IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i10p3722-d176128.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Determines the Purchase Intention of Liquid Milk during a Food Security Crisis? The Role of Perceived Trust, Knowledge, and Risk

Author

Listed:
  • Mohammed Ziaul Hoque

    (School of Business and Economics, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Breivangviegn 23, 9010 Tromsø, Norway)

  • Md. Nurul Alam

    (Coats Bangladesh Limited, Sagorika Road, Chittagong 4219, Bangladesh)

Abstract

Until today, inadequate food supply, malnutrition, food adulteration, etc., are still the key concern in developing economies. In order to address these issues of food security crisis, and to stimulate a sustainable supply of liquid milk (LM), a consumer behavior model was created, in which consumers’ perceived knowledge, trust and risk were the major catalysts. To shed light on this context, the study examined the effect of consumers’ perceived knowledge (PK) on their perceived risk (PR) and trust (in information sources and in the product). Further, the influence of consumers’ perceived knowledge, risk, and trust on their attitude and purchase intention (PI) were investigated via an exclusive survey design. The survey was conducted in the urban area of Dhaka and Chittagong, Bangladesh. The sample of 712 households was selected randomly and interviewed using a structured questionnaire. The data were analyzed employing descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and structural equation modelling. The results show that during a food security crisis, consumers’ perceived knowledge amplifies their perceived risk and their trust in information sources (ISs). During such a period, their perceived knowledge does not induce purchase intention but trust in ISs does. Again, consumers’ perceived risk leads to reduced trust in products, and hence in LM, but not reduced trust in ISs. Moreover, a paradoxical influence was found, where consumers’ perceived risks had no significant effect on the PI, meaning that they underestimate the risk of purchasing LM. The results also show that when explaining the purchase intention of LM, the effect of ‘trust in ISs’ was higher than that of their perceived ‘trust in the product (LM)’ and perceived knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohammed Ziaul Hoque & Md. Nurul Alam, 2018. "What Determines the Purchase Intention of Liquid Milk during a Food Security Crisis? The Role of Perceived Trust, Knowledge, and Risk," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-22, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3722-:d:176128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3722/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3722/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hartmann, Monika & Klink, Jeanette & Simons, Johannes, 2015. "Cause related marketing in the German retail sector: Exploring the role of consumers’ trust," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 108-114.
    2. Forza, Cipriano & Filippini, Roberto, 1998. "TQM impact on quality conformance and customer satisfaction: A causal model," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Chen, Xianwen & Alfnes , Frode & Rickertsen , Kyrre, 2015. "Labeling Farmed Seafood," Working Paper Series 10-2015, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, School of Economics and Business.
    4. L. J. Frewer & C. Howard & D. Hedderley & R. Shepherd, 1996. "What Determines Trust in Information About Food‐Related Risks? Underlying Psychological Constructs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 473-486, August.
    5. Hemme, Torsten & Garcia, Otto & Khan, A.R., 2004. "A Review of Milk Production in Bangladesh with Particular Emphasis on Small-Scale Producers," PPLPI Working Papers 23774, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative.
    6. Lobb, Alexandra E., 2004. "A Methodological Review of the Impacts of Risk and Trust on Consumer Behaviour Towards Food Safety," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24994, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Ahasanul Haque & Naila Anwar & Farzana Yasmin & Abdullah Sarwar & Zariyah Ibrahim & Abdul Momen, 2015. "Purchase Intention of Foreign Products," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(2), pages 21582440155, June.
    8. Pieniak, Zuzanna & Verbeke, Wim & Scholderer, Joachim & Brunso, Karen & Olsen, Svein Ottar, 2008. "How do affective health-related and cognitive determinants influence fish consumption? A consumer survey in five European countries," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44326, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Mario Mazzocchi & Alexandra Lobb & W. Bruce Traill & Alessio Cavicchi, 2008. "Food Scares and Trust: A European Study," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 2-24, February.
    10. Mila, F.A. & Raha, S.K., 2012. "Consumers’ preferences for processed milk – A study in Mymensingh town," Journal of the Bangladesh Agricultural University, Bangladesh Agricultural University Research System (BAURES), vol. 10.
    11. Lichtenstein, Donald R & Bearden, William O, 1989. "Contextual Influences on Perceptions of Merchant-Supplied Reference Prices," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(1), pages 55-66, June.
    12. Peter Ellis & Mark Roberts, 2016. "Leveraging Urbanization in South Asia," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 22549.
    13. Branden B. Johnson & Paul Slovic, 1995. "Presenting Uncertainty in Health Risk Assessment: Initial Studies of Its Effects on Risk Perception and Trust," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 485-494, August.
    14. Shiping Liu & Ju‐Chin Huang & Gregory L. Brown, 1998. "Information and Risk Perception: A Dynamic Adjustment Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 689-699, December.
    15. Pieniak, Zuzanna & Vanhonacker, Filiep & Verbeke, Wim, 2013. "Consumer knowledge and use of information about fish and aquaculture," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 25-30.
    16. Gerrit Antonides, 2017. "Sustainable Consumer Behaviour: A Collection of Empirical Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-5, September.
    17. Bocker, Andreas & Hanf, Claus-Hennig, 2000. "Confidence lost and -- partially -- regained: consumer response to food scares," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 471-485, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Roshanak Roustaee & Hamed Rafiee & Delaram Ghodsi & Nasrin Omidvar & Hedayat Hosseini & Fatemeh Toorang & Hassan Eini-Zinab, 2023. "Challenges and Obstacles to Dairy Consumption in Iran from Stakeholders’ Perspectives Using a Food System Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-26, August.
    2. Marvello Yang & Abdullah Al Mamun & Muhammad Mohiuddin & Noorshella Che Nawi & Noor Raihani Zainol, 2021. "Cashless Transactions: A Study on Intention and Adoption of e-Wallets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.
    3. Laura Emma Milani Marin & Alessandra Cecilia Jacomuzzi, 2020. "Insects at the table: What consumers know," RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA', FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 0(1), pages 195-208.
    4. Chakraborty, Debarun & Siddiqui, Aaliyah & Siddiqui, Mujahid & Mohmmad H Alatawi, Fatmah, 2022. "Exploring consumer purchase intentions and behavior of buying ayurveda products using SOBC framework," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    5. Grzegorz Zasuwa, 2019. "The Role of Individual- and Contextual-Level Social Capital in Product Boycotting: A Multilevel Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, February.
    6. Chuanhui Liao & Huang Yu & Weiwei Zhu, 2020. "Perceived Knowledge, Coping Efficacy and Consumer Consumption Changes in Response to Food Recall," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, March.
    7. Mohammed Ziaul Hoque & Mohammad Akter Hossan, 2020. "Understanding the Influence of Belief and Belief Revision on Consumers’ Purchase Intention of Liquid Milk," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(2), pages 21582440209, May.
    8. Vítor João Pereira Domingues Martinho, 2021. "Food and Consumer Attitude(s): An Overview of the Most Relevant Documents," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, November.
    9. Rainer Haas & Alina Schnepps & Anni Pichler & Oliver Meixner, 2019. "Cow Milk versus Plant-Based Milk Substitutes: A Comparison of Product Image and Motivational Structure of Consumption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-25, September.

    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. Zhou, Li & Turvey, Calum & Hu, Wuyang & Ying, Ruiyao, 2015. "Fear and Trust: How Risk Perceptions of Avian Influenza Affect the Demand for Chicken," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 202077, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Erdem, Seda, 2018. "Who do UK consumers trust for information about nanotechnology?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 133-142.
    3. Cope, S. & Frewer, L.J. & Houghton, J. & Rowe, G. & Fischer, A.R.H. & de Jonge, J., 2010. "Consumer perceptions of best practice in food risk communication and management: Implications for risk analysis policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 349-357, August.
    4. Glynn T. Tonsor & Ted C. Schroeder & Joost M. E. Pennings, 2009. "Factors Impacting Food Safety Risk Perceptions," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 625-644, September.
    5. Nocella, Giuseppe & Stefani, Gianluca & Romano, Donato, 2011. "Preferences, trust and willingness to pay for food information: An analysis of the Italian Market," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114606, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Ying Zhu & Xiaowei Wen & May Chu & Gongliang Zhang & Xuefan Liu, 2021. "Consumers’ Food Safety Risk Communication on Social Media Following the Suan Tang Zi Accident: An Extended Protection Motivation Theory Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-19, July.
    7. Rault, Arnaud & Krebs, Stephane, 2011. "Livestock epidemics and catastrophic risk management: State of the art and prospects on economic dynamics," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114793, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Janneke De Jonge & Hans Van Trijp & Reint Jan Renes & Lynn Frewer, 2007. "Understanding Consumer Confidence in the Safety of Food: Its Two‐Dimensional Structure and Determinants," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 729-740, June.
    9. George Chryssochoidis & Anna Strada & Athanasios Krystallis, 2009. "Public trust in institutions and information sources regarding risk management and communication: towards integrating extant knowledge," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 137-185, March.
    10. Arnaud Rault & Stéphane Krebs, 2011. "Catastrophic risk and risk management, what do we know about livestock epidemics? State of the art and prospects," Working Papers SMART 11-05, INRAE UMR SMART.
    11. Menozzi, Davide & Finardi, C. & Davoli, U., 2013. "Food purchase for natural disaster relief: the case of Parmigiano-Reggiano sales in the aftermath of the 2012 earthquake waves," 2013 Second Congress, June 6-7, 2013, Parma, Italy 149889, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    12. Anneloes Meijnders & Cees Midden & Anna Olofsson & Susanna Öhman & Jörg Matthes & Olha Bondarenko & Jan Gutteling & Maria Rusanen, 2009. "The Role of Similarity Cues in the Development of Trustin Sources of Information About GM Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(8), pages 1116-1128, August.
    13. Lobb, Alexandra E., 2004. "A Methodological Review of the Impacts of Risk and Trust on Consumer Behaviour Towards Food Safety," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24994, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Elif Akben & Gökhan Özertan & Aslýhan D. Spaulding & Sayed H. Saghaian, 2008. "Consumer responses to the H5N1 Avian Influenza: the case of Turkey," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(15), pages 1-9.
    15. Zhou, Li & Turvey, Calum G. & Hu, Wuyang & Ying, Ruiyao, 2016. "Fear and trust: How risk perceptions of avian influenza affect Chinese consumers’ demand for chicken," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 91-104.
    16. Lynn J. Frewer & Susan Miles & Roy Marsh, 2002. "The Media and Genetically Modified Foods: Evidence in Support of Social Amplification of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 701-711, August.
    17. Annukka Vainio & Riikka Paloniemi & Vilja Varho, 2017. "Weighing the Risks of Nuclear Energy and Climate Change: Trust in Different Information Sources, Perceived Risks, and Willingness to Pay for Alternatives to Nuclear Power," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 557-569, March.
    18. Olga Untilov & Stéphane Ganassali, 2020. "Product‐harm science communication: The halo effect and its moderators," Post-Print hal-02957579, HAL.
    19. Macready, Anna L. & Hieke, Sophie & Klimczuk-Kochańska, Magdalena & Szumiał, Szymon & Vranken, Liesbet & Grunert, Klaus G., 2020. "Consumer trust in the food value chain and its impact on consumer confidence: A model for assessing consumer trust and evidence from a 5-country study in Europe," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    20. Lynn J. Frewer & Chaya Howard & Duncan Hedderley & Richard Shepherd, 1998. "Methodological Approaches to Assessing Risk Perceptions Associated with Food‐Related Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 95-102, February.

    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:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3722-:d:176128. 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.