Segmentation of Consumer Preferences for Vegetables Produced in Areas Depressed by Drought
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. The Choice of Vegetables by Consumers
2.2. The INDAP Role in Small- and Medium-Scale Farming
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Sample and Procedure
3.2. Questionnaire
3.3. Statistical Analysis
4. Results
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Organizacion Mundial de la Salud (OMS). Aumentar el Consumo de Frutas y Verduras Para Reducir el Riesgo de Enfermedades No Transmisibles. Available online: https://fundacionsaborysalud.com/aumentar-el-consumo-de-frutas-y-verduras-para-reducir-el-riesgo-de-enfermedades-no-transmisibles/ (accessed on 4 September 2020).
- FAO/WHO Fruit and Vegetables for Health; Report of the Joint FAO; World Health Organization: Kobe, Japan, 2004.
- Canella, D.S.; Da Costa Louzada, M.L.; Claro, R.M.; Costa, J.C.; Bandoni, D.H.; Levy, R.B.; Martins, A.P.B. Consumo De Hortaliças e Sua Relação Com Os Alimentos Ultraprocessados No Brasil. Rev. Saúde Pública 2018, 52, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ekwaru, J.P.; Ohinmaa, A.; Loehr, S.; Setayeshgar, S.; Thanh, N.X.; Veugelers, P.J. The economic burden of inadequate consumption of vegetables and fruit in Canada. Public Health Nutr. 2016, 20, 515–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vandellen, M.R.; Rajbhandari-Thapa, J.; Sevilla, J. Does serving vegetables in partitioned portions promote vegetable consumption? Food Qual. Prefer. 2019, 78, 103750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Política Nacional De Alimentación Y Nutrición; Ministerio de Salud Chile: Santiago, Chile, 2017; ISBN 9789563481457.
- ODEPA Boletin de Hortalizas, Agosto 2020. Available online: https://www.odepa.gob.cl/publicaciones/boletines/boletin-de-hortalizas-agosto-2020 (accessed on 9 September 2020).
- ODEPA Boletín de Hortalizas, Marzo 2021. Available online: https://www.odepa.gob.cl/publicaciones/boletines/boletin-de-hortalizas-marzo-2021 (accessed on 1 April 2021).
- Contreras, R.; Layseca, G.; Márquez, J. Principales Resultados del Programa AFC de ProChile Noviembre de 2017. Available online: http://www.odepa.gob.cl/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/afcFinal.pdf (accessed on 4 May 2021).
- Salcedo, S.; Guzmán, L. Agricultura familiar en América Latina y el Caribe. In Recomendaciones de Política; Publicado por la Organización de las Naciones Unidas: Santiago, Chile, 2014; ISBN 9789253083640. [Google Scholar]
- ODEPA Coyuntura Internacional III—Proyección internacional de la Agricultura Familiar Campesina. 2016. Available online: https://www.odepa.gob.cl/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/agriculturaFamiliar2016.pdf (accessed on 10 September 2020).
- Kartzow, R. Situación de la Institucionalidad De Apoyo a la Innovación Comercial de la Agricultura Familiar y de Los Procesos de Gestión Comercial de la Agricultura Familiar en Chile; Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura (IICA): Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2016; ISBN 978-92-9248-621-1. [Google Scholar]
- Garreaud, R.; Alvarez-Garreton, C.; Barichivich, J.; Boisier, J.P.; Christie, D.A.; Galleguillos, M.; LeQuesne, C.; McPhee, J.; Zambrano-Bigiarini, M. The 2010–2015 mega drought in Central Chile: Impacts on regional hydroclimate and vegetation. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss. 2017, 21, 6307–6327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Garreaud, R.D.; Boisier, J.P.; Rondanelli, R.; Montecinos, A.; Sepúlveda, H.H.; Veloso-Aguila, D. The Central Chile Mega Drought (2010–2018): A climate dynamics perspective. Int. J. Clim. 2019, 40, 421–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oertel, M.; Meza, F.J.; Gironás, J. Observed trends and relationships between ENSO and standardized hydrometeorological drought indices in central Chile. Hydrol. Process. 2019, 34, 159–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Roest, K.; Ferrari, P.; Knickel, K. Specialisation and economies of scale or diversification and economies of scope? Assessing different agricultural development pathways. J. Rural Stud. 2018, 59, 222–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García-Cornejo, B.; Pérez-Méndez, J.A.; Roibás, D.; Wall, A. Efficiency and Sustainability in Farm Diversification Initiatives in Northern Spain. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manual de Capacitación: Agregación de Valor a Productos de Origen Agropecuario: Elementos Para la Formulación e Implementación de Políticas Públicas; Inst. Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2014; p. 142.
- Kuchi, V.; Kabir, J. Horti-tourism: A value-added approach for strengthening farmers economically. Acta Hortic. 2017, 5, 793–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adasme-Berríos, C.; Sánchez, M.; Mora, M.; Schnettler, B.; Lobos, G.; Díaz, J. Segmentation of consumer preference for food safety label on vegetables. Br. Food J. 2016, 118, 2550–2566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jürkenbeck, K.; Meyerding, S. Preferences for fresh tomatoes with a focus on young consumers in Germany—Choice-experiment and latent class analysis. Eur. J. Hortic. Sci. 2019, 84, 325–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meyerding, S. Determination of part-worth-utilities of food-labels using the choice-based-conjoint-analysis using the example of tomatoes in Germany. In Proceedings of the XVIII International Symposium on Horticultural Economics and Management, Alnarp, Sweden, 20 April 2016; Volume 1132, ISBN 9789462611115. [Google Scholar]
- Wann, J.-W.; Yang, Y.-C.; Huang, W.-S. An empirical analysis of consumer willingness to pay for domestically grown product attributes: The case of Taiwan. China Agric. Econ. Rev. 2016, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, P.-J.; Antonelli, M. Conceptual Models of Food Choice: Influential Factors Related to Foods, Individual Differences, and Society. Foods 2020, 9, 1898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Adasme-Berríos, C.; Sánchez, M.; Mora, M.; Díaz, J.; Schnettler, B.; Lobos, G. The gender role on moderator effect of food safety label between perceived quality and risk on fresh vegetables. Rev. La Fac. Cienc. Agrar. 2019, 51, 93–109. [Google Scholar]
- Martínez-Carrasco, L.; Brugarolas, M.; Martínez-Poveda, A.; Ruiz, J.; García-Martínez, S. Modelling perceived quality of tomato by structural equation analysis. Br. Food J. 2012, 114, 1414–1431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Power, E.B. University microfilms—A microfilming service for scholars. J. Doc. 1946, 2, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeithaml, V.A. Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. J. Mark. 1988, 52, 2–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCullough, J.; Best, R. Consumer Preferences for Food Label Information: A Basis for Segmentation. J. Consum. Aff. 1980, 14, 180–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jimenezguerrero, J.F.; Gázquez-Abad, J.C.; Huertas-Garcia, R.; Jimenez, J.F. Estimating consumer preferences for extrinsic and intrinsic attributes of vegetables. A study of German consumers. Span. J. Agric. Res. 2012, 10, 539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Causse, M.; Friguet, C.; Coiret, C.; Lépicier, M.; Navez, B.; Lee, M.; Holthuysen, N.; Sinesio, F.; Moneta, E.; Grandillo, S. Consumer Preferences for Fresh Tomato at the European Scale: A Common Segmentation on Taste and Firmness. J. Food Sci. 2010, 75, S531–S541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jürkenbeck, K.; Spiller, A. Importance of sensory quality signals in consumers’ food choice. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020, 90, 104155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ariyawardana, A.; Ganegodage, K.; Mortlock, M. Consumers trust in vegetable supply chain members and their behavioural responses: A study based in Queensland, Australia. Food Control. 2017, 73, 193–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grusovnik, D.; Rozman, C. Effects related to dimensions of purchasing decision quality of vegetables and fruits at grocery stores in Slovenia. Eur. J. Hortic. Sci. 2020, 85, 191–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kyriacou, M.C.; Rouphael, Y. Towards a new definition of quality for fresh fruits and vegetables. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 234, 463–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Massaglia, S.; Borra, D.; Peano, C.; Sottile, F.; Merlino, V. Consumer Preference Heterogeneity Evaluation in Fruit and Vegetable Purchasing Decisions Using the Best–Worst Approach. Foods 2019, 8, 266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Takemura, K. Behavioral Decision Theory: Psychological and Mathematical Descriptions of Human Choice Behavior, 2nd ed.; Springer Nature: Berlin, Germany, 2021; ISBN 978-981-16-5452-7. [Google Scholar]
- Van Der Pol, M.; Ryan, M. Using conjoint analysis to establish consumer preferences for fruit and vegetables. Br. Food J. 1996, 98, 5–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dagupen, M.K.T.; Tagarino, D.D.; Gumihid, B.B.; Gellynck, X.; Viaene, J. The ideal vegetable attributes based on consumer preferences: A conjoint analysis approach. In Proceedings of the XVI International Symposium on Horticultural Economics and Management, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 28 June 2009; Volume 831, ISBN 9789066054295. [Google Scholar]
- Schnettler, B.; Pihán, R.; Valdevenito, A.; Miranda, H.; Lobos, G.; Grunert, K.G. Acceptance of a vegetable with designation of origin in two cities in southern Chile|Aceptación de una hortaliza con denominación de origen en dos ciudades del sur de Chile. Rev. La Fac. Cienc. Agrar. 2015, 47, 173–191. [Google Scholar]
- Labrie, C.; Sijtsema, S.; Snoek, H.; Raaijmakers, I.; Aramyan, L. Flavour and nutrition of fruits and vegetables create added value to consumers. Acta Hortic. 2019, 1277, 425–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Onwezen, M. Chapter 15—Including Context in Consumer Segmentation: A Literature Overview Shows the What, Why, and How. In Methods in Consumer Research, Volume 1; Ares, G., Varela, P., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2018; pp. 383–400. ISBN 978-0-08-102089-0. [Google Scholar]
- Casas-Rosal, J.C.; Segura, M.; Maroto, C. Food market segmentation based on consumer preferences using outranking multicriteria approaches. Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 2021, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verain, M.C.; Sijtsema, S.J.; Taufik, D.; Raaijmakers, I.; Reinders, M.J. Motive-based consumer segments and their fruit and vegetable consumption in several contexts. Food Res. Int. 2019, 127, 108731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adasme-Berríos, C.; Sánchez, M.; Jara-Rojas, R.; Engler, A.; Rodríguez, M.; Mora, M. Who are the potential consumers of organic fruits and vegetables in central Chile? A CHAID approach. Rev. La Fac. Cienc. Agrar. 2015, 47, 193–208. [Google Scholar]
- Calus, M.; Van Huylenbroeck, G. The Persistence of Family Farming: A Review of Explanatory Socio-economic and Historical Factors. J. Comp. Fam. Stud. 2010, 41, 639–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hair, J.; Anderson, R.; Tatham, R.; Black, W. Análisis Multivariante, 5th ed.; Prentice Hall: Madrid, Spain, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Cerda, A.A.; García, L.Y.; Viscay, A.I.; López, B.M. Willingness to pay and consumer preferences for organic lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.). Rev. La Fac. Agron. La Univ. Del Zulia 2021, 38, 1087–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Da Cunha, D.T.; Antunes, A.E.C.; Da Rocha, J.G.; Dutra, T.G.; Manfrinato, C.V.; Oliveira, J.M.; Rostagno, M.A. Differences between organic and conventional leafy green vegetables perceived by university students. Br. Food J. 2019, 121, 1579–1591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nie, Y.Y.; Liang, A.R.-D.; Wang, E.C. Third-party certification labels for organic food: Consumers purchase choice and willingness-to-pay. Br. Food J. 2021, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aizaki, H.; Sato, K. Consumer preferences for three dimensions of country of origin of a processed food product. Br. Food J. 2020, 122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mora, M.; Schnettler, B.; Lobos, G.; Geldes, C.; Boza, S.; Lapo, M.; Del, C.; Paz, R. Aceite de oliva y la generación del milenio en Chile: ¿Qué consideran estos consumidores cuando compran este producto? Rev. La Fac. Cienc. Agrar. Univ. Nac. Cuyo 2020, 52, 233–245. [Google Scholar]
- Cavallo, D.P.; Cefola, M.; Pace, B.; Logrieco, A.F.; Attolico, G. Non-destructive automatic quality evaluation of fresh-cut iceberg lettuce through packaging material. J. Food Eng. 2018, 223, 46–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yousuf, B.; Qadri, O.S.; Srivastava, A.K. Recent developments in shelf-life extension of fresh-cut fruits and vegetables by application of different edible coatings: A review. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 89, 198–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Corato, U. Improving the shelf-life and quality of fresh and minimally-processed fruits and vegetables for a modern food industry: A comprehensive critical review from the traditional technologies into the most promising advancements. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 60, 940–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pilone, V.; Stasi, A.; Baselice, A. Quality preferences and pricing of fresh-cut salads in Italy: New evidence from market data. Br. Food J. 2017, 119, 1473–1486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erkan, M.; Yıldırım, I. Postharvest Quality and Safety of Fresh-Cut Vegetables. In Minimally Processed Refrigerated Fruits and Vegetables, Food Engineering Series; Yildiz, F., Ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2017; pp. 271–326. [Google Scholar]
- Ladaru, G.-R.; Ilie, D.; Diaconeasa, M.; Petre, I.; Marin, F.; Lazar, V. Influencing Factors of a Sustainable Vegetable Choice. The Romanian Consumers’ Case. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministerio_de_Salud Encuesta Nacional del Consumo de Alimentos. 2010. Available online: https://www.minsal.cl/sites/default/files/ENCA_FINAL_DIC_2014.pdf (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Ojeda, L.; Claramonte, M.; Rey, J.; Trestini, C.; Useche, M.; Zambrano, N.; Rodríguez, M.; Vásquez, I.; Noguera-Machado, N. Efecto de los procesos de congelación y descongelación sobre los almidones en un alimento a base de maíz. Rev. Chil. Nutr. 2018, 45, 310–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, S.; Li, C.; Copeland, L.; Niu, Q.; Wang, S. Starch Retrogradation: A Comprehensive Review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2015, 14, 568–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Köbrich, C.; Bravo-Peña, F.; Boza, S. Percepción y actitudes de consumidores chilenos respecto a productos de origen campesino: Un estudio exploratorio. RIVAR 2019, 6, 59–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niu, L.; Nazarenko, O.V.; Chen, J.; Hu, Z. Innovation and selection of family farms’ marketing channels in Henan Province under the “Internet+” environment. Innov. Mark. 2021, 17, 132–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, R. Japanese consumers’ use of extrinsic and intrinsic cues to mitigate risky food choices. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2007, 32, 49–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Winterstein, J.; Habisch, A. Is local the new organic? Empirical evidence from German regions. Br. Food J. 2021, 123, 3486–3501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schnettler, B.; Miranda, H.; Lobos, G.; Orellana, L.; Sepúlveda, J.; Denegri, M.; Etchebarne, S.; Mora, M.; Grunert, K.G. Eating habits and subjective well-being. A typology of students in Chilean state universities. Appetite 2015, 89, 203–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tittarelli, F.; Saba, A.; Di Pierro, M.; Ciaccia, C. Food Citizenship as an Agroecological Tool for Food System Re-Design. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoffmann, N.C.; Symmank, C.; Mai, R.; Stok, F.M.; Rohm, H.; Hoffmann, S. The influence of extrinsic product attributes on consumers’ food decisions: Review and network analysis of the marketing literature. J. Mark. Manag. 2020, 36, 888–915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chalupová, M.; Rojík, S.; Kotoučková, H.; Kauerová, L. Food Labels (Quality, Origin, and Sustainability): The Experience of Czech Producers. Sustainability 2020, 13, 318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cui, L.; Jiang, H.; Deng, H.; Zhang, T. The influence of the diffusion of food safety information through social media on consumers’ purchase intentions. Data Technol. Appl. 2019, 53, 230–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grunert, K.G.; Hieke, S.; Wills, J. Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use. Food Policy 2014, 44, 177–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Watanabe, E.A.D.M.; Alfinito, S.; Barbirato, L.L. Certification label and fresh organic produce category in an emerging country: An experimental study on consumer trust and purchase intention. Br. Food J. 2021, 123, 2258–2271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, B.; Fu, Z.; Huang, J.; Wang, J.; Xu, S.; Zhang, L. Consumers’ perceptions, purchase intention, and willingness to pay a premium price for safe vegetables: A case study of Beijing, China. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 197, 1498–1507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gonçalves, D.; Coelho, P.; Martinez, L.F.; Monteiro, P. Nudging Consumers Toward Healthier Food Choices: A Field Study on the Effect of Social Norms. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yadav, M.; Kumar, A.; Mangla, S.K.; Luthra, S.; Bamel, U.; Garza-Reyes, J.A. Mapping the human resource focused enablers with sustainability viewpoints in Indian power sector. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 210, 1311–1323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tahat, M.M.; Alananbeh, K.M.; Othman, Y.A.; Leskovar, D.I. Soil Health and Sustainable Agriculture. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adasme-Berrios, C. La Aceptación De Los Alimentos Funcionales Entre Los Consumidores. Nutr. Hosp. 2015, 32, 1616–1623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bonanno, A.; Russo, C.; Menapace, L. Market power and bargaining in agrifood markets: A review of emerging topics and tools. Agribusiness 2017, 34, 6–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chemas-Velez, M.M.; Gómez, L.F.; Velasquez, A.; Mora-Plazas, M.; Parra, D.C. Scoping review of studies on food marketing in Latin America: Summary of existing evidence and research gaps. Rev. De Saude Publica 2020, 53, 107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kasprzak, C.M.; Lally, A.E.; Schoonover, J.J.; Gallicchio, D.; Haynes-Maslow, L.; Vermont, L.N.; Ammerman, A.S.; Raja, S.; Tumiel-Berhalter, L.; Tirabassi, J.N.; et al. Operational challenges that may affect implementation of evidence-based mobile market interventions. BMC Public Health 2022, 22, 776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayala, G.X.; Pickrel, J.L.; Baquero, B.; Sanchez-Flack, J.; Lin, S.-F.; Belch, G.; Rock, C.L.; Linnan, L.; Gittelsohn, J.; Ji, M.; et al. The El Valor de Nuestra Salud clustered randomized controlled trial store-based intervention to promote fruit and vegetable purchasing and consumption. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2022, 19, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Molina, M.; Anderson, L.N.; Guindon, G.E.; Tarride, J. A review of implementation and evaluation of Pan American Health Organization’s policies to prevent childhood obesity in Latin America. Obes. Sci. Pr. 2021, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taillie, L.S.; Busey, E.; Stoltze, F.M.; Dillman Carpentier, F.R. Governmental policies to reduce unhealthy food marketing to children. Nutr. Rev. 2019, 77, 787–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, B.; Villoria, N.B. Climate shocks, food price stability and international trade: Evidence from 76 maize markets in 27 net-importing countries. Environ. Res. Lett. 2018, 14, 014007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cordero-Ahiman, O.V.; Vanegas, J.L.; Fernández-Lucero, C.A.; Torres-Torres, D.F.; Ayaviri-Nina, V.D.; Quispe-Fernández, G.M. Responsible Marketing in the Traffic Light Labeling of Food Products in Ecuador: Perceptions of Cuenca Consumers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pareti, S.; Monllor, J.; Kraft, I. Application of Technology Solutions during the Covid-19 Crisis: Latin America’s 50 Best Restaurants. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on E-business and Mobile Commerce, Seoul, Korea, 27–29 May 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rozas, L.; Castronuovo, L.; Busse, P.; Mus, S.; Barnoya, J.; Garrón, A.; Tiscornia, M.V.; Guanieri, L. Data on the Facebook marketing strategies used by fast-food chains in four Latin American countries during the COVID-19 lockdowns. BMC Res. Notes 2021, 14, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Profile | Type of Vegetable | Producer | Label | Origin | Presentation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Lettuce | INDAP beneficiary | Farmhand label | National | Cut vegetables |
2 | Lettuce | Non-beneficiary | Without label | Local | Whole vegetables |
3 | Cucumber | INDAP beneficiary | Farmhand label | Local | Cut vegetables |
4 | Onion | Non-beneficiary | Without label | National | Cut vegetables |
5 | Cucumber | Non-beneficiary | Without label | National | Whole vegetables |
6 | Lettuce | Non-beneficiary | Without label | National | Cut vegetables |
7 | Corn | Non-beneficiary | Without label | Local | Whole vegetables |
8 | Tomato | INDAP beneficiary | Without label | National | Whole vegetables |
9 | Onion | INDAP beneficiary | Without label | Local | Whole vegetables |
10 | Tomato | INDAP beneficiary | Farmhand label | National | Whole vegetables |
11 | Cucumber | INDAP beneficiary | Without label | Local | Cut vegetables |
12 | Cucumber | Non-beneficiary | Without label | National | Whole vegetables |
13 | Corn | INDAP beneficiary | Without label | National | Cut vegetables |
14 | Lettuce | INDAP beneficiary | Farmhand label | Local | Whole vegetables |
15 | Tomato | Non-beneficiary | Without label | Local | Cut vegetables |
16 | Tomato | Non-beneficiary | Without label | Local | Whole vegetables |
17 | Onion | INDAP beneficiary | Without label | Local | Cut vegetables |
18 | Lettuce | Non-beneficiary | Without label | National | Whole vegetables |
Total Sample | Group 1 n = 302 | Group 2 n = 470 | Group 3 n = 174 | F | p | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Relative importance (%) | |||||||||
Type of vegetable | 21.80 | 32.73 | a | 12.96 | c | 25.83 | b | 166.4 | 0.000 |
Producer | 10.30 | 20.10 | a | 4.45 | c | 8.33 | b | 128.2 | 0.000 |
Label | 15.90 | 15.34 | b | 6.44 | c | 41.16 | a | 458.8 | 0.000 |
Origin | 6.70 | 9.03 | a | 5.01 | c | 6.40 | b | 29.1 | 0.000 |
Presentation | 45.30 | 22.80 | b | 71.14 | a | 18.27 | c | 589.0 | 0.000 |
Utility values of attributes | |||||||||
Tomato | −0.15 | −0.026 | a | −0.202 | b | −0.224 | b | 13.4 | 0.000 |
Lettuce | 0.06 | 0.204 | a | 0.105 | a | −0.289 | b | 32.3 | 0.000 |
Cucumber | −0.17 | −0.228 | b | −0.188 | b | 0.003 | a | 6.7 | 0.000 |
Onion | −0.06 | −0.195 | b | −0.118 | b | 0.326 | a | 31.8 | 0.000 |
Corn | 0.31 | 0.245 | b | 0.404 | a | 0.185 | b | 6.5 | 0.000 |
INDAP beneficiary | 0.19 | 0.402 | a | 0.152 | b | −0.067 | c | 59.9 | 0.000 |
Non-beneficiary | −0.19 | −0.402 | c | −0.152 | b | 0.067 | a | 59.9 | 0.000 |
Farm hand label | 0.30 | 0.067 | b | 0.068 | b | 1.336 | a | 468.2 | 0.000 |
Without label | −0.30 | −0.067 | a | −0.068 | a | −1.336 | b | 468.2 | 0.000 |
National | 0.10 | 0.043 | b | 0.153 | a | 0.041 | b | 14.1 | 0.000 |
Local | −0.10 | −0.043 | a | −0.153 | b | −0.041 | a | 14.1 | 0.000 |
Cut vegetables | 1.44 | 0.404 | b | 2.468 | a | 0.483 | b | 1609.3 | 0.000 |
Whole vegetables | −1.44 | −0.404 | a | −2.468 | b | −0.483 | a | 1609.3 | 0.000 |
Characteristics (%) | Group 1 n = 302 | Group 2 n = 470 | Group 3 n = 174 |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | p = 0.000 | ||
Male | 33.1 | 20.6 | 26.2 |
Female | 66.9 | 79.4 | 73.8 |
Age | p = 0.000 | ||
<35 years old | 48.0 | 31.9 | 42.5 |
35–54 years old | 40.4 | 41.9 | 38.5 |
55 years or more | 11.6 | 26.2 | 19.0 |
Socioeconomic status (SES) | p = 0.000 | ||
High and middle-high | 33.8 | 17.9 | 35.6 |
Middle-middle | 29.2 | 30.0 | 35.6 |
Middle-low | 29.1 | 37.2 | 25.9 |
Low | 7.9 | 14.9 | 2.9 |
Family size | p = 0.530 | ||
Family with 1–2 members | 28.5 | 31.9 | 29.3 |
Family with 3–4 members | 51.0 | 51.7 | 54.6 |
Family with 5 or more members | 20.5 | 16.4 | 16.1 |
Frequency of vegetable consumption | p = 0.000 | ||
Eat vegetables occasionally | 8.3 | 4.0 | 5.7 |
Eat vegetables one time in a week | 8.9 | 3.8 | 6.4 |
Eat vegetables three time in a week | 30.5 | 27.7 | 29.3 |
Eat vegetables daily | 52.3 | 64.5 | 58.6 |
Where do you purchase fresh vegetables? | p = 0.000 | ||
Supermarkets | 28.5 | 14.9 | 29.9 |
Corner stores | 13.2 | 11.3 | 10.9 |
Municipal fairs | 34.8 | 54.3 | 42.0 |
Vegetable stores | 21.8 | 17.9 | 15.5 |
Other | 1.7 | 1.6 | 1.7 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Adasme-Berríos, C.; Valdes, R.; Roco, L.; Gómez, D.; Carvajal, E.; Herrera, C.; Espinoza, J.; Rivera, K. Segmentation of Consumer Preferences for Vegetables Produced in Areas Depressed by Drought. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6190. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106190
Adasme-Berríos C, Valdes R, Roco L, Gómez D, Carvajal E, Herrera C, Espinoza J, Rivera K. Segmentation of Consumer Preferences for Vegetables Produced in Areas Depressed by Drought. Sustainability. 2022; 14(10):6190. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106190
Chicago/Turabian StyleAdasme-Berríos, Cristian, Rodrigo Valdes, Lisandro Roco, David Gómez, Emilia Carvajal, Camila Herrera, Joaquín Espinoza, and Karla Rivera. 2022. "Segmentation of Consumer Preferences for Vegetables Produced in Areas Depressed by Drought" Sustainability 14, no. 10: 6190. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106190