IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v10y2022i17p3215-d907541.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deployment of the Microeconomic Consumer Theory in the Artificial Neural Networks Modelling: Case of Organic Food Consumption

Author

Listed:
  • Ivan Jajić

    (Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia)

  • Tomislav Herceg

    (Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia)

  • Mirjana Pejić Bach

    (Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia)

Abstract

Organic food consumption has become a significant trend in consumer behaviour, determined by various motives, among which the price does not play a major role, thus reflecting the Lancaster approach to the microeconomic consumer theory. Additionally, artificial neural networks (ANNs) have proven to have significant potential in providing accurate and efficient models for predicting consumer behaviour. Considering these two trends, this study aims to deploy the Lancaster approach in the emerging area of artificial intelligence. The paper aims to develop the ANN-based predictive model to investigate the relationship between organic food consumption, demographic characteristics, and health awareness attitudes. Survey research has been conducted on a sample of Croatian inhabitants, and ANN models have been used to assess the importance of various determinants for organic food consumption. A Three-layer Multilayer Perceptron Neural Networks (MLPNN) structure has been constructed and validated to select the optimal number of neurons and transfer functions. One layer is used as the first input, while the other two are hidden layers (the first covers the radially symmetrical input, sigmoid function; the second covers the output, softmax function). Three versions of the testing, training, and holdout data structures were used to develop ANNs. The highest accuracy was achieved with a 7-2-1 partition. The best ANN model was determined as the model that was showing the smallest percent of incorrect predictions in the holdout stage, the second-lowest cross-entropy error, the correct classification rate, and the area under the ROC curve. The research results show that the availability of healthy food shops and consumer awareness of these shops strongly impacts organic food consumption. Using the ANN methodology, this analysis confirmed the validity of the Lancaster approach, stating that the characteristics or attributes of goods are defined by the consumer and not by the product itself.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivan Jajić & Tomislav Herceg & Mirjana Pejić Bach, 2022. "Deployment of the Microeconomic Consumer Theory in the Artificial Neural Networks Modelling: Case of Organic Food Consumption," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(17), pages 1-21, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:17:p:3215-:d:907541
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/17/3215/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/17/3215/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    2. Hwanseok Seo & Jaehyun Hwang, 2022. "Analysis of Decisive Elements in the Purchase of Alternative Foods Using Bivariate Probit Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-12, March.
    3. Hendler, Reuven, 1975. "Lancaster's New Approach to Consumer Demand and Its Limitations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(1), pages 194-199, March.
    4. Grunert, Klaus G. & Hieke, Sophie & Wills, Josephine, 2014. "Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 177-189.
    5. Gratiela Dana Boca, 2021. "Factors Influencing Consumer Behavior in Sustainable Fruit and Vegetable Consumption in Maramures County, Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    6. Jian Huang & Junyi Chai & Stella Cho, 2020. "Deep learning in finance and banking: A literature review and classification," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 1-24, December.
    7. Anita Silvana Ilak Peršurić & Ana Težak Damijanić, 2021. "Connections between Healthy Behaviour, Perception of Olive Oil Health Benefits, and Olive Oil Consumption Motives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-12, July.
    8. Geoff Hodgson, 1985. "The Rationalist Conception of Action," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 825-851, December.
    9. Friederike Albersmeier & Holger Schulze & Achim Spiller, 2009. "Evaluation and reliability of the organic certification system: perceptions by farmers in Latin America," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 311-324.
    10. Hwang, Jiyoung & Chung, Jae-Eun, 2019. "What drives consumers to certain retailers for organic food purchase: The role of fit for consumers’ retail store preference," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 293-306.
    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. McVey, Marty Jay, 1996. "Valuing quality differentiated grains from a total logistics perspective," ISU General Staff Papers 1996010108000012326, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Yu Jiang & H. Holly Wang & Shaosheng Jin & Michael S. Delgado, 2019. "The Promising Effect of a Green Food Label in the New Online Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, February.
    3. Kaleb S. Jada & Mequanint B. Melesse & Marrit Berg, 2023. "The effects of safety certification and nutrition messaging on the demand for nutritionally enhanced food in urban Ethiopia," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 15(2), pages 395-409, April.
    4. Giovanna Piracci & Fabio Boncinelli & Leonardo Casini, 2022. "Wine consumers' demand for social sustainability labeling: Evidence for the fair labor claim," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(4), pages 1742-1761, December.
    5. Sigurdsson, Valdimar & Larsen, Nils Magne & Pálsdóttir, Rakel Gyða & Folwarczny, Michal & Menon, R.G. Vishnu & Fagerstrøm, Asle, 2022. "Increasing the effectiveness of ecological food signaling: Comparing sustainability tags with eco-labels," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1099-1110.
    6. Wayne DeSarbo & Kamel Jedidi & Joel Steckel, 1991. "A stochastic multidimensional scaling procedure for the empirical determination of convex indifference curves for preference/choice analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 56(2), pages 279-307, June.
    7. Utami, Anisa & Harianto, Harianto & Krisnamurthi, Bayu, 2021. "Price Interdependence in Indonesian Rice Market in the Presence of Quality Differential," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315229, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Kitchel, Hannah & Boehm, Rebecca L. & Cash, Sean B., 2018. "Does Consumer Climate Change Knowledge and Risk Perception Influence Willingness to Pay for Climate Mitigation in Beverage Crop Production?," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274067, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Cynthia I. Escobedo del Bosque & Achim Spiller & Antje Risius, 2021. "Who Wants Chicken? Uncovering Consumer Preferences for Produce of Alternative Chicken Product Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-21, February.
    10. Mario Scerri, 2012. "The introduction of the systems of innovation approach in economics curricula," International Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation and Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(1/2), pages 12-27.
    11. Ali Eldesouky & Francisco J. Mesias & Miguel Escribano, 2020. "Consumer Assessment of Sustainability Traits in Meat Production. A Choice Experiment Study in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-16, May.
    12. Cordula Hinkes & Inken Christoph-Schulz, 2020. "No Palm Oil or Certified Sustainable Palm Oil? Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences and the Role of Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-26, September.
    13. repec:zbw:rwirep:0418 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Gutkind E., 1983. "Towards basic needs policies in development planning," ILO Working Papers 992220133402676, International Labour Organization.
    15. Erpeng Wang & Zhifeng Gao, 2017. "Chinese Consumer Quality Perception and Preference of Traditional Sustainable Rice Produced by the Integrated Rice–Fish System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-13, December.
    16. Davide Menozzi & Thong Tien Nguyen & Giovanni Sogari & Dimitar Taskov & Sterenn Lucas & José Luis Santiago Castro-Rial & Cristina Mora, 2020. "Consumers’ Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Fish Products with Health and Environmental Labels: Evidence from Five European Countries," Post-Print hal-02935812, HAL.
    17. Bronnmann, Julia & Asche, Frank, 2017. "Sustainable Seafood From Aquaculture and Wild Fisheries: Insights From a Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 113-119.
    18. Kunze, Lars & Suppa, Nicolai, 2013. "Job Characteristics and Labour Supply," Ruhr Economic Papers 418, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    19. Rebecca Boehm & Hannah Kitchel & Selena Ahmed & Anaya Hall & Colin M. Orians & John Richard Stepp & Al Robbat, Jr. & Timothy S. Griffin & Sean B. Cash, 2019. "Is Agricultural Emissions Mitigation on the Menu for Tea Drinkers?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-20, September.
    20. Lars Kunze & Nicolai Suppa, 2013. "Job Characteristics and Labour Supply," Ruhr Economic Papers 0418, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    21. Yuan, Rao & Asioli, Daniele & Jin, Shaosheng & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2021. "Consumers’ Valuation for Cultured Chicken Meat: A Multi-city Choice Experiment in China," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313957, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:17:p:3215-:d:907541. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.