IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i13p5752-d1429739.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Young Consumers’ Price Perceptions in Purchasing Foods: Evidence from Greece

Author

Listed:
  • Zoi C. Kalyva

    (Laboratory of Food Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, University of Ioannina, 45110 Ioannina, Greece)

  • Ioanna S. Kosma

    (Laboratory of Food Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, University of Ioannina, 45110 Ioannina, Greece)

  • Dimitris Skalkos

    (Laboratory of Food Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, University of Ioannina, 45110 Ioannina, Greece)

Abstract

The recent consecutive economic and social crises impose sustainable “from farm to fork” food chain management to feed the global population. In this study, we investigated the price perceptions of young consumers (Gen Z) in purchasing foods in Greece to find out the determinants ensuring sustainable, future food consumption. We used eight overall price perception determinants, five with negative roles, namely value and price consciousness, coupon and sales proneness, and price mavenism, and three with positive roles, namely price–quality, price–value, and prestige–sensitivity for the formation of the study’s questionnaire. A total of 514 students (Gen Z, 85%) answered the questionnaire, promoted through the Google platform during September and October 2023. The data were analyzed with statistical tools, combining cross and chi-square tests. Between the negative determinants, the “value consciousness” price perceptions (71.02%) were the most important parameters in purchasing food, followed by “price consciousness” (55.02%) parameters. “Coupon proneness”, 48.4%, and “sales proneness”, 49%, were equally lower, while “price mavenism” parameters were minimally preferred by only 26.4% of the participants. Participants exhibited a major preference for the “value to price” interconnection (66.7%), such as good value for money, value exceeding a product’s price, and overvalued low-priced foods, while their preference for the “quality to price” interconnection was significantly lower (48.8%), such as in terms of getting what you pay for, more money for better quality, and priced, quality foods. The “prestige–sensitivity” price perception was outside of their preferences in terms of food purchasing (only 7.1%). Our findings indicate that young consumers (Gen Z) pay more attention to the values of negative and positive parameters concerning price perceptions when purchasing food rather than quality, coupons and sales, low prices, and mavenism, or even the prestige of the foods. This means that value issues such as the perceived environmental impact (green value), the climate crisis, the social signaling potential, and others are significant concerns, including their price perceptions for food purchases.

Suggested Citation

  • Zoi C. Kalyva & Ioanna S. Kosma & Dimitris Skalkos, 2024. "Young Consumers’ Price Perceptions in Purchasing Foods: Evidence from Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-12, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:13:p:5752-:d:1429739
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/13/5752/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/13/5752/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amiya Basu & Padmal Vitharana, 2009. "—Impact of Customer Knowledge Heterogeneity on Bundling Strategy," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 792-801, 07-08.
    2. Sujan, Mita, 1985. "Consumer Knowledge: Effects on Evaluation Strategies Mediating Consumer Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 12(1), pages 31-46, June.
    3. Klaus G. Grunert, 2005. "Food quality and safety: consumer perception and demand," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(3), pages 369-391, September.
    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. Rong Li & Amiya K. Basu, 2020. "Pricing Strategy for GM Food: Impact of Consumer Attitude Heterogeneity and GMO Food Labelling," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 291(1), pages 463-474, August.
    2. Stefanella Stranieri & Lucia Baldi & Alessandro Banterle, 2010. "Do Nutrition Claims Matter to Consumers? An Empirical Analysis Considering European Requirements," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 15-33, February.
    3. Kareklas, Ioannis & Muehling, Darrel D. & King, Skyler, 2019. "The effect of color and self-view priming in persuasive communications," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 33-49.
    4. Tingqiang Chen & Lei Wang & Jining Wang & Qi Yang, 2017. "A Network Diffusion Model of Food Safety Scare Behavior considering Information Transparency," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-16, December.
    5. Jabbar, Mohammad A. & Admassu, Samuel A., 2009. "Assessing consumer preferences for quality and safety attributes of food in the absence of official standards: the case of beef in Ethiopia," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 50120, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Deng, Qian (Claire) & Messinger, Paul R., 2022. "Dimensions of brand-extension fit," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 764-787.
    7. Hattori, Keisuke & Higashida, Keisaku, 2014. "Misleading advertising and minimum quality standards," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 1-14.
    8. Balaji, M.S. & Roy, Sanjit Kumar & Sadeque, Saalem, 2016. "Antecedents and consequences of university brand identification," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 3023-3032.
    9. Meyer, Christian H. & Fritz, Melanie & Schiefer, Gerhard, 2010. "Customer Communication of Regional Quality Efforts: A Case From the Grain Sector," 2010 International European Forum, February 8-12, 2010, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 100595, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    10. Curzi, Daniele & Raimondi, Valentina & Olper, Alessandro, 2013. "Quality Upgrading, Competition and Trade Policy: Evidence from the Agri-Food Sector," 2013: Productivity and Its Impacts on Global Trade, June 2-4, 2013. Seville, Spain 152386, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    11. Karen Thome & Birgit Meade & Stacey Rosen & John C. Beghin, 2016. "Assessing Food Security in Ethiopia with USDA ERS's New Food Security Modeling Approach," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 16-wp567, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    12. Marco Costanigro & Yuko Onozaka, 2020. "A Belief‐Preference Model of Choice for Experience and Credence Goods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 70-95, February.
    13. Naphtal Habiyaremye & Nadhem Mtimet & Emily A. Ouma & Gideon A. Obare, 2023. "Consumers' willingness to pay for safe and quality milk: Evidence from experimental auctions in Rwanda," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1049-1074, October.
    14. Elizabeth G. Pontikes & William P. Barnett, 2015. "The Persistence of Lenient Market Categories," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 1415-1431, October.
    15. Zoltán Lakner & Brigitta Plasek & Gyula Kasza & Anna Kiss & Sándor Soós & Ágoston Temesi, 2021. "Towards Understanding the Food Consumer Behavior–Food Safety–Sustainability Triangle: A Bibliometric Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    16. Ramo Barrena & Mercedes Sánchez, 2012. "Abstraction and product categories as explanatory variables for food consumption," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(30), pages 3987-4003, October.
    17. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    18. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Olynk, Nicole J., 2011. "Modeling heterogeneity in consumer preferences for select food safety attributes in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 318-324, April.
    19. Šárka Velčovská & Giacomo Del Chiappa, 2015. "The Food Quality Labels: Awareness and Willingness to Pay in the Context of the Czech Republic," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 63(2), pages 647-658.
    20. Domenica Lavorato & Palmira Piedepalumbo, 2023. "How Smart Technologies Affect the Decision-Making and Control System of Food and Beverage Companies—A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-21, 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:16:y:2024:i:13:p:5752-:d:1429739. 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.