IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i13p3580-d244080.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Neuroeconomics Meets Aquaponics: An Eye-tracking Pilot Study on Perception of Information about Aquaponics

Author

Listed:
  • Iris Schröter

    (Faculty of Agriculture, South Westphalia University of Applied Sciences, 59494 Soest, Germany)

  • Marcus Mergenthaler

    (Faculty of Agriculture, South Westphalia University of Applied Sciences, 59494 Soest, Germany)

Abstract

Aquaponics is an innovative food production method that combines the production of aquatic organisms with plant production. This can have environmental advantages such as reducing land conversion and resource input and waste output through nutrient cycling. To support the dissemination of aquaponics, key stakeholders need to be appropriately informed about this production method, an aspect that has received little attention so far. In this pilot study, visual perception of information about aquaponics was explored using eye tracking combined with a questionnaire. The results show that people distinguish between aquaponics variants when evaluating aquaponics. A production system with a more natural appearance is preferred. Allocation of visual attention is linked to the specific information content and to the assessment of the naturalness of aquaponics production. The results of the present study could form a basis for further research, not only to make information about food production systems more appropriate but also to develop food production systems in a way that people become more aware of the sustainability aspects of production methods and its products.

Suggested Citation

  • Iris Schröter & Marcus Mergenthaler, 2019. "Neuroeconomics Meets Aquaponics: An Eye-tracking Pilot Study on Perception of Information about Aquaponics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-20, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:13:p:3580-:d:244080
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/13/3580/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/13/3580/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Specht, Kathrin & Sanyé-Mengual, Esther, 2017. "Risks in urban rooftop agriculture: Assessing stakeholders’ perceptions to ensure efficient policymaking," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 13-21.
    2. Busch, Gesa & Gauly, Sarah Arianna & Spiller, Achim, 2017. "Ich sehe was, was du nicht siehst: Eine Eye Tracking Studie zur Betrachtung und Bewertung von Bildern aus der Schweinemast," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 66(2), June.
    3. Simon Goddek & Boris Delaide & Utra Mankasingh & Kristin Vala Ragnarsdottir & Haissam Jijakli & Ragnheidur Thorarinsdottir, 2015. "Challenges of Sustainable and Commercial Aquaponics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-26, April.
    4. Batra, Rajeev & Stayman, Douglas M, 1990. "The Role of Mood in Advertising Effectiveness," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 17(2), pages 203-214, September.
    5. Busch, Gesa & Schwetje, Carolin & Spiller, Achim, 2015. "Bewertung der Tiergerechtheit in der intensiven Hähnchenmast durch Bürger anhand von Bildern: ein Survey-Experiment," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 64(03), September.
    6. Wernsmann, Anna & Wildraut, Christiane & von Meyer-Höfer, Marie & Mergenthaler, Marcus, 2018. "Perception and Evaluation of a Pig Fattening Pen Based on Film Material in an Online Survey Experiment with German Citizens," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 67(4), December.
    7. Searles, K. & Münchhausen, S. & Kirwan, J. & Chiswell, H. & Maye, D. & Prosperi, P. & Vergamini, D. & Minarelli, F. & Tsakalou, E., 2018. "` Adding value to the fish ! ´ Business Strategies in Fish Farming and Small-Scale Fishery," 2018 Seventh AIEAA Conference, June 14-15, Conegliano, Italy 275654, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    8. Wille, Stefan Clemens & Busch, Gesa & Spiller, Achim, 2017. "Tiertransporte in der Schweinehaltung: Führen mehr Informationen und Wissen bei Verbrauchern zu einer positiveren Einstellung?," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 66(1), March.
    9. Van Loo, Ellen J. & Caputo, Vincenzina & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Seo, Han-Seok & Zhang, Baoyue & Verbeke, Wim, 2015. "Sustainability labels on coffee: Consumer preferences, willingness-to-pay and visual attention to attributes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 215-225.
    10. Muller, A. & Ferré, M. & Engel, S. & Gattinger, A. & Holzkämper, A. & Huber, R. & Müller, M. & Six, J., 2017. "Can soil-less crop production be a sustainable option for soil conservation and future agriculture?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 102-105.
    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. Gauly, Sarah & Busch, Gesa & Spiller, Achim & Enneking, Ulrich & Kunde, Susanne & von Meyer-Höfer, Marie, 2020. "How do People look at Pictures of Pigs? Analyzing Fixation Duration Depending on Pig Expression and Barn Type using Eye-Tracking," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(4), December.
    2. Schukat, Sirkka & Diekmann, Marie & Heise, Heinke, 2021. "What links neuroscience to agricultural economics? A review of neuroscientific methods literature in agricultural economic research and marketing," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(6), March.
    3. Kiryluk-Dryjska, Ewa & Rani, Anshu, 2023. "Neuroeconomic Studies In Agriculture And Food Economics: A Systematic Review Of Literature," Roczniki (Annals), Polish Association of Agricultural Economists and Agribusiness - Stowarzyszenie Ekonomistow Rolnictwa e Agrobiznesu (SERiA), vol. 2023(4).

    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. Gauly, Sarah & Müller, Andreas & Spiller, Achim, 2017. "New methods of increasing transparency: Does viewing webcam pictures change peoples' opinions towards modern pig farming?," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 260769, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    2. Dimitra I. Pomoni & Maria K. Koukou & Michail Gr. Vrachopoulos & Labros Vasiliadis, 2023. "A Review of Hydroponics and Conventional Agriculture Based on Energy and Water Consumption, Environmental Impact, and Land Use," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-26, February.
    3. Gauly, Sarah & Busch, Gesa & Spiller, Achim & Enneking, Ulrich & Kunde, Susanne & von Meyer-Höfer, Marie, 2020. "How do People look at Pictures of Pigs? Analyzing Fixation Duration Depending on Pig Expression and Barn Type using Eye-Tracking," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(4), December.
    4. Quevedo Cascante, Mónica & Acosta García, Nicolás & Fold, Niels, 2022. "The role of external forces in the adoption of aquaculture innovations: An ex-ante case study of fish farming in Colombia's southern Amazonian region," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    5. Katharina Momsen & Markus Ohndorf, 2019. "When do people exploit moral wiggle room? An experimental analysis in a market setup," Working Papers 2019-03, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    6. Shraddha Yadav & Yingjiao Xu & Helmut Hergeth, 2024. "Walking the Talk: Unraveling the Influence of the Sustainability Features of Leather Alternatives on Consumer Behavior toward Running Shoes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-19, January.
    7. Takahashi, Ryo, 2021. "How to stimulate environmentally friendly consumption: Evidence from a nationwide social experiment in Japan to promote eco-friendly coffee," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    8. Nurhayati Br Tarigan & Simon Goddek & Karel J. Keesman, 2021. "Explorative Study of Aquaponics Systems in Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-26, November.
    9. Samahita, Margaret & Holm, Håkan J., 2020. "Mining for Mood Effect in the Field," Working Papers 2020:2, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    10. Inés López López & Salvador Ruiz de Maya, 2012. "When hedonic products help regulate my mood," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 701-717, September.
    11. Danilo Bertoni & Daniele Cavicchioli & Franco Donzelli & Giovanni Ferrazzi & Dario G. Frisio & Roberto Pretolani & Elena Claire Ricci & Vera Ventura, 2018. "Recent Contributions of Agricultural Economics Research in the Field of Sustainable Development," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    12. Puccinelli, Nancy M. & Goodstein, Ronald C. & Grewal, Dhruv & Price, Robert & Raghubir, Priya & Stewart, David, 2009. "Customer Experience Management in Retailing: Understanding the Buying Process," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 15-30.
    13. Yokessa, Maïmouna & Marette, Stéphan, 2019. "A Review of Eco-labels and their Economic Impact," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 13(1-2), pages 119-163, April.
    14. Cristina Aibar-Guzmán & Francisco M. Somohano-Rodríguez, 2021. "Do Consumers Value Environmental Innovation in Product?," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, March.
    15. Mireia Ercilla-Montserrat & David Sanjuan-Delmás & Esther Sanyé-Mengual & Laura Calvet-Mir & Karla Banderas & Joan Rieradevall & Xavier Gabarrell, 2019. "Analysis of the consumer’s perception of urban food products from a soilless system in rooftop greenhouses: a case study from the Mediterranean area of Barcelona (Spain)," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(3), pages 375-393, September.
    16. Lamberz, Julia & Litfin, Thorsten & Teckert, Özlem & Meeh-Bunse, Gunther, 2019. "How Does the Attitude to Sustainable Food Influence the Perception of Customers at the Point of Sale? - an Eye-Tracking Study," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2019), Rovinj, Croatia, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Rovinj, Croatia, 12-14 September 2019, pages 476-483, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    17. Tibert Verhagen & Daniel Bloemers, 2018. "Exploring the cognitive and affective bases of online purchase intentions: a hierarchical test across product types," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 537-561, September.
    18. Hindsley, Paul & McEvoy, David M. & Morgan, O. Ashton, 2020. "Consumer Demand for Ethical Products and the Role of Cultural Worldviews: The Case of Direct-Trade Coffee," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    19. Takahashi, Ryo & Todo, Yasuyuki & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2018. "How Can We Motivate Consumers to Purchase Certified Forest Coffee? Evidence From a Laboratory Randomized Experiment Using Eye-trackers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 107-121.
    20. Drichoutis, Andreas & Nayga, Rodolfo & Klonaris, Stathis, 2010. "The Effects of Induced Mood on Preference Reversals and Bidding Behavior in Experimental Auction Valuation," MPRA Paper 25597, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:11:y:2019:i:13:p:3580-:d:244080. 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.