shiv shakti international journal in multidisciplinary and …ssijmar.in/vol2no3/vol2no3.5.pdf ·...
TRANSCRIPT
1
www.ssijmar.in
A STUDY ON PACKAGING AND LABELING OF ORGANIC FOODSAND
ITS IMPACT ON CONSUMER PURCHASE DECISION
Dr.R.Satish Kumar1
Atulsen Singh2
Gurman Sabarwaal3
1. Director-Research and Professor-Marketing Area, IFIM B-School, Karnataka India Mob: 9972572496, Email:
2. Research Scholar, School of Business, Alliance University, Chikkahagade Cross, Chandapur-Anekal Main
Road, Anekal, Bangalore-562106, Karnataka, India. Mob: 8095277630, Email: [email protected]
3. M.B.A Student, School of Business, Alliance University, Chikkahagade Cross, Chandapur-Anekal Main Road,
Anekal, Bangalore-562106, Karnataka, India.Mob:9886747888 Email: [email protected]
SHIV SHAKTI
International Journal in Multidisciplinary and Academic Research (SSIJMAR)
Vol. 2, No. 3, May-June (ISSN 2278 – 5973)
ABSTRACT
This paper analyses the importance of packaging and labeling in marketing organic foods and its impact on
consumer behaviour. Packaging is considered as the 5th P along with the 4 Ps of marketing. Labeling plays a
major role in providing information with regard to manufacturing date, expiry date, the Maximum Retail
Price, and also the ingredients of the Organic foods. This study was conducted in Bangalore city in places
such as BTM Layout, SarjaPura, Madiwala, Koramangala by targeting customers of retail stores like Spar,
Namdharis, RelianceFresh, and More etc. The required information was collected by using questionnaires
from all the above specified stores. The analysis of data provided very important and interesting revelations
on the impact of Organic Foods Labeling and packaging on consumer buying behaviour.
Key words:Consumer Behaviour, Organic Foods, Buying Behaviour, Labeling, Packaging
2
www.ssijmar.in
INDUSTRY OVERVIEW
The role of organic agriculture in providing food and income is now gaining wider
recognition (Van Elzakker et al 2007). In India the demand for organic foods is increasing
considerably due to the awareness created by the Government and Private organisations.
People are using organic foods and are concerned about the quality and the reassurance from the
marketers of Organic Foods. In this perspective the packaging and labeling play a major role in
creating value for the organic food products in India.
Thus, a consumer-oriented approach to understanding the market for organic products is
important for pursuing better management of organic farming. However, this is a complex
process, which is determined by factors such as quality production, certification, infrastructure
and market environment and policies (Aryal, 2008). It is important for the marketers to
understand consumer decision-making process with regard to organically produced foods and
formulate appropriate strategies to promote higher level of consumption.
In the case of organic foods the production and marketing strategies to a greater extend are being
influenced by consumer beliefs, attitudes, responses and the willingness to pay a premium
price.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Because organic products are credence goods, consumers may not know whether a product
is produced using organic or conventional methods unless they are told so (Giannakas,
2002). Therefore the awareness and knowledge about organic foods play a major role in
influencing the consumer purchase decisions. Krissoff (1998) reported that consumers purchase
organicproducts because of a perception that such products are safer, healthier and more
environmental friendly than conventionally produced alternatives. Human health, food
3
www.ssijmar.in
safety along with several other product characteristics such as nutritive value, taste,
freshness, appearance, and other sensory characteristics influence consumer
preferences(Makatouni, 2002, Bonti-Ankomah and Yiridoe, 2006).
The production and marketing of organic foods will play a major role in preserving our
ecological balances and improving the health of people. World-wide there is an increased
awareness with regard to Organic Foods and many nations are promoting Organic farming by
creating awareness and providing incentives to the farmers. Organic foods are the foods that are
farmed without using any synthesised or pesticide content. Organic farming (also known as
ecological or biological farming) is commonly recognised as a farming system that excludes the
use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides. This is a rather simplistic view of organic agriculture
as it differs from other farming systems around the management of the entire system.
In India, the total organic production is about 14,000 tons but domestic sales account for only
1050 tons (7.5%). However, the domestic market is still growing through a number of recently
launched marketing initiatives and sales are therefore likely to increase to around 1500 tons by
2006-07 (Yussefi& Willer, 2003).
Although the attributes associated with organic foods may be difficult to identify by visual
inspection alone, most consumers purchase organic products because of a perception that these
products have unique (and in some cases superior) attributes compared to conventionally grown
alternatives (Vindigni et al. 2002). On the other hand, a major reason why some consumers do
not purchase organic foods is linked to a perception that such foods are not better than their
conventionally produced alternatives (Jolly et al., 1989). There is, thus, a continuing debate
about whether organically produced products are superior to and/or different from
conventionally produced alternatives and, if so, in terms of what characteristics. Several studies
have assessed whether there are differences between organic and conventional foods from the
perspective of both the producer (or supply-side) and the consumer (or demand-side).
Supply-side evaluations have generally focused on yield, producer price, and profitability
comparisons. In contrast, demand-side studies have investigated the differences in terms of
biophysical and chemical (e.g., nutritive, sensory, and food safety) characteristics, as well as
consumer preferences.
Studies that investigated the level of consumer awareness and knowledge about organic foods
include Jolly et al. (1989), Ekelund (1990), Akgungor et al. (1997), Hutchins and Greenhalgh
4
www.ssijmar.in
(1997), Wang et al. (1997), Compagnoni et al. (2000), Environics (2001), Oystein et al. (2001),
Kenanoglu and Karahan (2002), Cunningham (2002), Demeritt (2002), Hill and Lynchehaun
(2002). A critical review of these studies suggests that, overall; there is some consumer
awareness about organic foods around the world.
STUDIES ON ORGANIC FOOD MARKET IN INDIAN SCENARIO
Organic foods are relatively a new concept in India. Organic foods are referred to as fresh food
or natural food in Indian context. Organic food products are slowly but steadily finding their way
in the average Indian household and one can find them in common retail stores or food outlets
inside malls in India. But, the organic food market in India is still at a nascent stage. Due to high
logistic cost and low volume operation, organic food products are costly. The value of industry
in 2008 is 5.6 billion rupees, the increase in organic food consumption in India is evident from
the fact that many organic food stores are spurring up in India.
ACNielsen, a leading market research firm, recently surveyed about 21,000 regular Internet users
in 38 countries to find their preference for functional foods (foods that have additional health
benefits). The survey revealed that “India was among the top ten countries where health food,
including organic food, was demanded by the consumers”. Even though organic foods are priced
over 25 percent more than conventional food in India, Parents still prefer as they are concern to
the health of their children. In the Research (Baker, 2007), when the consumers recognise the
added value of the organic products that are differentiated by specific information such as
certification, organic producers and marketers may realize an increase in their market power.
Due to asymmetric nature of information on the organic products, consumers may have difficulty
in evaluating product characteristics associated with the organic production process, thus
certification and labeling becomes critical signal for the quality. When consumers are faced with
the complexity of the uncertain choice situation surrounding foods, trust towards regulatory body
emerges as a key variable that is often seen to reduce the complexity of decision making under
uncertainty (Viklund, 2003). The independent public institutions certify the organic product
quality to buyers via governmental grading systems with the 3rd party certification for the
organic mandatory labeling.
PACKGING IN ORGANIC FOODS
5
www.ssijmar.in
Packaging is considered as the 5th P along with the conventional 4 Ps of marketing such as
Product, Price, Place and Promotion. Labeling plays a major role in providing information with
regard to manufacturing date, expiry date, the Maximum Retail Price, and also the ingredients of
the Organic foods. Over the last 50 years the way people are buying foods has been completely
changed. In the past, some food items were usually sold „loose‟ and taken home in a paper bag.
Due to advances in technology, most food items are now sold pre-packed. The same is the
scenario with organic foods; especially in organic foods packaging plays a prominent role.
Organic foods must meet EU standards with regard to the materials used in packaging and
labeling. Materials must be recyclable, where possible, and carry the appropriate organic
accreditation symbol. In addition, although it is not a legal requirement, organic products should
strive to avoid all unnecessary packaging. Wood wool is one form of organic packaging, which
dates back over a few hundred years.
Organic standards are enforced by organic certification authorities. If there in doubt consumers
can check the packaging and look for a logo belonging to one of these accrediting bodies such as
OFF and SOPA, or by the EU license code number printed on the packaging.
All suppliers have to obtain licenseto use the word "organic" in the product title. The term
"organic" is a legally recognised term, the use of which is governed by trading standards
legislation. The principles can be briefly summarised as follows:
If 95% or more organic ingredients are used, the product may be called organic in the
title.
If between 70-95% of the ingredients used are organic, then the term "organic" may only
be used in the ingredients listing.
If less that 70% of the ingredients are organic, then the term "organic" may not be used
anywhere on the product packaging.
OBJECTIVE OF STUDY
Demand for organic food products is growing rapidly as consumers' perception of food quality
and safety is reshaping. This research narrowly focuses on consumer purchase decision only in
organic foods covering the major aspects of packaging and labeling.
6
www.ssijmar.in
To understand the role of packaging in organic food products
To understand the role of labeling/ certification in organic food products
Dependent variable- customer buying behavior
Independent variable- labeling and packaging
HYPOTHESES:
H1: Certification in organic foods does not affect customer buying behavior
H2: The Design of packaging for Easy to open, Easy to Stack, Easy to store does not affect
customer satisfaction in packaging in organic foods.
H3: Labeling Information on packages about Manufacturer details, Details on weight/volume,
Date of Manufacturing, and Ingredients information does not affect consumer buying behavior
H4: Importance for certification in organic foods does not depend on age of consumer.
H5: Purchase location of organic foods does not depend on consumers‟ family Income.
METHODOLOGY
The data were collected during April and May 2012 from simple random sample of 283
consumers in Bangalore City in places such as BTM Layout, SarjaPura, Madiwala, Koramangala
by targeting customers of retail stores like Spar, Namdharis, RelianceFresh, and More etc.
CROSSTABULATION ANALYSIS
Hypothesis1:
Certification in organic foods doesn‟taffect customerbuyingbehavior To provethe
abovehypothesis wedo across tabulation between the variables
BelieveinCertificationand Increase inPurchasedue to Certification.
Both thevariables underconsideration areordinalin nature and areinLikertscale (a non-
comparative continuous scale)ofsize 5.
CaseProcessing Summary
7
www.ssijmar.in
Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
cer_purchas
e*
believe_cer
272
96.1%
11
3.9%
283
100.0%
On the other hand, a major reason why some consumers do not purchase organic foods
strongly
agree
agree
neutral
disagree
e
Total
Count
Expected Count
%within believe_ceree
Count Expected
Count
%within believe_cer
neutral
Count Expected Count
%within believe_cer
disagree
Count Expected Count
65
22.9
67.7%
21
47.6
0
22.5
.0%
73
46.7
0
7.4
.0%
31
15.4
0
12.2
.0%
10
25.3
65
65.0
23.9%
135
135.0
8
www.ssijmar.in
%within believe_cer
Total
Count Expected Count
%within believe_cer
21.9%
10
14.5
10.4%
0
10.9
.0%
96
96.0
77.7%
21
14.2
22.3%
0
10.7
.0%
94
94.0
100.0%
0
4.7
.0%
0
3.5
.0%
31
31.0
19.6%
10
7.7
19.6%
31
5.8
60.8%
51
51.0
49.6%
41
41.0
15.1%
31
31.0
11.4%
272
272.0
9
www.ssijmar.in
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Table1.Crosstabulationtablebetweenincreaseinpurchaseduetocertificationandbelieveincertificati
on
Chi-SquareTests
Value
df
Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided) Pearson Chi-
Square Likelihood
Ratio Linear-by-
Linear
Association
N ofValid Cases
318.431(
a)
309.381
139.013
272
9
9
1
.000
.000
.000
A2cells (12.5%) have expected count less than 5. Theminimum expected count is 3.53.
Themajorityof cross tabulation scoreis between“stronglyagreevs. strongly agree”
and“agreevs. agree”.
10
www.ssijmar.in
Analyzingthetables:
1. Pearson Chi-Squareis 318.431
2. And sig. value= p.value=0.00<0.05 (wherealpha=0.05)
3. HencenullHypothesiscan be rejected, means alternate hypothesis can be accepted.
4. Therebythe hypothesisis tested that “Certification in organic foods effectson customer
buyingbehavior”
REGRESSIONANALYSIS
Hypothesis2:
TheDesign of packaging forEasyto open, Easyto Stack, Easyto storedoesn‟t affect customer
satisfaction in packagingin organic foods.
To provethe abovehypothesis wedo a regressionmodel with the abovespecified factors
Dependent variable(Y) =Customer satisfactionin packaging
Independent variables=
X1=Available sizes of packages
X2=Easyto open X3=Easyto store
X4=Easyto stack
Description of variables:
All the variables under consideration areordinal in nature andareinLikertscale (a non-
comparative continuous scale) of5 sizes.
Model Summary (b)
11
www.ssijmar.in
Mode l
R
R Square
Adjusted
R Square
Std. Error
ofthe
Estimate
1 .919(a) .845 .841 .56.76
aPredictors: (Constant),easy_stack,available_size, easy_open, easy_store
b Dependent Variable: satisfied
Null hypothesis is- H0: R Square=0
Alternativehypothesis is- H1: R Square>0
Herein ouranalysiswe found RSquare=0.845, >0 so reject Nullhypothesis means thereis
arelationship exists “Consumersatisfaction in respectiveto packagingandfactors in design of
packaginglikeEasyto open, Easyto Stack, Easyto store, and availabilityof various sizepackets.”
As R squaredetermines the strength and direction between variables under considerationand
Adjusted R Squareis 84.1%,henceitcanexplain the strength by84 percent
ANOVA (b)
12
www.ssijmar.in
Mode
l
Sum of
Squares
df
Mean
Square
F
Sig. 1Regression
Residual Total
69.197
189.481
258.679
4
247
251
17.299
.767
22.551
.000(a)
aPredictors: (Constant),easy_stack,available_size, easy_open, easy_store
b DependentVariable: satisfied
Sig. value=0<0.05, alpha, so reject NullHypothesis.
Coefficients (a)
Mode l
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
B
Std.
Error
Beta 1 (Constant)
Available _siz e
easy_open
easy_store
easy_stack
1.239
-.058
-.136
.122
.690
.235
.063
.058
.095
.091
-.054
-.149
.092
.517
5.268
-.921
-2.324
1.282
7.561
.000
.358
.021
.000
.000
aDependent Variable: satisfied
13
www.ssijmar.in
Table.2indicatingCoefficientsmatrixforthevariableseasytoopen,easyto storeandeasyto stack
Therefore equation is Consumer satisfaction inpackaging
Y=1.239-0.058X1-0.136X2+0.122X3+0.690X4,
But thesig. value for easyopenand available size are >0.05, alpha.Hencethey
can‟tbethecoefficients,Thereforetheequation is
Consumer satisfaction in packaging,Y=1.239+0.122X3+0.690X4.
Residuals Statistics (a)
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std.
Deviation
N Predicted Value
Residual
Std. Predicted
Value
Std. Residual
1.8575
-1.52775
-1.927
-1.744
3.9930
1.46591
2.141
1.674
2.8690
.00000
.000
.000
.52506
.86885
1.000
.992
252
252
252
252
aDependent Variable: satisfied
14
www.ssijmar.in
Hypothesis3:
Information about organic foods on packages likeManufacturer details, Details on
weight/volume, DateofManufacturing, and ingredients doesn‟taffect consumer
buyingbehavior.
To provethe abovehypothesis wedo a regressionmodel with the abovespecified factors
Dependent variable(Y)= information on packagescan increasemypurchase amount
Independent variables:
X1=Information ofmanufacturer
X2=Information ofweight/Volume
X3=Information about dateof manufacturing/ dateof expiry
X4=Information about ingredients
Description of variables:
All thevariables under consideration areordinal in nature andareinLikertscale (a non-
comparative continuous scale
15
www.ssijmar.in
Model Summary (b)
Mode l
R
R Square
Adjusted
R Square
Std. Error
ofthe
Estimate
1 .658(a) .833 .824 .65507
aPredictors: (Constant),info_ingredients, info_weight, info_manu, info_dom
b Dependent Variable: info_purchase
Null hypothesis is- H0: R Square=0
Alternativehypothesis is- H1: R Square>0
Herein ouranalysiswe found R Square=0.824, >0 so reject Nullhypothesis means thereis
arelationship exists “Information aboutorganic foods on packages likeManufacturer details,
Details on weight/volume, Date ofManufacturing, and ingredients affects
consumerbuyingbehavior”
As R squaredetermines the strength and direction between variables under consideration
andAdjusted R Squareis 82.4%, henceit canexplain the strength by82 percent
16
www.ssijmar.in
ANOVA (b)
Mode
l
Sum of
Squares
df
Mean
Square
F
Sig. 1 Regression
Residual Total
78.101
102.130
180.230
4
238
242
19.525
.429
45.501
.000(a)
aPredictors: (Constant),info_ingredients, info_weight, info_manu, info_dom
b Dependent Variable: info_purchase
Sig. value=0<0.05, alpha, so reject Nullhyphothesis.
17
www.ssijmar.in
Coefficients (a)
Mode l
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
B
Std.
Error
Beta 1 (Constant)
info_manu info_weight
info_dom
info_ingredient s
.043
.275
.350
.169
.350
.217
.056
.079
.058
.060
.280
.245
.169
.320
.199
4.900
4.419
2.929
5.797
.842
.000
.000
.004
.000
aDependent Variable:info_purchase
Fig.indicatingcoefficient matrixforthevariablesinfo_manu,info_weight,info_dom,info_ingredients
18
www.ssijmar.in
Therefore equation isincreasein purchase amountdueto informationpackage
Y=0.043+0.275X1+0.350X2+0.169X3+0.350X4,
Thesig. value forallthevariables are>0.05,alpha. Hencetheycan bethe coefficients.
CORRELATION ANALYSIS
Hypothesis4
Importanceforcertification in organic foods does notdepend on ageof consumer.
Correlations
cert_imp age
cert_imp Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) N
age Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) N
1
272
.870
.005
272
.870
.005
272
1
283
1. Sig. valueis0.005 <0.05, Hencereject Nullhypothesis,hencethereis a relationship between
importanceto certification and ageof consumer.
2. Therelationship is positive
19
www.ssijmar.in
3. Thestrength ofcorrelation is r=87%
Hypothesis5
Purchaselocation oforganic foods does not dependonconsumers‟familyIncome.
Correlations
income buy_location
income Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) N
buy_location Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) N
1
283
.912
.001
283
.912
.001
283
1
283
1. Sig. valueis 0.01 <0.05,Hencereject Nullhypothesis, hencethereis a
relationship betweenlocation ofbuying and income earnedby consumer.
2. Therelationship is positive
3. Thestrength ofcorrelation is r=91.2%
Factoranalysis
20
www.ssijmar.in
TheSig. value of observed factorsis 0.00<0.05 alpha, hencewecan proceed with
factoranalysisand also as KMO=0.747 >0.5, itis appropriate to useFactorAnalysis.
Communalities:
Initial Extraction
pack_protect
info_ingresdients info_manu
info_weight
info_dom
tech_dev
info_adeq
info_purchase
size_info
cert_imp
believe_cer
cer_purchaseavailable_size
easy_open
easy_store
easy_stack
plastic
types_packmultiple_packgraphic_work
satisfied
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
.790
.647
.873
.810
.853
.914
.854
.822
.878
.917
21
www.ssijmar.in
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
.954
.890
.915
.902
.781
.848
.845
.835
.905
.892
.937
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Total VarianceExplained
Initial Eigenvalues
Extraction Sums of
Squared
22
www.ssijmar.in
Component
Loadings
Total
%of
Variance
Cumulativ
e%
Total
%of
Variance
Cumulativ
e%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
6.888
3.290
2.535
1.830
1.445
1.055
1.018
.780
.545
.463
.331
.297
.241
32.801
15.669
12.072
8.712
6.880
5.024
4.849
3.713
2.596
2.207
1.577
1.414
1.145
32.801
48.470
60.541
69.254
76.134
81.158
86.007
89.720
92.317
94.523
96.101
97.515
98.660
6.888
3.290
2.535
1.830
1.445
1.055
1.018
32.801
15.669
12.072
8.712
6.880
5.024
4.849
32.801
48.470
60.541
69.254
76.134
81.158
86.007
23
www.ssijmar.in
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
.160
.068
.040
.013
.001
4.13E-
016
-
2.64E-
018
-
7.02E-
016
.764
.323
.189
.061
.003
1.97E-015
-1.26E-
017
-3.34E-
015
99.424
99.747
99.936
99.997
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis
24
www.ssijmar.in
Components
1
2 3 4 5 6 7
pack_protect
info_ingredients info_manu
info_weight
.209
.312
.623
.791
.423
.230
-
.04
0
.23
5
.40
.022
-
.353
-
.125
-
.315
.347
.499
.086
.103
-
.009
.11
3
.24
4
-
.06
25
www.ssijmar.in
info_dom
tech_devinfo_adeqinfo_purchasesize_in
fo
cert_imp believe_cer cer_purchase
available_size easy_open
easy_store
easy_stack
plastic
types_packmultiple_packgraphic_work
satisfied
.665
.749
.501
.672
.538
.701
.764
.652
.494
.459
-
.397
.058
-
.609
-
.348
.305
-
.357
.101
-
.599
-
4
-
.04
3
.16
8
.36
6
-
.24
6
.57
1
-
.40
9
-
.279
.055
-
.071
.433
-
.178
.270
-
.249
-
.153
-
.008
-
.322
-
.195
.030
.275
.134
.083
-
.014
.030
-
.138
-
.391
-
.172
-
.027
-
.002
.007
-
.225
.123
3
-
.33
4
.01
0
.29
2
.17
8
.07
9
-
.04
2
-
.14
0
-
26
www.ssijmar.in
.140
.337
.731
.720
.722
.423
.537
.48
3
.213
-
.281
.434
.719
275
.405
.141
.104
-
.191
.23
6
.42
8
.34
7
.59
9
-
.02
9
.07
5
-
.10
3
.11
3
-
.182
.423
.643
.315
350
-
.021
-
.364
-
.356
-
.323
.101
.498
.009
-
.301
-
.262
-
.290
.139
.394
-
.23
.262
.494
-
.126
-
.161
.108
.091
-
.228
.232
-
.150
.10
1
-
.37
3
.43
7
-
.10
0
.12
4
.01
3
.23
2
.10
0
27
www.ssijmar.in
.17
8
-
.12
4
-
.68
8
-
.53
4
-
.31
6
-
.116
3
.51
6
.20
6
-
.01
0
-
.462
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
a7 components extracted.
RotatedComponent Matrix (a)
28
www.ssijmar.in
FACTORS 1 2 3
pack_protect .209 .791 -.040
Plastic .405 .720 .178
types_pack .141 .722 -.124
multiple_pack .423 .652 .688
info_manu .623 .230 .404
info_weight .665 -.397 -.043
info_dom .749 .058 .168
info_adeq .672 -.348 -.246
size_info .701 -.357 -.409
cert_imp -.428 .101 .764
believe_cer .347 -.599 .731
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation
Method:Varimaxwith KaiserNormalization aRotation converged
in5 iterations.
The 3 factors identified are:
1. These are Safety oriented customers, they believe in organic foods because they are safe for
consumption and are healthy to them and to their family, so these Consumers view package as a
protection for the product, so they are factored because of their rating on multiple packaging,
plastic packaging, etc.
2. These are Information oriented customers, these customers believe in certification of
organic foods, they refer to labeling details while purchasing like manufacturer details, date of
manufacturing, weight/volume details and size of these information.
3. These are Trust oriented customers, these customers believe in certification and majorly by
private international bodies and can switch to other products which are genuinely certified.
FINDINGS OF THE STUDY:
Theresearch findings clearly show that packaging and labelingaffect consumer buyingbehavior
29
www.ssijmar.in
in organic foods. Here packagingcomprises ofcolor, design, shapeetc.oforganic packages,
andlabelingrefers to certification, adequate information on packages etc.
The following are the findings of the study:
1. Certification in organic foods affects customer buyingbehavior
2. TheDesign of packagingfor Easyto open, Easyto Stack, Easyto storedoes not affect customer
satisfaction in packagingin organic foods.
3. LabelingInformation on packages about Manufacturer details, Details on
weight/volume, Date ofManufacturing,andIngredients information affect consumer
buyingbehavior
4. Importanceforcertification in organic foods depends on ageof consumer.
5. Purchaselocation oforganic foods depends onconsumers‟ family Income.
CONCLUSION:
There is greater emphasis on organic foods packaging and labeling in providing information and
reassurance to the consumers. The marketers need to innovate and find new ways of labeling
and packaging organic foods create value for their products.
Demographics like age, income,gender etc.areplayingvital roleinconsumer buyingbehavior
oforganic foods. People perceptions towards organic foods aredifferent than that of
conventional foods. Visual packagingin organic foods can increasethetrust on theproduct.
Thereis arelation betweentypes of organic foodsbought and internal factors of consumption
likesafety,healthyetc. Even organicfoods arepriced triplethat ofconventional foods, people
acceptance fororganic foods is more, as ithavehealth aspects.
Few consumersbuyorganic foods becausethese foods are goodfor the environment. Consumer
familyincomeplays a prominent role in buyingtypes of organic foods and numberof organic
foods. Availabilityof organic foods is a biggest challengeinIndian scenario. Theindustryis
morethan 40years experienced inIndia, but still in infant state. Packagingof organic foods plays a
prominent rolein consumerbuying behavior. Information details on organic foods can
providemore confidenceto consumer while buyingorganic foods. Morethan 90%of organic foods
areplasticpackaged. Indian organicconsumers arehighlyinterested inexports as there aremany
issues in domesticmarket. Thedemand for organicnaturein few products categoryliketurmeric,
teasetc. areveryhigh. Limitation in organic farmingpractices arerestrictingmanyfamers to enter in
30
www.ssijmar.in
to organic farming. Limited recognition and subsidyfromgovernment is anotherdrawback forthe
growth oforganic foodsmarket domestically.
It is high time for the government and private organisations in creating awareness
onOrganic farming among farmers by providinginformation and incentives to them. On the
other hand there is increased need for creating awareness and preferences for organic foods
among the consumers. The innovative packaging and labeling of the Organic foods will
help the marketers in achieving this objective.
REFERENCES:
1. Baker, S., Thompson, K.E. and Engelken, J. (2004). Mappingthevalues driving
organic foodchoice.European Journal of Marketing, 38(8), p.995-1012.
2. ReneeKim, Opal Suwunnamek, Takashi Toyoda (2007).Consumer Attitudetowards
OrganicLabelingSchemes in Japan.
3. Mohd RizaimyShaharudin, J.J. (2010). PurchaseIntention ofOrganicFood in Kedah,
Malaysia; A religious overview.InternationalJournal of Marketing Studies, 96-105.
4. KatieGiffordand John C. Bernard (2004). PackagingofOrganicand Conventional
Products–A Comparison. Journal of Food Distribution Research 35(1), p.107-109.
5. Davies, A., Titterington,A.J., &Cochrane, C. (1995). Who buys organicfood?A profileof
the purchasersoforganic food in NorthernIreland.British Food Journal, Vol. 97 No. 10,
17-23.
6. Dindyal, S. (2003).Howpersonal factors, includingculture and ethnicity, affect the
choices andselection offood wemake.Internet Journal of Third World Medicine, 1 (2),
27-33.