288 PMCID: PMC9317213 DOI: 10.3390/foods11142045
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Demographic characteristics of New Zealand and Chinese consumers in New Zealand (%).
| NZ | CN-NZ | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| NZ European | 86.6 | 0.0 | |
| Maori | 1.9 | 0.0 | |
| Samoan | 0.5 | 0.0 | |
| Cook Island Maori | 0.5 | 0.0 | |
| Tongan | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Niuean | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Chinese | 3.8 | 100.0 | |
| Indian | 0.5 | 0.0 | |
| Other | 6.2 | 0.0 | |
|
| |||
| Male | 53.8 | 43.7 | 0.071 |
| Female | 46.2 | 56.3 | 0.072 |
|
| |||
| 18–25 | 23.7 | 15.8 | 0.079 |
| 26–35 | 14.7 | 43.0 | <0.001 |
| 36–45 | 15.4 | 24.1 | 0.054 |
| 46–60 | 31.4 | 8.9 | <0.001 |
| 61 and over | 14.1 | 8.2 | 0.098 |
|
| |||
| Tier 1 * | 3.9 | 0.0 | 0.012 |
| Tier 2 # | 4.5 | 0.0 | 0.007 |
| Tier 3 @ | 12.3 | 1.3 | <0.001 |
| Tier 4 ^ | 17.5 | 5.1 | 0.001 |
| Tier 5 $ | 13.0 | 5.7 | 0.027 |
| Tier 6 + | 48.1 | 88.0 | <0.001 |
|
| |||
| Trades | 10.5 | 3.8 | 0.022 |
| Professional | 27.5 | 32.3 | 0.353 |
| Administration/Office | 5.2 | 1.9 | 0.112 |
| Sales/Services | 7.8 | 7.0 | 0.767 |
| Technical | 6.5 | 3.8 | 0.274 |
| Labourer | 1.3 | 0.0 | 0.149 |
| Home maker | 0.7 | 5.7 | 0.012 |
| Student | 20.3 | 28.5 | 0.092 |
| Retired | 9.2 | 7.6 | 0.620 |
| Unemployed | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.543 |
| Other employment | 9.8 | 8.9 | 0.775 |
|
| |||
| Less than NZD25,000 | 14.5 | 9.6 | 0.190 |
| NZD25,001 to NZD40,000 | 17.1 | 12.8 | 0.292 |
| NZD40,001 to NZD55,000 | 6.6 | 19.9 | <0.001 |
| NZD55,001 to NZD70,000 | 7.8 | 16.0 | 0.028 |
| NZD70,001 to NZD100,000 | 23.7 | 22.4 | 0.795 |
| NZD100,001 to NZD150,000 | 16.4 | 14.1 | 0.567 |
| More than NZD150,000 | 13.8 | 5.1 | 0.009 |
|
| |||
| 1 | 8.4 | 12.2 | 0.271 |
| 2 | 59.4 | 53.2 | 0.274 |
| 3 | 22.6 | 19.9 | 0.559 |
| 4 or more | 9.7 | 14.7 | 0.173 |
|
| |||
| 0 | 64.1 | 68.6 | 0.403 |
| 1 | 10.3 | 18.9 | 0.030 |
| 2 or more | 25.6 | 12.6 | 0.003 |
NZ (New Zealand); CN-NZ (Chinese consumers in New Zealand); * None; # Primary school; @ Middle school; ^ High school; $ Trades certificate or vocational college; + Bachelor’s degree or higher.
Dietary restrictions and consumption frequency of animal protein sources (%) (p value determined using a Chi-squared test for ethnicity).
| NZ | CN-NZ | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Low salt | 3.2 | 62.3 | <0.001 |
| Low sugar | 5.8 | 62.9 | <0.001 |
| Low calories | 2.6 | 42.1 | <0.001 |
| Do not follow diets | 88.5 | 24.5 | <0.001 |
|
| |||
| Daily | 0.0 | 1.3 | 0.160 |
| 4–5 times a week | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.312 |
| 2–3 times a week | 4.5 | 15.3 | 0.002 |
| Weekly | 19.5 | 31.8 | 0.013 |
| Fortnightly | 35.1 | 28.0 | 0.182 |
| Monthly | 40.3 | 23.6 | 0.002 |
| Never | - | - | |
|
| |||
| Daily | 0.6 | 3.2 | 0.106 |
| 4–5 times a week | 9.1 | 4.4 | 0.100 |
| 2–3 times a week | 33.8 | 20.9 | 0.011 |
| Weekly | 40.3 | 41.1 | 0.874 |
| Fortnightly | 11.7 | 20.3 | 0.039 |
| Monthly | 3.2 | 9.5 | 0.024 |
| Never | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.547 |
|
| |||
| Daily | 0.0 | 3.8 | 0.017 |
| 4–5 times a week | 1.4 | 8.2 | 0.006 |
| 2–3 times a week | 9.6 | 13.3 | 0.312 |
| Weekly | 27.4 | 27.8 | 0.930 |
| Fortnightly | 28.1 | 14.6 | 0.004 |
| Monthly | 28.8 | 22.2 | 0.185 |
| Never | 4.8 | 10.1 | 0.079 |
|
| |||
| Daily | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.547 |
| 4–5 times a week | 9.9 | 9.0 | 0.788 |
| 2–3 times a week | 43.4 | 25.0 | 0.001 |
| Weekly | 36.2 | 36.5 | 0.948 |
| Fortnightly | 5.9 | 10.3 | 0.164 |
| Monthly | 2.6 | 12.2 | 0.001 |
| Never | 0.7 | 6.4 | 0.007 |
|
| |||
| Daily | 0.7 | 1.9 | 0.343 |
| 4–5 times a week | 2.0 | 2.5 | 0.761 |
| 2–3 times a week | 12.8 | 19.6 | 0.103 |
| Weekly | 28.9 | 26.6 | 0.656 |
| Fortnightly | 22.8 | 21.5 | 0.784 |
| Monthly | 27.5 | 25.9 | 0.756 |
| Never | 5.4 | 1.9 | 0.102 |
NZ (New Zealand); CN-NZ (Chinese consumers in New Zealand).
Preferred level of cooking, meat qualities of interest to consumers at the point of purchase and purchase frequency of different lamb products (%) (p value determined using a Fishers exact test (Chi-squared) for ethnicity).
| NZ | CN-NZ | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Rare | 33.5 | 3.8 | <0.001 |
| Medium/Rare | 5.8 | 9.5 | 0.220 |
| Medium | 18.7 | 19.6 | 0.838 |
| Medium/Well-done | 38.7 | 49.4 | 0.058 |
| Well-done | 3.2 | 17.7 | <0.001 |
|
| |||
| Marbling | 23.7 | 45.9 | <0.001 |
| Leanness | 44.9 | 83.0 | <0.001 |
| Meat Colour | 49.4 | 91.2 | <0.001 |
| Portion size | 62.8 | 34.6 | <0.001 |
| Price | 85.3 | 80.5 | 0.263 |
|
| |||
| Leg Roast | 58.3 | 61.6 | 0.550 |
| Lamb chops | 71.2 | 42.8 | <0.001 |
| Lamb mince | 26.9 | 13.2 | 0.002 |
| Lamb rump | 5.1 | 8.2 | 0.278 |
| Lamb steaks | 39.1 | 53.5 | 0.011 |
| Lamb sausages | 34.6 | 11.3 | <0.001 |
| Lamb shanks | 28.8 | 40.3 | 0.033 |
| Shoulder roast | 28.8 | 42.8 | 0.010 |
NZ (New Zealand); CN-NZ (Chinese consumers in New Zealand).
The relative importance of lamb attributes at the point of purchase for New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers (mean ± SD) (1 = not important, 9 = very important) (p value determined using ANOVA with ethnicity as main effect).
| NZ | SD | CN-NZ | SD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Animal origin | 5.308 | 2.549 | 6.513 | 2.332 | <0.001 |
| Animal welfare | 5.871 | 2.349 | 5.095 | 2.431 | 0.004 |
| Animal feeding | 5.474 | 2.185 | 6.778 | 1.934 | <0.001 |
| Animal age | 4.660 | 2.231 | 6.228 | 2.203 | <0.001 |
| Animal sex | 2.232 | 1.840 | 3.513 | 2.214 | <0.001 |
| Pres. of hormones/residues | 6.141 | 2.541 | 8.063 | 1.440 | <0.001 |
| Traceability | 4.923 | 2.579 | 6.006 | 2.325 | <0.001 |
| Lamb price | 7.277 | 1.700 | 6.981 | 1.725 | 0.127 |
| Price of other meats | 6.768 | 2.032 | 6.044 | 2.166 | 0.003 |
| Fat content | 6.542 | 1.821 | 6.310 | 2.099 | 0.299 |
| Meat appearance | 7.000 | 1.381 | 7.861 | 1.068 | <0.001 |
| Meat colour | 6.908 | 1.607 | 7.943 | 1.048 | <0.001 |
| Meat flavour | 7.559 | 1.404 | 8.000 | 1.162 | 0.003 |
| Meat texture (tenderness) | 7.503 | 1.333 | 7.943 | 1.130 | 0.002 |
| Food safety (risk of disease) | 7.497 | 2.314 | 8.842 | 0.511 | <0.001 |
| Place of purchase | 4.922 | 2.246 | 6.582 | 1.939 | <0.001 |
| Trust in butcher | 5.806 | 2.468 | 5.633 | 2.201 | 0.512 |
| Time of day to purchase | 2.613 | 2.037 | 4.741 | 2.630 | <0.001 |
| Brand or quality label | 4.686 | 2.424 | 7.151 | 1.726 | <0.001 |
| Label information | 5.574 | 2.253 | 6.791 | 1.896 | <0.001 |
| Presentation (piece/slice/etc.) | 5.753 | 2.270 | 6.854 | 1.583 | <0.001 |
| Ease of preparation | 6.071 | 2.095 | 6.987 | 1.806 | <0.001 |
| Dish to be prepared with it | 5.374 | 2.154 | 5.810 | 2.224 | 0.079 |
| Knowledge of commercial cuts | 5.118 | 2.137 | 6.354 | 1.919 | <0.001 |
| Value for money | 7.315 | 1.628 | 7.405 | 1.584 | 0.625 |
Rated 1–9. NZ (New Zealand); CN-NZ (Chinese consumers in New Zealand).
New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers’ opinion of New Zealand lamb (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) (mean ± SD) (p value determined using ANOVA with ethnicity as main effect).
| NZ | SD | CN-NZ | SD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nutritious | 5.955 | 1.044 | 6.229 | 0.831 | 0.011 |
| Healthy | 5.921 | 1.064 | 6.459 | 0.738 | <0.001 |
| Well-known | 6.201 | 1.168 | 6.395 | 0.979 | 0.114 |
| Unique | 5.020 | 1.440 | 5.000 | 1.476 | 0.905 |
| Safe | 6.059 | 1.015 | 6.389 | 0.748 | 0.001 |
| Good value for money | 4.292 | 1.440 | 5.968 | 1.087 | <0.001 |
| Boring | 2.513 | 1.540 | 1.898 | 1.199 | <0.001 |
| Traditional product | 5.575 | 1.271 | 4.809 | 1.661 | <0.001 |
| Natural | 5.523 | 1.298 | 6.306 | 0.998 | <0.001 |
| Hard to digest | 2.477 | 1.410 | 2.293 | 1.424 | 0.254 |
| Produced sustainably | 4.941 | 1.368 | 5.468 | 1.277 | 0.001 |
| Convenient | 4.914 | 1.332 | 5.369 | 1.247 | 0.002 |
| Readily available | 5.448 | 1.391 | 6.168 | 1.022 | <0.001 |
| High quality | 5.714 | 1.203 | 6.287 | 0.801 | <0.001 |
| Contains no additive | 4.843 | 1.410 | 6.032 | 1.112 | <0.001 |
| Makes people feel good | 5.072 | 1.257 | 6.255 | 0.800 | <0.001 |
| Taste good | 6.091 | 0.986 | 6.306 | 0.790 | 0.035 |
| Supports NZ economy | 5.877 | 1.345 | 6.497 | 0.874 | <0.001 |
Rated 1–7. NZ (New Zealand); CN-NZ (Chinese consumers in New Zealand).