Cross-Cultural Differences in the Perception of Lamb between New Zealand and Chinese Consumers in New Zealand
by
, , , ,
Scott C. Hutchings
1
,
Luis Guerrero
2,
Levi Smeets
3,
Graham T. Eyres
4
,
Patrick Silcock
4
,
Enrique Pavan
1,5 and
Carolina E. Realini
1,* 1
AgResearch Limited, Te Ohu Rangahau Kai, Massey University Campus, Grasslands, Tennent Drive, Palmerston North 4474, New Zealand
2
IRTA-Monells, Finca Camps i Armet, 17121 Monells, Spain
3
Department of Marketing & Supply Chain Management, Maastricht University, Nassaustraat 36, 5911 BV Venlo, The Netherlands
4
Department of Food Science, University of Otago, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand
5
Departamento de Producción Animal, Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce, Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria, c.c. 276, Balcarce 7620, Argentina
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Foods 2022, 11(14), 2045; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11142045
Submission received: 6 May 2022
/
Revised: 7 July 2022
/
Accepted: 8 July 2022
/
Published: 11 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Sensory and Consumer Sciences)
Abstract
:This study investigated differences between general New Zealand consumers and ethnic Chinese consumers living in New Zealand regarding the importance of lamb attributes at the point of purchase and opinions of New Zealand lamb. A central location test survey was undertaken with 156 New Zealand consumers living in Dunedin, New Zealand, and 159 Chinese consumers living in Auckland, New Zealand. In terms of importance at the point of purchase, Chinese consumers rated a number of attributes as more important than New Zealand consumers by a difference of >1.0 on a 9-point Likert scale for importance: animal origin, feeding, age, presence of hormones/residues, traceability, food safety, place of purchase, brand/quality label, and label information (p < 0.05). New Zealand consumers rated the price of other meats and animal welfare as more important than Chinese consumers (p < 0.05); however, the differences in scores were <1.0. In terms of opinions, Chinese consumers also considered New Zealand lamb to be better value for money, more additive-free, and more likely to make people feel good (p < 0.05), by scores >1.0 on a 7-point Likert scale for agreement. New Zealand consumers considered New Zealand lamb more traditional and boring (p < 0.05); however, the differences in scores were <1.0.
1. Introduction
In New Zealand, a nation with strong historical ties to lamb production [1], the consumption of lamb by local consumers has declined drastically in recent years. Lamb consumption in New Zealand is reported to have dropped 45% over the past decade [2], and total sheep meat consumption in New Zealand dropped from 25.5 kg per capita in 2002 to 3.5 kg per capita in 2019 [3,4]. In the meantime, the consumption of poultry and pork in New Zealand has increased [2,4], and veganism, vegetarianism, and flexitarianism are also on the rise [5].
The reasons for this decline in lamb consumption by New Zealand consumers is likely to be a result of a range of factors. Consumer concerns on issues such as the cost of lamb relative to other meats, the nutritive properties of lamb, environmental footprint of red meat production, the taste experience of lamb, perceived lack of versatility, as well as animal welfare, may all play a role in declining consumption. When considering lamb perception in other cultures, a wide range of attributes have been identified to be important to consumers when deciding to purchase lamb. For example, recent studies have shown that factors such as freshness, marbling, colour, the type of cut, price, and quality label are very important to lamb consumers in Brazil [6]; food safety and the absence of hormones and antibiotics are important for sheep meat consumers in Mexico [7]; and external appearance, origin, and price are important to lamb consumers in Spain [8].
While around 94% of the sheep meat produced in New Zealand is exported [9], an increasing desire by global consumers to buy local produce [10] and plans to reduce meat consumption in some key export markets due to environmental pressures [11,12], means that a greater understanding of the preferences of New Zealand consumers towards lamb is needed for New Zealand lamb producers to increase the share of product they market locally. Furthermore, understanding the attitudes of other growing ethnic populations in New Zealand, as well as general New Zealand consumers, can provide critical insights for New Zealand lamb producers on how to drive greater opportunities for local consumption of lamb. In New Zealand, Chinese are one of the fastest growing ethnic groups [13,14], largely as a result of immigration [15]. Understanding the perception of lamb of ethnic Chinese in New Zealand provides an opportunity to understand cross-cultural differences in perception towards lamb, from consumers whose culture originates from a nation where lamb consumption has been increasing in recent decades [16].
Prior cross-cultural research has identified notable differences in how consumers from different cultures view lamb. For example, Indian and Chinese consumers have been shown to have a higher willingness to pay for environmental certification on lamb products than UK consumers [17]. A number of studies have also investigated differences in sensory/eating quality responses of lamb between Chinese consumers and consumers in certain western markets [18,19,20]. While the attitudes of Chinese consumer perceptions in China towards lamb are well understood [21,22,23], to the best of the authors’ knowledge, no published research has investigated attitudes of New Zealand consumers towards a comprehensive range of credence and intrinsic New Zealand lamb attributes, or investigated the attitudes of any specific New Zealand ethnic group.
The aim of this study was, therefore, to determine how New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers in New Zealand differ in their attitudes towards a range of lamb attributes (such as animal origin, food safety, appearance, taste, price, brand), and in their opinions of New Zealand lamb. It was hypothesized that the relative importance of a range of attributes, and opinion of New Zealand lamb would differ between the cultures.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Recruitment, Sample Characteristics and Data Collection
A sample of 156 general New Zealand consumers living in Dunedin, New Zealand, was obtained through a consumer database at the University of Otago, and a sample of 159 ethnic Chinese consumers living in Auckland, New Zealand, was obtained for the Chinese consumer group by an external recruitment company. All Chinese consumers were self-identified Chinese, all spoke Mandarin as their first language, and read/wrote in Mandarin script.
The survey was administered to the New Zealand consumers at the Department of Food Science, the University of Otago, Dunedin, and to the Chinese consumers at the Plant & Food Research Consumer Research facility in Auckland. Eight sessions with 20 participants in each session were run at central location facilities for both groups of consumers. The survey was undertaken in central location facilities, rather than through an online survey, as studies using Likert scales in online surveys with Chinese consumers can often show that attribute differentiation can be limited, where Chinese consumers give high scores for all attributes, using a narrow scale range [21,24]. Some studies suggest that the behavioural differences between consumers when completing surveys in person, compared to online, may increase scale use [25] and the reliability of results [26].
Both groups of consumers received and completed the questionnaire on paper ballots, in individual sensory booths in January, 2019. A summary of the demographic characteristics of the two population groups is shown in Table 1. All consumers were non-rejecters of lamb and, on average, consumed lamb at least once per month, and were aged 18–75 years old. The data for the New Zealand consumers were collected and stored in accordance with University of Otago Human Ethics application number 15/092. The data for the Chinese consumers were covered by general approval for sensory and consumer research from the Human Ethics Committee at the New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research. Participants provided informed consent and were assured that their responses would remain confidential and that they could withdraw from the study at any time.
2.2. Questionnaire
The questionnaire used in this survey, conducted as central location test, asked identical questions to the online survey conducted in China and results published in [21]. A copy of the questionnaire can be found in Appendix A. The survey captured information on demographic data, dietary habits, meat qualities of interest at the point of purchase, and the lamb products the consumers typically purchase. To understand consumer considerations at the point of purchase, consumers indicated the level of importance of varying aspects of lamb meat purchase on a scale of one (“not important”) to nine (“very important”). This included animal and other production factors, pricing factors, intrinsic cues of the meat, convenience factors, personal knowledge of commercial cuts and aspects related to descriptive information and branding. To capture their opinion on New Zealand lamb meat, consumers rated the degree of agreement on several descriptions of the lamb meat on a scale of one (“strongly disagree”) to seven (“strongly agree”). These describe New Zealand lamb meat in several ways, including, but not limited to, being nutritious, safe, good value for money, produced sustainably and convenient. All New Zealand consumers received the English version of the questionnaire, while Chinese consumers received the Mandarin version of the questionnaire (Appendix A). A couple of native speakers of Mandarin translated the questionnaire from English into Mandarin. Chinese scientists in Auckland (Plant and Food Research, New Zealand) subsequently validated the translation.
2.3. Data Analysis
XLSTAT 2017 (Addinsoft 2012) software was used to analyze survey data. For data on demographic factors, diet, and consumption patterns, a Chi-square test was performed to find differences between ethnicities. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to the data on consumers’ consideration of lamb meat attributes at the point of purchase and their opinion on New Zealand lamb meat to find differences in scores between ethnicities (fixed effect).
3. Results
3.1. Demographic Characteristics
Table 1 summarizes the demographic characteristics of the two consumer groups that were sampled. The general New Zealand consumer group was comprised of a majority of New Zealand Europeans (87%), with smaller proportions of other ethnicities (such as Maori, Samaon, Cook Island Maori, and Chinese), while the Chinese group was comprised of only people of Chinese ethnicity (100%). Gender balance was similar between the two groups, while age distribution did differ slightly—more of the Chinese consumers were aged 26–35, and more of the New Zealand consumers were aged 46–60. Educational background also differed, with a higher proportion of Chinese consumers having a tertiary qualification, and a higher proportion of New Zealand consumers having a trades certificate or only a high school qualification. New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers were similar in terms of occupation types, apart from a slightly higher number of New Zealand consumers working as trades people and a lower number as home makers. Income was also similar between the two groups, with the exception of a higher proportion of Chinese consumers earning NZD40,001 to NZD55,000, and a higher proportion of New Zealand consumers earning more than NZD150,000. The number of adults in the household was similar between the two groups; however, having 1 child in the household was slightly more common for Chinese consumers, while having 2 or more children in the household was slightly more common for New Zealand consumers.
3.2. Diet and Consumption Patterns
Results from Table 2 show that diet differed significantly between New Zealand and Chinese consumers, with a much greater proportion of Chinese consumers following low salt, low sugar, and low calorie diets (p < 0.05). In terms of consumption frequency of animal protein sources, Chinese consumers generally consumed significantly greater quantities of lamb and pork than New Zealand consumers (p < 0.05), and significantly less poultry and beef (p < 0.05). No significant differences in fish consumption were found between the two groups (p > 0.05) (Table 2).
3.3. Preferred Level of Cooking, Meat Qualities of Interest, Purchase Location and Types of Lamb Products Typically Purchased
Many of the preferences measured in terms of cooking, location of purchase, and types of lamb products differed significantly between New Zealand and Chinese consumers (p < 0.05) (Table 3). A higher proportion of Chinese consumers preferred meat cooked well-done, while a higher percentage of New Zealand consumers preferred meat cooked rare (p < 0.05). A higher proportion of Chinese consumers sought out leanness and meat colour when purchasing meat, whereas a higher proportion of New Zealand consumers were interested in portion size (p < 0.05). No difference in the proportion of consumers looking at price when purchasing red meat was observed (p > 0.05). Although the proportion of Chinese consumers that look for marbling when purchasing lamb was higher (p < 0.05) than New Zealand consumers, the proportion of consumers looking for marbling was relatively low for both ethnicities. Similar proportions of New Zealand and Chinese consumers typically purchased leg roast lamb. A greater proportion of New Zealand consumers typically purchased lamb chops, lamb mince, and lamb sausages, whereas a greater proportion of Chinese consumers typically purchased lamb steaks, lamb shanks, and lamb shoulder roast (p < 0.05).
3.4. Importance of Lamb Attributes at the Point of Purchase (e.g., Origin, Food Safety, Appearance, Taste, Price)
In general, both New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers rated most lamb attributes at the point of purchase as important (scores > 5.0). Most notably, both New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers rated taste attributes (flavour and texture in particular), food safety, and price, as important lamb attributes at the point of purchase. Furthermore, both New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers also rated animal sex and the time of day as relatively unimportant attributes at the point of purchase (scores < 5.0) (Table 4). However, comparisons between New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers for each attribute revealed significant differences for 20 of the 25 attributes (p < 0.05) (Table 4). While the magnitude of some differences was small (differences in scores <1.0), some notable effects were observed: Chinese consumers rated animal origin, feeding, age, presence of hormones/residues, traceability, food safety, place of purchase, brand/quality label, and label information as more important than New Zealand consumers by a difference of 1.0 or more (p < 0.05). New Zealand consumers rated animal welfare and the price of other meats as significantly more important than Chinese consumers (p < 0.05), although the magnitude of differences with Chinese consumers was less than one. There were no significant differences between New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers in their ratings of the importance of lamb price, fat content, trust in the butcher, dish to be prepared with and value for money (p > 0.05).
3.5. Opinion about New Zealand Lamb
In general, both New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers agreed with the positive statements presented on New Zealand lamb characteristics (scores > 4.0), and also both showed disagreement with the two negative statements presented on New Zealand lamb characteristics (scores < 4.0), boring and hard to digest (Table 5). However, there were also significant differences between New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers in the degree of agreement/disagreement about New Zealand lamb for 15 out of 18 characteristics (p < 0.05). Specifically, Chinese consumers’ opinion of New Zealand lamb was higher than New Zealand consumers for the following characteristics: nutritious, healthy, safe, good value for money, natural, produced sustainably, convenient, readily available, high quality, contains no additives, makes people feel good, tastes good, and supports the New Zealand economy (p < 0.05). However, the magnitude of the differences was small in most cases (differences in scores < 1.0), except for the attributes good value for money, makes people feel good, and contains no additive (differences in scores > 1.0). Interestingly, New Zealand consumers’ opinion of New Zealand lamb was higher than Chinese consumers for two characteristics: traditional product and boring (p < 0.05), although the magnitude of the differences was less than one. There was no significant difference between the opinions of New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers for well-known, unique, and hard to digest (p > 0.05).
4. Discussion
4.1. Differences in Diets, Cooking and Purchasing Habits between Chinese and New Zealand Consumers
As expected, results showed a number of differences between Chinese consumers and New Zealand consumers in their diet and purchasing behaviour with meat (Table 2). This may occur as a result of differences in a wide range of social (e.g., cultural traditions, religion, family style), economic (e.g., salary, lifestyle or employment status), and environmental (e.g., water, soil, geography) factors that New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers would have experienced growing up [27]. In general, Chinese consumers are well-known to be health-conscious consumers [28], and the present study’s finding that a significantly higher proportion of Chinese consumers in New Zealand followed diets low in salt, sugar, and calories, supports this concept. Although results indicated that a higher proportion of Chinese consumers look for marbling when purchasing lamb compared to New Zealand consumers, results also indicate a relatively low proportion of consumers from both ethnicities look for marbling when purchasing lamb compared to most other quality attributes. Large differences in the types of lamb products purchased were also seen between Chinese and New Zealand consumers, which again was expected as a result of differences in food culture such as food familiarity, flavour preferences, and cooking styles [18,20,27,29]. Chinese consumers tended to prefer to cook their lamb more thoroughly than New Zealand consumers, which may again reflect differences in cooking styles between cultures. For example, the most common cooking methods for sheep meat in China are stewing, cooking in hot pot or roasting [23], which normally cook meat to a high degree of doneness.
4.2. Differences in the Importance of Lamb Attributes at the Point of Purchase between Chinese and New Zealand Consumers
It is well-known that Chinese consumers place high importance on the quality, safety, and traceability of meat [22,23,30], often seeing these attributes as more important than consumers in other western nations [17]. Results in this study support this notion, as higher ratings of importance for food safety-related attributes such as traceability, brand/quality label, label information, food safety, knowledge of commercial cuts and place of purchase were found for Chinese consumers compared to New Zealand consumers. Several animal factors (origin, feed, and age) were also more important to Chinese consumers than New Zealand consumers (Table 4). The higher value of importance of animal attributes by Chinese consumers may stem from a high level of distrust in Chinese food production systems and Chinese food products [31,32]. Animal welfare was an exception, where New Zealand consumers considered it more important than Chinese consumers when purchasing lamb. Recent studies suggest that animal welfare is becoming an increasingly important issue with Chinese consumers [33,34,35]; however, the results of this study indicate that it may still be a more important issue for consumers from a western background. In New Zealand, consumers generally expect the food they purchase to be safe for consumption; this high degree of trust may lead to greater attention on animal welfare issues.
In terms of the importance of sensory attributes, while Chinese consumers gave slightly higher overall ratings than New Zealand consumers (meat appearance, colour, flavour, texture), both consumer groups considered these attributes important when purchasing lamb (Table 4). In fact, meat flavour and texture were of a comparative level of importance to food safety for New Zealand consumers (food safety was more important than flavour and texture for Chinese consumers). Previous studies assessing the importance of sensory attributes on food choice suggest that sensory appeal is important to both Chinese and western consumers [36]. Interestingly, Prescott et al., 2002, [37] compared motives of food choice between New Zealand consumers and Japanese, Taiwanese, and ethnically Chinese Malaysian consumers, and found that sensory appeal was more important for New Zealand consumers than consumers from the other nations.
4.3. Differences in Opinion of New Zealand Lamb between Chinese and New Zealand Consumers
The largest difference observed between New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers in the opinion of New Zealand lamb was around price, where Chinese consumers considered New Zealand lamb as much better value for money than New Zealand consumers (Table 5). This result may again be due to the high value Chinese consumers place on food safety and quality attributes in lamb, attributes which the results of this study suggest Chinese consumers see in New Zealand lamb (Table 5). The fact that New Zealand consumers are known to view the price of food as the most important attribute when making purchasing decisions [38], is also likely to contribute to this result. New Zealand consumers rated the price of other meats as more important than Chinese consumers at the point of purchase (Table 4), and New Zealand consumers’ familiarity with New Zealand lamb, where safety and quality are expected, may temper concerns for some other attributes and put greater emphasis on price.
Furthermore, Chinese consumers had a higher overall opinion of New Zealand lamb than New Zealand consumers (Table 5). Although the magnitude of differences was relatively small, results suggest that Chinese consumers considered New Zealand lamb as more additive-free, likely to make people feel good, natural, healthy, sustainable, and high quality than New Zealand consumers; whereas New Zealand consumers viewed New Zealand lamb as more traditional than Chinese consumers (Table 5). In addition, Chinese consumers disagreed even more than New Zealand consumers with the statement that New Zealand lamb is boring. These results suggest that the New Zealand lamb industry has a significant opportunity to market lamb and lamb-based products to Chinese living in New Zealand, but also highlights that strategies need to be developed to address the concerns of general New Zealand consumers that New Zealand lamb is too expensive. While results in this study suggest that New Zealand consumers continue to believe that New Zealand lamb is unique, well-known, and of high quality, it is interesting that New Zealand consumers appear to be largely indifferent towards New Zealand lamb attributes despite its strong international reputation [1,39].
4.4. Limitations of This Study
This study recruited participants who were diverse in terms of sex, age, educational background, occupation, income, and household size. However, the age distribution of the New Zealand sample was skewed slightly towards the 18–25- and 46–60-year-old age categories, and skewed slightly towards males, compared to the total New Zealand population [40]. The age distribution of the Chinese sample was skewed slightly towards the younger/middle age categories (26–45 years old), and towards females, compared to the total Chinese population in New Zealand [41].
The results of this study show cross-cultural differences between New Zealanders and Chinese living in New Zealand; however, results cannot be generalized to cross-cultural differences between New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers from China. A comparison of responses of Chinese consumers from this study, with those obtained from an online survey with Chinese consumers in China using identical questions [21], shows only moderate differences in the results.
5. Conclusions
This study showed that, in terms of importance at the point of purchase, Chinese consumers rated a number of attributes as more important than New Zealand consumers by a difference of >1.0 on a 9-point Likert scale for importance: animal origin, feeding, age, presence of hormones/residues, traceability, food safety, place of purchase, brand/quality label, and label information (p < 0.05). New Zealand consumers rated the price of other meats and animal welfare as more important than Chinese consumers (p < 0.05); however, the differences in scores were <1.0. Both Chinese and New Zealand consumers rated sensory properties of lamb (meat colour, meat appearance, meat flavour, and meat texture) as important relative to other attributes; however, Chinese consumers still rated sensory properties as significantly more important than New Zealand consumers (p < 0.05), despite the differences in scores being <1.0.
In terms of opinions, Chinese consumers also considered New Zealand lamb to be better value for money, more additive-free, and more likely to make people feel good (p < 0.05), by scores >1.0 on a 7-point Likert scale for agreement. New Zealand consumers considered New Zealand lamb more traditional and boring (p < 0.05); however, the differences in scores were <1.0.
These insights may prove valuable for the New Zealand lamb industry to develop strategies to address declining domestic lamb consumption in New Zealand.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, S.C.H. and C.E.R.; methodology, L.G. and C.E.R.; formal analysis, L.G. and E.P.; investigation, S.C.H., G.T.E., P.S. and C.E.R.; resources, C.E.R.; data curation, L.G., L.S. and E.P; writing—original draft preparation, S.C.H.; writing—review and editing, L.S., G.T.E., P.S. and C.E.R.; project administration, C.E.R.; funding acquisition, C.E.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research was funded by the AgResearch Strategic Science Investment Fund, SSIF-A27235 (Consumer Experience: pathways to premium foods).
Institutional Review Board Statement
The data for the New Zealand consumers were collected and stored in accordance with University of Otago Human Ethics application number 15/092. The data for the Chinese consumers were covered by general approval for sensory and consumer research from the Human Ethics Committee at the New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research.
Informed Consent Statement
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement
The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. Although consumer data have been anonymised, data are not publicly available.
Acknowledgments
Yangfan Ye and Renyu Zhang are greatly appreciated for assisting with questionnaire translation from English into Mandarin and Chinese scientists from Plant & Food Research for validating the translation.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appendix A
ID Number: ID 号: ____________
Consumer Lamb Study
羊肉消费者研究
Demographic Questionnaire
调查问卷
- Gender 性别
| □ 男 Male | □ 女 Female |
- 2.
- Age 年龄
| □ 18–25 |
| □ 26–35 |
| □ 36–45 |
| □ 46–60 |
| □ 61 and over 及以上 |
- 3.
- Please provide the postcode for where you currently live: _____________
请填写您现居住地址的邮编编号: _____________
- 4.
- What is your highest level of education? 您最高的学历是?
| □ | None 无 |
| □ | Primary school 小学毕业 |
| □ | Middle School 初中毕业 |
| □ | High School 普通高中毕业 |
| □ | Trades certificate or vocational college 职业高中、技校毕业 |
| □ | Bachelor’s degree or higher 本科及以上 |
- 5.
- What is your occupation? 您的工作是?
| □ Trades 商人 | □ Home maker 家庭主妇/夫 |
| □ Professional 专业技术人员 | □ Student 学生 |
| □ Administration/Office 行政人员/前台 | □ Retired 退休 |
| □ Sales/Services 销售/服务业 | □ Unemployed 无业 |
| □ Technical 技术服务支持 | □ Other employment 其他工作 |
| □ Labourer 劳工 |
- 6.
- Which of these income levels best represents your combine household income (or personal if single) per annum? ($NZD)
以下哪一项的收入水平最符合您的年家庭 （或个人如果单身) 收入?
| □ Less than $25,000 |
| □ $25,001–$40,000 |
| □ $40,001–55,000 |
| □ $55,001–$70,000 |
| □ $70,001–$100,000 |
| □ $100,001-$150,000 |
| □ More than $150,000 |
- 7.
- How many people live in your household (adults are aged 18 and over.
您家庭的人数 (成年人指18岁及以上).
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 (or more) (及更多) | |
| Adults 成年人 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Children 儿童 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
- 8.
- Please indicate if you follow any of these diets (you may select more than one option).
如果您遵循以下的饮食习惯，请指出 (可以多选).
| □ Low salt 低盐 |
| □ Low sugar 低糖 |
| □ Low calories 低卡路里 |
| □ Other—please specify______________其他—请指明_____________________ |
| □ I don’t follow any diets 我不遵从特定的饮食习惯 |
- 9.
- How often do you consume the following types of meat? 您消费一下肉类的频率?
| Meat Type 肉的 种类 | Daily 每天 | 4–5 times a week 每周 4–5 次 | 2–3 times a week 每周 2–3 次 | Weekly 每周 | Fortnightly 每2周 | Monthly 每月 | Never 从不 |
| Lamb 羊肉 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Beef 牛肉 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Pork 猪肉 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Poultry 禽类 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Fish 鱼肉 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
- 10.
- When consuming grilled lamb, what level of cooking do you prefer?
食用烤羊肉的时候，您喜欢烹饪到怎样的熟度?
| □ Blue 生肉 □ Rare 半生/三成熟 □ Medium/Rare 半生至中等/四成熟 |
| □ Medium 中等/五成熟 □ Medium/Well Done 中等至全熟/7成熟 □ Well Done 全熟 |
- 11.
- Where do you usually purchase red meat for your household?
您通常在哪里购买红肉（牛羊肉）?
| □ Supermarket 超市 |
| □ Butcher shop 肉店 □ Market 集市 |
| □ On-line 网购 |
| □ Other—please specify 其他—请指明 _______________________ |
- 12.
- What qualities do you look for when purchasing red meat? (Select all applicable)
那些品质是您在购买时所期待的? (可多选)
| □ Marbling 大理石花纹 |
| □ Leanness 肥瘦比例 |
| □ Meat colour 肉的颜色 |
| □ Portion size 分量大小 |
| □ Price 价格 |
| □ Other—please specify其他—请指明_______________________ |
- 13.
- What lamb products do you typically purchase? (Select all applicable)
您通常会购买哪部分的羊肉? (可多选)
| □ Leg roast 羊大腿 |
| □ Lamb chops 单骨羊排 |
| □ Lamb mince 羊肉碎 |
| □ Lamb rump 羊臀腰肉 |
| □ Lamb steaks 羊肉排 |
| □ Lamb rack 羊肋脊排 |
| □ Lamb sausages 羊肉香肠 |
| □ Lamb shanks 羊腿腱子肉 |
| □ Shoulder roast 羊肩肉 |
| □ Other—please specify __________________________ 其他—请指明__________________________ |
Please circle a number that indicates the level of importance each aspect is to you when purchasing lamb.
根据其对您购买时的重要性，请圈出对应程度的数字
- Animal origin 动物产地
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 2.
- Animal welfare 动物福利
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 3.
- Animal feeding 动物的饲养
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 4.
- Animal age 动物年龄
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 5.
- Animal sex 动物性别
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 6.
- Presence of hormones and other residues 激素和其他残存物的存在
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 7.
- Traceability (to know history of meat you purchase) 可追溯性（了解您购买的肉的历史）
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 8.
- Lamb price 羊肉价格
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 9.
- Price of other meats 其他肉类的价格
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 10.
- Fat content of meat 肉中的脂肪含量
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 11.
- General meat appearance (shiny, dry…etc.) 总体肉的外观(光泽，干燥度等)
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 12.
- Meat colour 肉的颜色
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 13.
- Meat flavour 肉的风味
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 14.
- Meat texture (tenderness) 肉的质感(嫩度)
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 15.
- Risk of catching a disease consuming lamb (food safety) 食用带病肉的风险 (食品安全)
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 16.
- Place of purchase 购买地点
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 17.
- Trust in butcher 对屠宰的信任度
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 18.
- Time of the day in which you can purchase lamb 在一天中可购买羊肉的时间
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 19.
- Brand or quality label 品牌或品质认证标签
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 20.
- Label information 标签信息（营养信息等）
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 21.
- Presentation (pieces, slices, trays…etc) 包装情况 (托盘等)
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 22.
- Easy to prepare/cook 便于烹饪
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 23.
- Dish to be prepared with it 与之搭配的菜品
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 24.
- My knowledge of different commercial cuts 对于不同切割部位的知识
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 25.
- Value for money 性价比
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
- 26.
- Others (indicate) __________________________
其他 (请指明)_____________________
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Not Important 不重要 | Very Important 非常重要 |
In your opinion New Zealand lamb…..
新西兰的羊肉在您的印象中…...
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
| Strongly Disagree 非常 不同意 | Neither disagree nor agree 中立 | Strongly Agree 非常 同意 | |||||
| Is nutritious 是有营养的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is healthy 是健康的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is well known 是广为人知的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is unique 是独一无二的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is safe 是安全的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| is good value for money 是物有所值的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is boring 是无聊的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is a traditional product 是传统的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is natural 是自然的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is hard to digest 是难以消化的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is produced sustainably 是可持续生产的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is convenient 是方便的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is readily available 是容易购买到的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Is high quality 是高品质的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Contains no additive 是无添加的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Makes people feel good 使人感觉良好的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
| Taste good 是美味的 | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ | □ |
References
- Clemens, R.L.; Babcock, B.A. Country of origin as a brand: The case of New Zealand lamb. MATRIC Brief. Pap. 2004, 2–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beef and Lamb New Zealand: EAT-Lancet Report FAQs. Available online: https://beeflambnz.com/sites/default/files/news-docs/Beef%20Lamb%20New%20Zealand%20EAT-Lancet%20Report%20FAQs.pdf (accessed on 11 March 2022).
- Whitton, C.; Bogueva, D.; Marinova, D.; Phillips, C.J.C. Are We Approaching Peak Meat Consumption? Analysis of Meat Consumption from 2000 to 2019 in 35 Countries and Its Relationship to Gross Domestic Product. Animals 2021, 11, 3466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- OECD Data. Available online: https://data.oecd.org/agroutput/meat-consumption.htm (accessed on 31 March 2022).
- Hungry For Plant-Based: New Zealand Consumer Insights (Commissioned by Food Frontier & Life Health Foods. Research conducted by Colmar Brunton). Available online: https://www.foodfrontier.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Hungry-For-Plant-Based-New-Zealand-Consumer-Insights-Oct-2019.pdf (accessed on 11 March 2022).
- Battagin, H.V.; Panea, B.; Trindade, M.A. Study on the Lamb Meat Consumer Behavior in Brazil. Foods 2021, 10, 1713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alanís, P.J.; Miranda-de la Lama, G.C.; Mariezcurrena-Berasain, M.A.; Barbabosa-Pliego, A.; Rayas-Amor, A.A.; Estévez-Moreno, L.X. Sheep meat consumers in Mexico: Understanding their perceptions, habits, preferences and market segments. Meat Sci. 2022, 184, 108705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rabadán, A.; Martínez-Carrasco, L.; Brugarolas, M.; Navarro-Rodríguez de Vera, C.; Sayas-Barberá, E.; Bernabéu, R. Differences in Consumer Preferences for Lamb Meat before and during the Economic Crisis in Spain. Analysis and Perspectives. Foods 2020, 9, 696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Statistics New Zealand. Available online: https://www.stats.govt.nz/large-datasets/csv-files-for-download/overseas-merchandise-trade-datasets (accessed on 28 April 2022).
- Ditlevsen, K.; Denver, S.; Christensen, T.; Lassen, J. A taste for locally produced food—Values, opinions and sociodemographic differences among ‘organic’ and ‘conventional’ consumers. Appetite 2020, 147, 104544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The Guardian. Available online: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/20/chinas-meat-consumption-climate-change (accessed on 11 February 2022).
- Time. Available online: https://time.com/5930095/china-plant-based-meat/ (accessed on 11 March 2022).
- Statistics New Zealand. Available online: https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/population-projected-to-become-more-ethnically-diversec (accessed on 11 March 2022).
- Statistics New Zealand. Available online: https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/national-ethnic-population-projections-2018base-2043 (accessed on 11 March 2022).
- Statista. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/692815/asian-immigrant-stock-of-new-zealand-by-country-of-origin/ (accessed on 11 March 2022).
- Meat and Livestock Australia. Available online: https://www.mla.com.au/prices-markets/market-news/2018/chinas-sheep-cycle-driving-global-markets/# (accessed on 6 October 2021).
- Tait, P.; Saunders, C.; Guenther, M.; Rutherford, P. Emerging versus developed economy consumer willingness to pay for environmentally sustainable food production: A choice experiment approach comparing Indian, Chinese and United Kingdom lamb consumers. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 124, 65–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hastie, M.; Ashman, H.; Torrico, D.; Ha, M.; Warner, R. A Mixed Method Approach for the Investigation of Consumer Responses to Sheepmeat and Beef. Foods 2020, 9, 126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- O’Reilly, R.A.; Pannier, L.; Gardner, G.E.; Garmyn, A.J.; Luo, H.; Meng, Q.; Miller, M.F.; Pethick, D.W. Influence of Demographic Factors on Sheepmeat Sensory Scores of American, Australian and Chinese Consumers. Foods 2020, 9, 529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prescott, J.; Young, O.; Zhang, S.; Cummings, T. Effects of added “flavour principles” on liking and familiarity of a sheepmeat product: A comparison of Singaporean and New Zealand consumers. Food Qual. Prefer. 2004, 15, 187–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hutchings, S.C.; Guerrero, L.; Mirosa, M.; Bremer, P.; Mather, D.; Pavan, E.; Hicks, T.M.; Day, L.; Realini, C.E. The Implications of COVID-19 on Chinese Consumer Preferences for Lamb Meat. Foods 2021, 10, 1324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kantono, K.; Hamid, N.; Ma, Q.; Chadha, D.; Oey, I. Consumers’ perception and purchase behaviour of meat in China. Meat Sci. 2021, 179, 108548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mao, Y.; Hopkins, D.L.; Zhang, Y.; Luo, X. Consumption patterns and consumer attitudes to beef and sheep meat in China. Am. J. Food Nutr. 2016, 4, 30–39. [Google Scholar]
- Ares, G.; Giménez, A.; Vidal, L.; Zhou, Y.; Krystallis, A.; Tsalis, G.; Symoneaux, R.; Cunha, L.M.; de Moura, A.P.; Claret, A.; et al. Do we all perceive food-related wellbeing in the same way? Results from an exploratory cross-cultural study. Food Qual. Prefer. 2016, 52, 62–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goldenbeld, C.; de Craen, S. The comparison of road safety survey answers between web-panel and face-to-face; Dutch results of SARTRE-4 survey. J. Saf. Res. 2013, 46, 13–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szolnoki, G.; Hoffmann, D. Online, face-to-face and telephone surveys—Comparing different sampling methods in wine consumer research. Wine Econ. Policy 2013, 2, 57–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nam, K.-C.; Jo, C.; Lee, M. Meat products and consumption culture in the East. Meat Sci. 2010, 86, 95–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, P.Y.; Lusk, K.; Mirosa, M.; Oey, I. The role of personal values in Chinese consumers’ food consumption decisions. A case study of healthy drinks. Appetite 2014, 73, 95–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Torrico, D.D.; Fuentes, S.; Gonzalez Viejo, C.; Ashman, H.; Dunshea, F.R. Cross-cultural effects of food product familiarity on sensory acceptability and non-invasive physiological responses of consumers. Food Res. Int. 2019, 115, 439–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, L.; Wang, S.; Zhu, D.; Hu, W.; Wang, H. Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food quality and safety attributes: The case of pork. China Econ. Rev. 2015, 35, 121–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, Y. Food safety and social risk in contemporary China. J. Asian Stud. 2012, 71, 705–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.; Xu, Y.; Oosterveer, P.; Mol, A.P.J. Consumer trust in different food provisioning schemes: Evidence from Beijing, China. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 134, 269–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Carnovale, F.; Jin, X.; Arney, D.; Descovich, K.; Guo, W.; Shi, B.; Phillips, C.J.C. Chinese Public Attitudes towards, and Knowledge of, Animal Welfare. Animals 2021, 11, 855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, M.; Hu, E.; Kuen, L.L.; Wu, L. Study on Consumer Preference for Traceable Pork with Animal Welfare Attribute. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 2545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Xu, L.; Yang, X.; Wu, L.; Chen, X.; Chen, L.; Tsai, F.-S. Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Food with Information on Animal Welfare, Lean Meat Essence Detection, and Traceability. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pearcey, S.M.; Zhan, G.Q. A comparative study of American and Chinese college students’ motives for food choice. Appetite 2018, 123, 325–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prescott, J.; Young, O.; O’Neill, L.; Yau, N.J.N.; Stevens, R. Motives for food choice: A comparison of consumers from Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia and New Zealand. Food Qual. Prefer. 2002, 13, 489–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Insch, A.; Jackson, E. Consumer understanding and use of country-of-origin in food choice. Br. Food J. 2014, 116, 62–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barnes, F.; Higgins, D.M. Brand image, cultural association and marketing: ‘New Zealand’ butter and lamb exports to Britain, c. 1920–1938. Bus. Hist. 2020, 62, 70–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Statistics New Zealand. Available online: https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/national-population-estimates-at-30-june-2021 (accessed on 24 May 2022).
- Statistics New Zealand. Available online: https://www.stats.govt.nz/tools/2018-census-ethnic-group-summaries/chinese (accessed on 24 May 2022).
Table 1.
Demographic characteristics of New Zealand and Chinese consumers in New Zealand (%).
| NZ | CN-NZ | p (Chi2) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ethnicity | |||
| NZ European | 86.6 | 0.0 | |
| Maori | 1.9 | 0.0 | |
| Samoan | 0.5 | 0.0 | |
| Cook Island Maori | 0.5 | 0.0 | |
| Tongan | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Niuean | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Chinese | 3.8 | 100.0 | |
| Indian | 0.5 | 0.0 | |
| Other | 6.2 | 0.0 | |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 53.8 | 43.7 | 0.071 |
| Female | 46.2 | 56.3 | 0.072 |
| Age | |||
| 18–25 | 23.7 | 15.8 | 0.079 |
| 26–35 | 14.7 | 43.0 | <0.001 |
| 36–45 | 15.4 | 24.1 | 0.054 |
| 46–60 | 31.4 | 8.9 | <0.001 |
| 61 and over | 14.1 | 8.2 | 0.098 |
| Education | |||
| Tier 1 * | 3.9 | 0.0 | 0.012 |
| Tier 2 # | 4.5 | 0.0 | 0.007 |
| Tier 3 @ | 12.3 | 1.3 | <0.001 |
| Tier 4 ^ | 17.5 | 5.1 | 0.001 |
| Tier 5 $ | 13.0 | 5.7 | 0.027 |
| Tier 6 + | 48.1 | 88.0 | <0.001 |
| Occupation | |||
| Trades | 10.5 | 3.8 | 0.022 |
| Professional | 27.5 | 32.3 | 0.353 |
| Administration/Office | 5.2 | 1.9 | 0.112 |
| Sales/Services | 7.8 | 7.0 | 0.767 |
| Technical | 6.5 | 3.8 | 0.274 |
| Labourer | 1.3 | 0.0 | 0.149 |
| Home maker | 0.7 | 5.7 | 0.012 |
| Student | 20.3 | 28.5 | 0.092 |
| Retired | 9.2 | 7.6 | 0.620 |
| Unemployed | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.543 |
| Other employment | 9.8 | 8.9 | 0.775 |
| Income | |||
| Less than NZD25,000 | 14.5 | 9.6 | 0.190 |
| NZD25,001 to NZD40,000 | 17.1 | 12.8 | 0.292 |
| NZD40,001 to NZD55,000 | 6.6 | 19.9 | <0.001 |
| NZD55,001 to NZD70,000 | 7.8 | 16.0 | 0.028 |
| NZD70,001 to NZD100,000 | 23.7 | 22.4 | 0.795 |
| NZD100,001 to NZD150,000 | 16.4 | 14.1 | 0.567 |
| More than NZD150,000 | 13.8 | 5.1 | 0.009 |
| Adults in household | |||
| 1 | 8.4 | 12.2 | 0.271 |
| 2 | 59.4 | 53.2 | 0.274 |
| 3 | 22.6 | 19.9 | 0.559 |
| 4 or more | 9.7 | 14.7 | 0.173 |
| Children in household | |||
| 0 | 64.1 | 68.6 | 0.403 |
| 1 | 10.3 | 18.9 | 0.030 |
| 2 or more | 25.6 | 12.6 | 0.003 |
NZ (New Zealand); CN-NZ (Chinese consumers in New Zealand); * None; # Primary school; @ Middle school; ^ High school; $ Trades certificate or vocational college; + Bachelor’s degree or higher.
Table 2.
Dietary restrictions and consumption frequency of animal protein sources (%) (p value determined using a Chi-squared test for ethnicity).
Table 2.
Dietary restrictions and consumption frequency of animal protein sources (%) (p value determined using a Chi-squared test for ethnicity).
| NZ | CN-NZ | p (Chi2) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dietary Restrictions | |||
| Low salt | 3.2 | 62.3 | <0.001 |
| Low sugar | 5.8 | 62.9 | <0.001 |
| Low calories | 2.6 | 42.1 | <0.001 |
| Do not follow diets | 88.5 | 24.5 | <0.001 |
| Lamb | |||
| Daily | 0.0 | 1.3 | 0.160 |
| 4–5 times a week | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.312 |
| 2–3 times a week | 4.5 | 15.3 | 0.002 |
| Weekly | 19.5 | 31.8 | 0.013 |
| Fortnightly | 35.1 | 28.0 | 0.182 |
| Monthly | 40.3 | 23.6 | 0.002 |
| Never | - | - | |
| Beef | |||
| Daily | 0.6 | 3.2 | 0.106 |
| 4–5 times a week | 9.1 | 4.4 | 0.100 |
| 2–3 times a week | 33.8 | 20.9 | 0.011 |
| Weekly | 40.3 | 41.1 | 0.874 |
| Fortnightly | 11.7 | 20.3 | 0.039 |
| Monthly | 3.2 | 9.5 | 0.024 |
| Never | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.547 |
| Pork | |||
| Daily | 0.0 | 3.8 | 0.017 |
| 4–5 times a week | 1.4 | 8.2 | 0.006 |
| 2–3 times a week | 9.6 | 13.3 | 0.312 |
| Weekly | 27.4 | 27.8 | 0.930 |
| Fortnightly | 28.1 | 14.6 | 0.004 |
| Monthly | 28.8 | 22.2 | 0.185 |
| Never | 4.8 | 10.1 | 0.079 |
| Poultry | |||
| Daily | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.547 |
| 4–5 times a week | 9.9 | 9.0 | 0.788 |
| 2–3 times a week | 43.4 | 25.0 | 0.001 |
| Weekly | 36.2 | 36.5 | 0.948 |
| Fortnightly | 5.9 | 10.3 | 0.164 |
| Monthly | 2.6 | 12.2 | 0.001 |
| Never | 0.7 | 6.4 | 0.007 |
| Fish | |||
| Daily | 0.7 | 1.9 | 0.343 |
| 4–5 times a week | 2.0 | 2.5 | 0.761 |
| 2–3 times a week | 12.8 | 19.6 | 0.103 |
| Weekly | 28.9 | 26.6 | 0.656 |
| Fortnightly | 22.8 | 21.5 | 0.784 |
| Monthly | 27.5 | 25.9 | 0.756 |
| Never | 5.4 | 1.9 | 0.102 |
NZ (New Zealand); CN-NZ (Chinese consumers in New Zealand).
Table 3.
Preferred level of cooking, meat qualities of interest to consumers at the point of purchase and purchase frequency of different lamb products (%) (p value determined using a Fishers exact test (Chi-squared) for ethnicity).
Table 3.
Preferred level of cooking, meat qualities of interest to consumers at the point of purchase and purchase frequency of different lamb products (%) (p value determined using a Fishers exact test (Chi-squared) for ethnicity).
| NZ | CN-NZ | p (Chi2) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preferred Level of Cooking | |||
| Rare | 33.5 | 3.8 | <0.001 |
| Medium/Rare | 5.8 | 9.5 | 0.220 |
| Medium | 18.7 | 19.6 | 0.838 |
| Medium/Well-done | 38.7 | 49.4 | 0.058 |
| Well-done | 3.2 | 17.7 | <0.001 |
| What qualities do you look for when purchasing red meat? | |||
| Marbling | 23.7 | 45.9 | <0.001 |
| Leanness | 44.9 | 83.0 | <0.001 |
| Meat Colour | 49.4 | 91.2 | <0.001 |
| Portion size | 62.8 | 34.6 | <0.001 |
| Price | 85.3 | 80.5 | 0.263 |
| What lamb products do you typically purchase? | |||
| Leg Roast | 58.3 | 61.6 | 0.550 |
| Lamb chops | 71.2 | 42.8 | <0.001 |
| Lamb mince | 26.9 | 13.2 | 0.002 |
| Lamb rump | 5.1 | 8.2 | 0.278 |
| Lamb steaks | 39.1 | 53.5 | 0.011 |
| Lamb sausages | 34.6 | 11.3 | <0.001 |
| Lamb shanks | 28.8 | 40.3 | 0.033 |
| Shoulder roast | 28.8 | 42.8 | 0.010 |
NZ (New Zealand); CN-NZ (Chinese consumers in New Zealand).
Table 4.
The relative importance of lamb attributes at the point of purchase for New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers (mean ± SD) (1 = not important, 9 = very important) (p value determined using ANOVA with ethnicity as main effect).
Table 4.
The relative importance of lamb attributes at the point of purchase for New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers (mean ± SD) (1 = not important, 9 = very important) (p value determined using ANOVA with ethnicity as main effect).
| NZ | SD | CN-NZ | SD | p (ANOVA) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Animal origin | 5.308 | 2.549 | 6.513 | 2.332 | <0.001 |
| Animal welfare | 5.871 | 2.349 | 5.095 | 2.431 | 0.004 |
| Animal feeding | 5.474 | 2.185 | 6.778 | 1.934 | <0.001 |
| Animal age | 4.660 | 2.231 | 6.228 | 2.203 | <0.001 |
| Animal sex | 2.232 | 1.840 | 3.513 | 2.214 | <0.001 |
| Pres. of hormones/residues | 6.141 | 2.541 | 8.063 | 1.440 | <0.001 |
| Traceability | 4.923 | 2.579 | 6.006 | 2.325 | <0.001 |
| Lamb price | 7.277 | 1.700 | 6.981 | 1.725 | 0.127 |
| Price of other meats | 6.768 | 2.032 | 6.044 | 2.166 | 0.003 |
| Fat content | 6.542 | 1.821 | 6.310 | 2.099 | 0.299 |
| Meat appearance | 7.000 | 1.381 | 7.861 | 1.068 | <0.001 |
| Meat colour | 6.908 | 1.607 | 7.943 | 1.048 | <0.001 |
| Meat flavour | 7.559 | 1.404 | 8.000 | 1.162 | 0.003 |
| Meat texture (tenderness) | 7.503 | 1.333 | 7.943 | 1.130 | 0.002 |
| Food safety (risk of disease) | 7.497 | 2.314 | 8.842 | 0.511 | <0.001 |
| Place of purchase | 4.922 | 2.246 | 6.582 | 1.939 | <0.001 |
| Trust in butcher | 5.806 | 2.468 | 5.633 | 2.201 | 0.512 |
| Time of day to purchase | 2.613 | 2.037 | 4.741 | 2.630 | <0.001 |
| Brand or quality label | 4.686 | 2.424 | 7.151 | 1.726 | <0.001 |
| Label information | 5.574 | 2.253 | 6.791 | 1.896 | <0.001 |
| Presentation (piece/slice/etc.) | 5.753 | 2.270 | 6.854 | 1.583 | <0.001 |
| Ease of preparation | 6.071 | 2.095 | 6.987 | 1.806 | <0.001 |
| Dish to be prepared with it | 5.374 | 2.154 | 5.810 | 2.224 | 0.079 |
| Knowledge of commercial cuts | 5.118 | 2.137 | 6.354 | 1.919 | <0.001 |
| Value for money | 7.315 | 1.628 | 7.405 | 1.584 | 0.625 |
Rated 1–9. NZ (New Zealand); CN-NZ (Chinese consumers in New Zealand).
Table 5.
New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers’ opinion of New Zealand lamb (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) (mean ± SD) (p value determined using ANOVA with ethnicity as main effect).
Table 5.
New Zealand consumers and Chinese consumers’ opinion of New Zealand lamb (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) (mean ± SD) (p value determined using ANOVA with ethnicity as main effect).
| NZ | SD | CN-NZ | SD | p (ANOVA) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nutritious | 5.955 | 1.044 | 6.229 | 0.831 | 0.011 |
| Healthy | 5.921 | 1.064 | 6.459 | 0.738 | <0.001 |
| Well-known | 6.201 | 1.168 | 6.395 | 0.979 | 0.114 |
| Unique | 5.020 | 1.440 | 5.000 | 1.476 | 0.905 |
| Safe | 6.059 | 1.015 | 6.389 | 0.748 | 0.001 |
| Good value for money | 4.292 | 1.440 | 5.968 | 1.087 | <0.001 |
| Boring | 2.513 | 1.540 | 1.898 | 1.199 | <0.001 |
| Traditional product | 5.575 | 1.271 | 4.809 | 1.661 | <0.001 |
| Natural | 5.523 | 1.298 | 6.306 | 0.998 | <0.001 |
| Hard to digest | 2.477 | 1.410 | 2.293 | 1.424 | 0.254 |
| Produced sustainably | 4.941 | 1.368 | 5.468 | 1.277 | 0.001 |
| Convenient | 4.914 | 1.332 | 5.369 | 1.247 | 0.002 |
| Readily available | 5.448 | 1.391 | 6.168 | 1.022 | <0.001 |
| High quality | 5.714 | 1.203 | 6.287 | 0.801 | <0.001 |
| Contains no additive | 4.843 | 1.410 | 6.032 | 1.112 | <0.001 |
| Makes people feel good | 5.072 | 1.257 | 6.255 | 0.800 | <0.001 |
| Taste good | 6.091 | 0.986 | 6.306 | 0.790 | 0.035 |
| Supports NZ economy | 5.877 | 1.345 | 6.497 | 0.874 | <0.001 |
Rated 1–7. NZ (New Zealand); CN-NZ (Chinese consumers in New Zealand).
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
MDPI and ACS Style
Hutchings, S.C.; Guerrero, L.; Smeets, L.; Eyres, G.T.; Silcock, P.; Pavan, E.; Realini, C.E. Cross-Cultural Differences in the Perception of Lamb between New Zealand and Chinese Consumers in New Zealand. Foods 2022, 11, 2045. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11142045
AMA Style
Hutchings SC, Guerrero L, Smeets L, Eyres GT, Silcock P, Pavan E, Realini CE. Cross-Cultural Differences in the Perception of Lamb between New Zealand and Chinese Consumers in New Zealand. Foods. 2022; 11(14):2045. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11142045
Chicago/Turabian StyleHutchings, Scott C., Luis Guerrero, Levi Smeets, Graham T. Eyres, Patrick Silcock, Enrique Pavan, and Carolina E. Realini. 2022. "Cross-Cultural Differences in the Perception of Lamb between New Zealand and Chinese Consumers in New Zealand" Foods 11, no. 14: 2045. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11142045
APA StyleHutchings, S. C., Guerrero, L., Smeets, L., Eyres, G. T., Silcock, P., Pavan, E., & Realini, C. E. (2022). Cross-Cultural Differences in the Perception of Lamb between New Zealand and Chinese Consumers in New Zealand. Foods, 11(14), 2045. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11142045
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
