IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aae/journl/v17y2021i1p269-299.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer attitudes and behavior towards organic products: Evidence from the Lithuanian market

Author

Listed:
  • Lina PilelienÄ—

    (Ph.D., Professor, Vytautas Magnus University, Faculty of Economics and Management, K. DonelaiÄ io str. 58, LT-44248, Kaunas, Lithuania)

  • Vilma TamulienÄ—

    (Ph.D., Associate Professor, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University; Department of Management; Business Management Faculty. Sauletekio av. 11, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania)

Abstract

Purpose: The paper analyzes consumer attitudes and related behavior towards organic products and determines the factors affecting consumer attitudes towards organic products andLithuanian consumers' choices. Methodology: Previous scientific works are analyzed and generalized in order to provide scientific substantiation for the research. A questionnaire survey is provided in order to approve the theoretically established factors in the Lithuanian market of organic products. The questionnaire is comprised of 23 statements representing eight latent variables: six possible reasons for the choice of an organic product (health issues; environmental concerns; food safety and quality; economic reasons; social reasons; psychological reasons) and two possible outcomes (intentions to choose organic products; actual organic product purchases). The survey results are based on the answers of 269 respondents representing the population of the four biggest cities in Lithuania. Findings: The results indicate the structural differences between theory and its application for the Lithuanian market; therefore, the factors are reestablished. The research results show the high level of Lithuanian consumers’ environmental consciousness; also, a willingness to share information relating to environmental issues with friends; and active engagement in sharing information about environmentally related issues. However, consumer awareness of the relationship between organic products, and health and quality issues is lower, indicating the necessity to be managed. Also, consumers do not express high agreement that organic products have to be more expensive; they do not intend to pay a higher price for them. Research results show that Lithuanian consumers do not choose organic products often and they also do not express conformable behavior (resulting from organic product purchases). Implications for theory and practice: The research results enable the ability to compose a clear framework of Lithuanian consumer attitudes and behavior towards organic products. The established factors affecting consumer attitudes and behavior can be further explored and modeled according to different market situations. Originality and value: Based on the results, companies can elaborate on effective marketing strategies fostering consumer attitudes and behavior in a particular way.

Suggested Citation

  • Lina PilelienÄ— & Vilma TamulienÄ—, 2021. "Consumer attitudes and behavior towards organic products: Evidence from the Lithuanian market," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 17(1), pages 269-299.
    • Handle: RePEc:aae:journl:v:17:y:2021:i:1:p:269-299
    DOI: 10.7341/20211719
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://jemi.edu.pl/uploadedFiles/file/all-issues/vol17/issue1/JEMI_Vol17_Issue1_2021_Article10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.7341/20211719?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maria Raquel David Pereira Ventura Lucas & Cristina Isabel Galamba Oliveira Costa Marreiros, 2008. "Quality, Safety and Consumer Behaviour Towards Organic Food in Germany and Portugal," CEFAGE-UE Working Papers 2008_05, University of Evora, CEFAGE-UE (Portugal).
    2. Shiksha Kushwah & Amandeep Dhir & Mahim Sagar & Bhumika Gupta, 2019. "Determinants of organic food consumption. A systematic literature review on motives and barriers," Post-Print hal-02559373, HAL.
    3. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9-10), pages 1082-1095, October.
    4. Katarzyna Bachnik & Justyna Szumniak-Samolej, 2018. "Social Initiatives in Food Consumption and Distribution as Part of Sustainable Consumption and Sharing Economy," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 14(2), pages 101-122.
    5. Pat Auger & Timothy Devinney, 2007. "Do What Consumers Say Matter? The Misalignment of Preferences with Unconstrained Ethical Intentions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 361-383, December.
    6. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Social norms and energy conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1082-1095.
    7. Elena Kostadinova, 2016. "Sustainable Consumer Behavior: Literature Overview," Economic Alternatives, University of National and World Economy, Sofia, Bulgaria, issue 2, pages 224-234, June.
    8. Jianming Wang & Richard C.M. Yam & Esther P.Y. Tang, 2013. "Ecologically conscious behaviour of urban Chinese consumers: the implications to public policy in China," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(7), pages 982-1001, September.
    9. Grunert, Suzanne C. & Juhl, Hans Jorn, 1995. "Values, environmental attitudes, and buying of organic foods," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 39-62, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alt, Marius, 2021. "Committing to behave pro-environmentally: An assessment of time and regulatee-size effects on the demand for environmental regulation," VfS Annual Conference 2021 (Virtual Conference): Climate Economics 242419, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    2. Peter John Robinson & W. J. Wouter Botzen, 2022. "Setting descriptive norm nudges to promote demand for insurance against increasing climate change risk," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 47(1), pages 27-49, January.
    3. Lillemo, Shuling Chen, 2014. "Measuring the effect of procrastination and environmental awareness on households' energy-saving behaviours: An empirical approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 249-256.
    4. Qin, Botao & Shogren, Jason, 2023. "Endogenous Social Norms, Mechanism Design, and Payment for Environmental Services," MPRA Paper 112878, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Peter Bergman, 2020. "Nudging Technology Use: Descriptive and Experimental Evidence from School Information Systems," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 15(4), pages 623-647, Fall.
    6. Burlig, Fiona & Preonas, Louis & Woerman, Matt, 2020. "Panel data and experimental design," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    7. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    8. Lane, Tom & Miller, Luis & Rodriguez, Isabel, 2024. "The normative permissiveness of political partyism," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    9. Schleich, Joachim & Faure, Corinne & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte & Tu, Gengyang, 2020. "Conveyance, envy, and homeowner choice of appliances," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    10. Richard G. Newell & Juha Siikamäki, 2014. "Nudging Energy Efficiency Behavior: The Role of Information Labels," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(4), pages 555-598.
    11. Abeer Mohamed Ali Abd Elkhalek, 2020. "An Assessment of the Applicability of Behavioral Economics’ Tools to Policy Making Process Considering Sustainable Development Goals," International Journal of Economics and Finance, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(10), pages 1-57, October.
    12. Carattini, Stefano & Gillingham, Kenneth & Meng, Xiangyu & Yoeli, Erez, 2024. "Peer-to-peer solar and social rewards: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 340-370.
    13. Mang, Clarissa & Castro, Silvia, 2023. "Breaking the Silence," VfS Annual Conference 2023 (Regensburg): Growth and the "sociale Frage" 277639, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Migchelbrink, Koen & Raymaekers, Pieter, 2023. "Nudging people to pay their parking fines on time. Evidence from a cluster-randomized field experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    15. Anwar Shah & Karim Khan & Muhammad Zubair, 2019. "Moral Hazard, Monitoring and Punishment: Evidence from a Field Experiment," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 58(2), pages 109-134.
    16. Damgaard, Mette Trier & Nielsen, Helena Skyt, 2018. "Nudging in education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 313-342.
    17. Chatzigeorgiou, I.M. & Andreou, G.T., 2021. "A systematic review on feedback research for residential energy behavior change through mobile and web interfaces," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    18. Alexandra E. Hill & Jesse Burkhardt, 2021. "Peers in the Field: The Role of Ability and Gender in Peer Effects among Agricultural Workers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(3), pages 790-811, May.
    19. Beatty, Timothy K.M. & Katare, Bhagyashree, 2018. "Low-cost approaches to increasing gym attendance," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 63-76.
    20. Fischbacher, Urs & Schudy, Simeon & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2021. "Heterogeneous preferences and investments in energy saving measures," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aae:journl:v:17:y:2021:i:1:p:269-299. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anna Ujwary-Gil (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://fundacjacognitione.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.