Health and environmental attitudes and values in food choices: a comparative study for Poland and Czech Republic

Abstract

Research background: Health and environmental concerns linked to food production and consumption have become crucial both for policy makers and for consumers for modern society. Some consumers are becoming increasingly careful about what they eat, giving value to the impacts of everyday food choices on their health and on the environment. There have been few studies that have jointly analyzed these consumption patterns and that have looked for their association.

Purpose of the article: The objective of the study is to develop a Polish (PL) and Czech (Cz) young-adult consumers? segmentation based on health and environ-mental attitudes and values in food choices. The research is needed to diagnose consumption trends in this segment of the market to enable creating a market offer tailored to this group of consumers.

Methods: A total of 631 students from two Universities ? one in Poland (University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn (323)) and on in the Czech Republic (University of South Bohemia (308)) were selected to participate in the research. The sample of students was chosen because of the importance of young-adult consumers as the participants of the market with a specified purchasing potential. The data were collected through a survey questionnaire, in which a Likert type scale was used to determine the health and environmental attitudes and values in food choices. The results obtained were analyzed statistically using Statistica 13.1 using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) with Varimax rotation, cluster analysis using the k-means method and ANOVA.

Findings & Value added: The survey demonstrated that the students presented both health and environmental attitudes, and that their food choices were driven to a lesser extent by the environmental than by the health-related values. Results demonstrated that the two distinguished factors significantly differentiated both the Polish and the Czech students into two clusters, with the first cluster being represented by consumers presenting stronger health and environmental attitudes (PL N=58%, Cz N=48%) compared to the students from the second cluster. It adds value to recent young consumers? behavior knowledge by jointly analyzing their attitudes toward health and environmental values in food choices. These findings may be useful in developing effective educational and marketing campaigns and understanding the demand for certain products.

Keywords

consumers, health and environmental sustainability, sustainability of food systems, sustainable consumption

References

1. Annunziataa, A., & Vecchiob, R. (2016). Organic farming and sustainability in food choices: an analysis of consumer preference in Southern Italy. Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia, 8. doi: 10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.093. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.093
   View in Google Scholar
2. Aschemann-Witzel, J., & Niebuhr Aagaard, E. M. (2014). Elaborating on the attitude behaviour gap regarding organic products: young Danish consumers and in-store food choice. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38(5). doi: 10.1111/ijcs.12115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12115
   View in Google Scholar
3. Banterle, A., & Ricci, E. C. (2013). Does the sustainability of food products influence consumer choices? The case of Italy. International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 4(2). doi: 10.18461/pfsd.2013.1305.
   View in Google Scholar
4. Bernard, J. C., Duke, J. M., & Albrecht S. E. (2019). Do labels that convey minimal, redundant, or no information affect consumer perceptions and willingness to pay? Food Quality and Preference, 71. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual. 2018.06.012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.06.012
   View in Google Scholar
5. Bosona, T., & Gebresenbet, G. (2018). Swedish consumers’ perception of food quality and sustainability in relation to organic food production. Foods, 7(4). doi: 10.3390/foods7040054. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/foods7040054
   View in Google Scholar
6. Brecic, R., Gorton. M., & Barjolle, D. (2012). Understanding variations in the consumption of functional foods evidence from Croatia. British Food Journal, 116(4). doi: 10.1108/BFJ-05-2012-0133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-05-2012-0133
   View in Google Scholar
7. Cavaliere, A., Claire Ricci, E. C., Solesin, M., & Banterle, A. (2014). Can health and environmental concerns meet in food choices? Sustainability, 6. doi: doi: 10.3390/su6129494. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su6129494
   View in Google Scholar
8. De Boer, J. Boersema, J. J., & Aiking, H. (2009). Consumers’ motivational associations favoring free-range meat or less meat. Ecological Economics, 68. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.07.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.07.001
   View in Google Scholar
9. De Maya, S. R., López-López, I., & Munuera, J. L. (2011). Organic food consumption in Europe: international segmentation based on value system differences. Ecological Economics, 70(10). doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011. 04.019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.04.019
   View in Google Scholar
10. Gagić, S., Jovičić, A., Tešanović, D., & Kalenjuk, B. (2014). Motives for food choice among Serbian consumers. Economics of Agriculture, 61(1). doi: DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/ekoPolj1401041G
    View in Google Scholar
11. 5937/ekoPolj1401041G.
    View in Google Scholar
12. Gains, N. (1994). The repertory grid approach. In H. L. Meiselman & H. J. H. Mac Fie (Eds.). Measurement of food preferences. London: Chapman and Hall. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2171-6_3
    View in Google Scholar
13. Goetzke, B. I., & Spiller, A. (2014). Health-improving lifestyles of organic and functional food consumers. British Food Journal, 116(3). doi: 10.1016/j.appet. 2014.02.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-03-2012-0073
    View in Google Scholar
14. Grant, I. C., & Waite, K. (2003). Following the yellow brick road-young adults: Experiences of the information super-highway. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 6(1). doi: 10.1108/13522750310457375. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750310457375
    View in Google Scholar
15. Grønhøj, A. (2007). The consumer competence of young adults: a study of newly formed households. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 10(3). doi: 10.1108/13522750710754290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750710754290
    View in Google Scholar
16. Grunert, K. G. (1997). What’s in a steak? A cross-cultural study on the quality perception of beef. Food Quality and Preference, 8(3). doi: 10.1016/S0950-3293(96)00038-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(96)00038-9
    View in Google Scholar
17. Grunert, K. G. (2005). Food quality and safety: consumer perception and demand. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 32(3). doi: 10.1093/eurrag/ jbi011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurrag/jbi011
    View in Google Scholar
18. Gutkowska, K., & Ozimek, I. (2008). Zachowania młodych konsumentów na rynku żywności. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo SGGW.
    View in Google Scholar
19. Hansen, T., Sørensen, M. I., & Riewerts Erikse, M. L. (2018). How the interplay between consumer motivations and values influences organic food identity and behavior. Food Policy, 74. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.11.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.11.003
    View in Google Scholar
20. Head, M., Sevenster, M., Odegard, I., Krutwagen, B., Croezen, H., & Bergsma G. (2014). Life cycle impacts of protein-rich foods: creating robust yet extensive life cycle models for use in a consumer app. Journal of Cleaner Production, 73. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.026
    View in Google Scholar
21. Honkanen, P., Verplanker, B., & Olsen, S. O. (2006). Ethical values and motives driving organic food choice. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 5(5). doi:10.1002 /cb.190. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.190
    View in Google Scholar
22. Huang, L., Bai, L., Zhang, X., & Gong, S. (2018). Re-understanding the antecedents of functional foods purchase: mediating effect of purchase attitude and moderating effect of food neophobia. Food Quality and Preference. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.11.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.11.001
    View in Google Scholar
23. Jakubowska, D., & Radzymińska, M. (2015). Attitudes and behaviour of Warmia and Mazury residents towards issues related to environmental protection. Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Morskiej w Gdyni, 88.
    View in Google Scholar
24. Khan, M. A.& Hackler, L. R. (1981). Evaluation of food selection patterns and preferences. Critical Review of Food Science and Nutrition, 15. doi: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398109527314
    View in Google Scholar
25. 1080/10408398109527314.
    View in Google Scholar
26. Kita, P., Furková, A., Reiff, M., Konštiak, P., & Sitášová, J. (2017). Impact of consumer preferences on food chain choice: an empirical Study of consumers in Bratislava. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 65(1). doi: 10.11118/actaun201765010293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11118/actaun201765010293
    View in Google Scholar
27. Kumar B., Manrai A. K., & Manrai L. A. (2017). Purchasing behavior for environmentally sustainable products: a conceptual framework and empirical study. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser. 2016.09.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.09.004
    View in Google Scholar
28. Küster-Boluda, I., & Vidal-Capilla, I. (2017). Consumer attitudes in the election of functional foods. Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC, 21(1). doi: 10.1016/j.sjme.2017.05.002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjme.2017.05.002
    View in Google Scholar
29. Lazzarini, G. A., Zimmermann, J., Visschers, V. H. M., & Siegrist, M. (2016). Does environmental friendliness equal healthiness? Swiss consumers' perception of protein products. Appetite, 105. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2016.06.038. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.06.038
    View in Google Scholar
30. Lindeman, M., & Väänänen, M. (2000). Measurement of ethical food choice motives.Appetite, 34(1). doi: 10.1006/appe.1999.0293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.1999.0293
    View in Google Scholar
31. Maddock, S., & Hill, B. (2016). Bagels and doughnuts… round food for every mood food advertising discourses. British Food Journal, 118(2). doi: 10.1108/ BFJ-04-2015-0136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-04-2015-0136
    View in Google Scholar
32. Memery, J., Angell, R. J, Megicks, P., & Lindgreen A. (2015). Unpicking motives to purchase locally-produced food: analysis of direct and moderation effects. European. Journal of Marketing, 49(7/8). doi: 10.1108/EJM-02-2014-0075. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2014-0075
    View in Google Scholar
33. Miškolci, S. (2011). Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for the health aspects of food. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 59(4). doi:10.11118/actaun201159040167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11118/actaun201159040167
    View in Google Scholar
34. Nissinen, A., Heiskanen, E., Perrels, A., Berghall, E., Liesimaa, V., & Mattinen, M. (2015). Combinations of policy instruments to decrease the climate impacts of housing, passenger transport and food in Finland. Journal of Cleaner Production, 107(16). doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.095. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.095
    View in Google Scholar
35. Nivaa, M., & Jallinoja, P. (2018). Taking a stand through food choices? Characteristics of political food consumption and consumers in Finland. Ecological Economics, 154. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.08.013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.08.013
    View in Google Scholar
36. Onozaka, Y., Nurse, G., & McFadden, D. T. (2010). Local food consumers: how motivations and perceptions translate to buying behavior. Choice, The Magazine of Food Farm and Resource, 25(1).
    View in Google Scholar
37. Oroian, C. F., Safirescu, C. O., Harun, R., Chiciudean, G. O., Arion, F. H., Muresan, I. C., & Bordeanu, B. M. (2017). Consumers’ attitudes towards organic products and sustainable development: a case study of Romania. Sustainability, 9. doi: 10.3390/su9091559. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091559
    View in Google Scholar
38. Profeta, A., & Hamm, U. (2019). Do consumers prefer local animal products produced with local feed? Results from a discrete-choice experiment. Food Quality and Preference, 71. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.07.007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.07.007
    View in Google Scholar
39. Radzymińska, M. (2016). A consumer at the local food market – an empirical study. Olsztyn: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warmińsko-Mazurskiego w Olsztynie.
    View in Google Scholar
40. Radzymińska, M., Jakubowska, D., & Mozolewski, W. (2015). Proecological attitudes and behaviours towards the environmental issues. Handel Wewnętrzny 2(355).
    View in Google Scholar
41. Rana, J., & Paul, J. (2017). Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food: a review and research agenda. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 38. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.06.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.06.004
    View in Google Scholar
42. Rašković, M., Ding, Z., Škare, V., Ozretić Došen, D., & Žabkar, V. (2016). Comparing consumer innovativeness and ethnocentrism of young-adult consumers. Journal of Business Research,69. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.03.029. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.03.029
    View in Google Scholar
43. Reisch, L., Eberle, U., & Lorek, S. (2013). Sustainable food consumption: an overview of contemporary issues and policies. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 9(2). doi: 10.1080/15487733.2013.11908111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2013.11908111
    View in Google Scholar
44. Renner, B., Sproesser, G., Strohbach, S., & Schupp, H. T. (2012). Why we eat what we eat. The Eating Motivation Survey (TEMS). Appetite, 59(1), doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2012.04.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2012.04.004
    View in Google Scholar
45. Rybowska, A., & Babicz-Zielińska, E. (2007). Cluster analysis in dietary behaviour assessment of students. Food Quality and Preference, 18. doi: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.09.009
    View in Google Scholar
46. 1016/j.foodqual.2005.09.009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2005/09/009
    View in Google Scholar
47. Shepherd, R. (1985). Dietary salt intake. Nutrition and Food Science, 96. doi:10.1108/eb059082. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/eb059082
    View in Google Scholar
48. Siegrist, M., & Hartmann, Ch. (2019). Impact of sustainability perception on consumption of organic meat and meat substitutes. Appetite, 132(1). doi:10.1016/j.appet.2018.09.016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.09.016
    View in Google Scholar
49. Smith, S., & Paladino, A. (2010). Eating clean and green? Investigating consumer motivations towards the purchase of organic food. Australasian Marketing Journal, 18. doi:10.1016/j.ausmj.2010.01.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2010.01.001
    View in Google Scholar
50. Szakály, Z., Popp, J., Kontor, E., Kovács,, S., Petö, K., & Jasák, H. (2017). Attitudes of the lifestyle of health and sustainability segment in Hungary. Sustainability, 9. doi: 10.3390/su9101763. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101763
    View in Google Scholar
51. Thompson, A., & Moughan, P. (2008). Innovation in the food industry: functional foods, innovation: management. Policy & Practice, 10. doi: 10.5172/impp.453. 10.1.61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5172/impp.453.10.1.61
    View in Google Scholar
52. van Herpen, E., & Van Trijp, H. C. (2011). Front-of-pack nutrition labels. Their effect on attention and choices when consumers have varying goals and time constraints. Appetite, 57(1). doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2011.04.011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2011.04.011
    View in Google Scholar
53. Verbeke, W. (2008). Impact of communication on consumers’ food choices. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 67(3). doi: 10.1017/S0029665108007179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0029665108007179
    View in Google Scholar
54. Wansik, B. (2010). From mindless eating to mindlessly eating better. Physiology & Behavior, 100. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2010.05.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2010.05.003
    View in Google Scholar