IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i7p4338-d787831.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceived Consumer Effectiveness and Willingness to Pay for Credence Product Attributes of Sustainable Foods

Author

Listed:
  • Ildiko Kovacs

    (Department of Marketing, Faculty of International Management and Business, Budapest Business School, University of Applied Sciences, 1165 Budapest, Hungary)

  • Eva Reka Keresztes

    (Department of Methodology for Social Studies, Faculty of International Management and Business, Budapest Business School, University of Applied Sciences, 1165 Budapest, Hungary)

Abstract

While perceived consumer effectiveness has consistently been linked to socially conscious attitudes, such as sustainable consumption decisions, the concept appears to have been confounded with other related constructs in the empirical studies measuring its effects on consumer buying intentions and consumer behaviour. A sustainable food consumer evaluation is based on product values and credibility to health, origin, environment, and ethical concerns. The research aimed to examine if sustainability-related perceived consumer effectiveness has an impact on purchase intention and willingness to pay for sustainable food products, in order to provide information on the pricing of sustainable foods. The study was carried out using a quantitative approach on a sample of 1204 young consumers using a self-administered online questionnaire. The results indicated a significant positive relationship between perceived consumer effectiveness and consumers’ willingness to pay a premium price for sustainable food attributes. Based on this willingness to pay a premium price for food products, a WTP Index was developed. The findings revealed that perceived effectiveness has a strong connection with the buying intention of food products with sustainable attributes.

Suggested Citation

  • Ildiko Kovacs & Eva Reka Keresztes, 2022. "Perceived Consumer Effectiveness and Willingness to Pay for Credence Product Attributes of Sustainable Foods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-17, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:4338-:d:787831
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/4338/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/4338/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Iryna Printezis & Carola Grebitus & Stefan Hirsch, 2019. "The price is right!? A meta-regression analysis on willingness to pay for local food," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Patrick Pelsmacker & Wim Janssens, 2007. "A Model for Fair Trade Buying Behaviour: The Role of Perceived Quantity and Quality of Information and of Product-specific Attitudes," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 75(4), pages 361-380, November.
    3. Del Giudice, Teresa & Cavallo, Carla & Vecchio, Riccardo, 2018. "Credence Attributes, Consumers Trust and Sensory Expectations in Modern Food Market: Is there a Need to Redefine their Role?," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 9(4), August.
    4. María Manuela Palacios-González & Antonio Chamorro-Mera, 2020. "Analysis of Socially Responsible Consumption: A Segmentation of Spanish Consumers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-15, October.
    5. Daniel Hanss & Gisela Böhm & Rouven Doran & Andreas Homburg, 2016. "Sustainable Consumption of Groceries: the Importance of Believing that One Can Contribute to Sustainable Development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(6), pages 357-370, November.
    6. Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
    7. Vermeir, Iris & Verbeke, Wim, 2008. "Sustainable food consumption among young adults in Belgium: Theory of planned behaviour and the role of confidence and values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 542-553, January.
    8. Patrick Pelsmacker & Wim Janssens & Caroline Mielants, 2005. "Consumer values and fair-trade beliefs, attitudes and buying behaviour," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 2(2), pages 50-69, December.
    9. Giuseppina Migliore & Massimiliano Borrello & Alessia Lombardi & Giorgio Schifani, 2018. "Consumers’ willingness to pay for natural food: evidence from an artefactual field experiment," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 6(1), pages 1-10, December.
    10. Paolo Antonetti & Stan Maklan, 2014. "Feelings that Make a Difference: How Guilt and Pride Convince Consumers of the Effectiveness of Sustainable Consumption Choices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 117-134, September.
    11. Silvia Coderoni & Maria Angela Perito, 2021. "Approaches for reducing wastes in the agricultural sector. An analysis of Millennials’ willingness to buy food with upcycled ingredients," Post-Print hal-03385406, HAL.
    12. Webb, Deborah J. & Mohr, Lois A. & Harris, Katherine E., 2008. "A re-examination of socially responsible consumption and its measurement," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 91-98, February.
    13. Syed Shah Alam & Maisarah Ahmad & Yi-Hui Ho & Nor Asiah Omar & Chieh-Yu Lin, 2020. "Applying an Extended Theory of Planned Behavior to Sustainable Food Consumption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-14, October.
    14. Ellen, Pam Scholder, 1994. "Do we know what we need to know? Objective and subjective knowledge effects on pro-ecological behaviors," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 43-52, May.
    15. Mamouni Limnios, Elena & Schilizzi, Steven G.M. & Burton, Michael & Ong, Angeline & Hynes, Niki, 2016. "Willingness to pay for product ecological footprint: Organic vs non-organic consumers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 338-348.
    16. Johanna Lena Dahlhausen & Cam Rungie & Jutta Roosen, 2018. "Value of labeling credence attributes—common structures and individual preferences," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 741-751, November.
    17. Lee, Min-Young & Jackson, Vanessa & Miller-Spillman, Kimberly A. & Ferrell, Erika, 2015. "Female consumers׳ intention to be involved in fair-trade product consumption in the U.S.: The role of previous experience, product features, and perceived benefits," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 91-98.
    18. Moser, Riccarda & Raffaelli, Roberta & Thilmany, Dawn D., 2011. "Consumer Preferences for Fruit and Vegetables with Credence-Based Attributes: A Review," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 14(2), pages 1-22, May.
    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. João M. Lopes & Luis Filipe Silva & Ilda Massano-Cardoso & Ana Galhardo, 2024. "Green Purchase Determinants in a Peripheral Region of Europe: How Can Green Marketing Influence Consumers’ Decisions? The Mediating Role of Green Awareness of Price," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-24, November.
    2. Rim Lassoued & Janet Music & Sylvain Charlebois & Stuart J. Smyth, 2023. "Canadian Consumers’ Perceptions of Sustainability of Food Innovations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-22, April.
    3. Rajumesh Sivarajah, 2024. "Exploring the impact of psychological and social factors on green consumer behaviour: a comprehensive review of green marketing tactics," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 4(12), pages 1-26, December.
    4. McDowell, R.W. & Kaye-Blake, W., 2023. "Viewpoint: Act local, effect global: Integrating farm plans to solve water quality and climate change problems," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    5. Kristia Kristia & Sándor Kovács & Zoltán Bács & Mohammad Fazle Rabbi, 2023. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Sustainable Food Consumption: Historical Evolution, Dominant Topics and Trends," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-24, June.
    6. Supawan Visetnoi & Wayne Nelles, 2023. "Can Organic Pork Help Achieve Sustainable Development Goals in Thailand?," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, September.
    7. Ha-Won Jang & Meehee Cho, 2022. "Application of the Constraint Negotiation Theory to the Plant-Based Meat Alternatives Food Service Business: An Exploration of Perceived Value and Negotiation–Constraint–Visit Intention Relationships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-16, May.

    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. María Manuela Palacios-González & Antonio Chamorro-Mera, 2020. "Analysis of Socially Responsible Consumption: A Segmentation of Spanish Consumers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-15, October.
    2. Wintschnig, Bea Alexandra, 2021. "The Attitude-Behavior Gap – Drivers and Barriers of Sustainable Consumption," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 6(2), pages 324-346.
    3. Chad M. Baum & Robert Weigelt, 2019. "How Where I Shop Influences What I Buy: The Importance of the Retail Format in Sustainable Tomato Consumption," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Chai & Chad M. Baum (ed.), Demand, Complexity, and Long-Run Economic Evolution, pages 141-169, Springer.
    4. Paweł Brzustewicz & Anupam Singh, 2021. "Sustainable Consumption in Consumer Behavior in the Time of COVID-19: Topic Modeling on Twitter Data Using LDA," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-20, September.
    5. Azzurra ANNUNZIATA & Debora SCARPATO, 2014. "Factors affecting consumer attitudes towards food products with sustainable attributes," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 60(8), pages 353-363.
    6. Erifili Papista & Athanasios Krystallis, 2013. "Investigating the Types of Value and Cost of Green Brands: Proposition of a Conceptual Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(1), pages 75-92, June.
    7. María Luisa Ríos-Rodríguez & José María Salgado-Cacho & Pilar Moreno-Jiménez, 2021. "What Impacts Socially Responsible Consumption?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-14, April.
    8. Vesselin Blagoev & Elena Shustova & Inna Mischenko, 2021. "Buyer Behaviour in the Case of Organic Agricultural Products," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 2, pages 124-139.
    9. Daniel Belanche & Luis V. Casaló & Carlos Flavián & Alfredo Pérez-Rueda, 2021. "The role of customers in the gig economy: how perceptions of working conditions and service quality influence the use and recommendation of food delivery services," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 15(1), pages 45-75, March.
    10. Ragna Nilssen & Geoff Bick & Russell Abratt, 2019. "Comparing the relative importance of sustainability as a consumer purchase criterion of food and clothing in the retail sector," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(1), pages 71-83, January.
    11. Ildikó Kovács & Marietta Balázsné Lendvai & Judit Beke, 2022. "The Importance of Food Attributes and Motivational Factors for Purchasing Local Food Products: Segmentation of Young Local Food Consumers in Hungary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-14, March.
    12. Katherine Fuller & Carola Grebitus, 2023. "Consumers' preferences and willingness to pay for coffee sustainability labels," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1007-1025, October.
    13. Feucht, Yvonne & Zander, Katrin, 2017. "Consumers’ attitudes on carbon footprint labelling. Results of the SUSDIET project," Thünen Working Paper 266396, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    14. Paolo Antonetti & Stan Maklan, 2014. "Feelings that Make a Difference: How Guilt and Pride Convince Consumers of the Effectiveness of Sustainable Consumption Choices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 117-134, September.
    15. Rombach, Meike & Widmar, Nicole Olynk & Byrd, Elizabeth & Bitsch, Vera, 2018. "Do all roses smell equally sweet? Willingness to pay for flower attributes in specialized retail settings by German consumers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 91-99.
    16. José Javier Pérez-Barea & Ricardo Espantaleón-Pérez & Peter Šedík, 2020. "Evaluating the Perception of Socially Responsible Consumers: The Case of Products Derived from Organic Beef," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-24, December.
    17. De Devitiis, Biagia & Viscecchia, Rosaria & Carfora, Valentina & Cavallo, Carla & Cicia, Gianna & Del Giudice, Teresa & Menna, Concetta & Nardone, Gianluca & Secca, Antonio, 2021. "Parents’ trust in food safety and healthiness of children’s diets: A TPB model explaining the role of retailers and government," Economia agro-alimentare / Food Economy, Italian Society of Agri-food Economics/Società Italiana di Economia Agro-Alimentare (SIEA), vol. 23(2), July.
    18. Agata Balinska & Ewa Jaska & Agnieszka Werenowska, 2023. "Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Behavior of Generation Z in the Context of Tourist Trips," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 945-959.
    19. Empen, Lena & Schulze, Birgit, 2014. "Analyse Des Einstellungs-Verhaltens-Zusammenhangs Bei Fair Gehandelter Schokolade," 54th Annual Conference, Goettingen, Germany, September 17-19, 2014 187323, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    20. Hongru Yan & Huaqi Chai, 2021. "Consumers’ Intentions towards Green Hotels in China: An Empirical Study Based on Extended Norm Activation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-15, 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:14:y:2022:i:7:p:4338-:d:787831. 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.