Understanding the Impact of Agroecological Products: The Algerian Case Study †
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
- (a)
- The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), proposed by Ajzen (1991), which serves as one of the most widely used models for understanding and predicting human behaviour, mainly for understanding the consumer decision-making process [31]. Based on this theory, a consumer’s behaviour is directly influenced by their intentions, which in turn are shaped by their attitude towards a particular behaviour, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control.
- (b)
- The model of Responsible Environmental Behaviour (REB) is based on the fact that both the cognitive (rational) and emotional reactions of consumers play a very important role in consumer behaviour [32].
- (c)
- The Stimulus–Organism–Response (S-O-R) model attempts to examine all stimuli that come from both the external and internal environment of consumers and strongly influence their final consumer decision [33].
3. Results and Discussion
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| AE | Agroecology |
| AEP | Agroecological Practices |
| WTP | Willingness To Pay |
| PCA | Principal Component Analysis |
| SOR | Stimulus–Organism–Response |
| TPB | Theory of Planned Behaviour |
| REB | Responsible Environmental Behaviour |
References
- Elkhalfi, O.; Chaabita, R.; Ghoujdam, M.; Zehraoui, K.; EL Alaoui, H.; Belhaj, I. The impact of climate change on food security in the Middle East and North Africa: Challenges and adaptation strategies. J. Agric. Food Res. 2025, 21, 101963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaudhary, S.; Shrestha, A.K.; Rai, S.; Acharya, D.K.; Subedi, S.; Rai, R. Agroecology integrates science, practice, movement, and future food systems. J. Multidiscip. Sci. 2023, 5, 39–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berki-Kiss, D.; Menrad, K. Ethical consumption: Influencing factors of consumer’s intention to purchase Fairtrade roses. Clean. Circ. Bioecon. 2022, 2, 100008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehrabi, S.; Perez-Mesa, J.C.; Giagnocavo, C. The Role of Consumer-Citizens and Connectedness to Nature in the Sustainable Transition to Agroecological Food Systems: The Mediation of Innovative Business Models and a Multi-Level Perspective. Agriculture 2022, 12, 203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radulescu, V.; Cetina, I.; Orzan, G. Key factors that influence behavior of health care consumer, the basis of health care strategies. Contemp. Read. Law Soc. Justice 2012, 4, 992–1001. [Google Scholar]
- Tsakiridou, E.; Efthimia; Tsiamparli; Mattas, K. Consumers’ Potentials to Adopt a Healthy Eating Lifestyle. Int. J. Food Beverage Manuf. Bus. Models (IJFBMBM) 2016, 1, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pereira, L.F.; Dias, Á.L.; Drogo, R. The green plate revolution: Understanding consumer willingness to embrace environmentally friendly food products. Prog. Ind. Ecol. Int. J. 2024, 17, 346–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mazzocchi, C.; Orsi, L.; Sali, G. Consumers’ Attitudes for Sustainable Mountain Cheese. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rossi, E.S.; Zabala, J.A.; Caracciolo, F.; Blasi, E. The Value of Crop Diversification: Understanding the Factors Influencing Consumers’ WTP for Pasta from Sustainable Agriculture. Agriculture 2023, 13, 585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Śmiglak-Krajewska, M.; Wojciechowska-Solis, J.; Viti, D. Consumers’ purchasing intentions on the legume market as evidence of sustainable behaviour. Agriculture 2020, 10, 424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Graaf, S.; Vanhonacker, F.; Van Loo, E.J.; Bijttebier, J.; Lauwers, L.; Tuyttens, F.A.; Verbeke, W. Market opportunities for animal-friendly milk in different consumer segments. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerini, F.; Alfnes, F.; Schjøll, A. Organic- and Animal Welfare-labelled Eggs: Competing for the Same Consumers? J. Agric. Econ. 2016, 67, 471–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Predieri, S.; Cianciabella, M.; Daniele, G.M.; Gatti, E.; Lippi, N.; Magli, M.; Medoro, C.; Rossi, F.; Chieco, C. Italian Consumers’ Awareness of Climate Change and Willingness to Pay for Climate-Smart Food Products. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- William, S. The Importance of Biodiversity and Sustainable Agricultural Practices. 2017. Available online: https://businesswales.gov.wales/farmingconnect/sites/farming/files/documents_and_files/Lluniau_2017/technical_article_-_farmland_biodiversity_final.pdf (accessed on 30 December 2025).
- Tsakiridou, E.; Tsakiridou, H.; Mattas, K. Effects of animal welfare standards on consumers’ food choices. Food Econ. 2010, 7, 234–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pais, D.F.; Marques, A.C.; Fuinhas, J.A. The cost of healthier and more sustainable food choices: Do plant-based consumers spend more on food? Agric. Food Econ. 2022, 10, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Petrescu, D.C.; Vermeir, I. Consumer Understanding of Food Quality, Healthiness, and Environmental Impact: A Cross-National Perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 17, 169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghvanidze, S.; Velikova, N.; Dodd, T.H.; Oldewage-Theron, W. Consumers’ environmental and ethical consciousness and the use of the related food products information: The role of perceived consumer effectiveness. Appetite 2016, 107, 311–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sciarelli, M.; Tani, M.; Prisco, A.; Caputo, F. Fostering ethical consumption in food sector: Insights from the Italian Solidarity Purchasing Groups. Br. Food J. 2021, 123, 3100–3115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zander, K.; Hamm, U. Consumer preferences for additional ethical attributes of organic food. Food Qual. Prefer. 2010, 21, 495–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srinivasan, S.; Galvez, A.; Krieger, R.; Sebo, A.; Mckever, M.; Nestico, D.; Carlsson, L.; Wegener, J.; Everitt, T. Factors that facilitate consumer uptake of sustainable dietary patterns in Western countries: A scoping review. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2024, 8, 1333742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Bussel, L.M.; Kuijsten, A.; Mars, M.; van ‘t Veer, P. Consumers’ perceptions on food-related sustainability: A systematic review. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 341, 130904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahendra Wisnu W, I.K.R.; Basrowi, R.W. The Impact of Nutritional Marketing Claims on Consumer Behavior and Food Choices Based on Medical Ethics. J. Indones. Spec. Nutr. 2024, 2, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X. The Impact of Food Nutrition Labels on Consumer Behavior: A Cross-national Survey and Quantitative Analysis. Int. J. Public Health Med. Res. 2024, 1, 18–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Korte, T.; Otte, L.; Amel, H.; Beeken, M. ‘Burger.i.doo’—An Innovative Education Game for the Assessment of Sustainability from Meat and Substitute Products in Science Education. Sustainability 2023, 15, 213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinez, S.; San-Juan-Heras, R.; Gabriel, J.L.; Álvarez, S.; Delgado, M.D.M. Insights into the Nitrogen Footprint of food consumption in Spain: Age and gender impacts on product choices and sustainability. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 900, 165792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wezel, A.; Goette, J.; Lagneaux, E.; Passuello, G.; Reisman, E.; Rodier, C.; Turpin, G. Agroecology in Europe: Research, education, collective action networks, and alternative food systems. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galati, A.; Miret-Pastor, L.; Siggia, D.; Crescimanno, M.; Fiore, M. Determinants affecting consumers’ attention to fish eco-labels in purchase decisions: A cross-country study. Br. Food J. 2022, 124, 2993–3013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heerman, K.E.R.; Sheldon, I.M. Sustainable agricultural production, income, and eco-labeling: What can be learned from a modern Ricardian approach? Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy 2022, 44, 1614–1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Higgins, K.; Hutchinson, W.G.; Longo, A. Willingness-to-Pay for Eco-Labelled Forest Products in Northern Ireland: An Experimental Auction Approach. J. Behav. Exp. Econ. 2020, 87, 101572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goldman, D.; Hansmann, R.; Činčera, J.; Radović, V.; Telešienė, A.; Balžekienė, A.; Vávra, J. Education for Environmental Citizenship and Responsible Environmental Behaviour. In Conceptualizing Environmental Citizenship for 21st Century Education; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 115–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hetharie, J.A.; Hussein, A.S.; Puspaningrum, A. SOR (Stimulus-Organism-Response) Model Application In Observing The Influence Of Impulsive Buying On Consumer’s Post-Purchase Regret. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 2019, 8, 2829–2841. Available online: https://www.ijstr.org/final-print/nov2019/Sor-stimulus-organism-response-Model-Application-In-Observing-The-Influence-Of-Impulsive-Buying-On-Consumers-Post-purchase-Regret.pdf (accessed on 5 January 2026).
- Gao, J. R-Squared (R2)—How much variation is explained? Res. Methods Med. Health Sci. 2024, 5, 104–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
| Principal Components | % of Variance | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Consumer awareness about AE practices | 12.423 |
| 2 | Environmental concerns | 10.547 |
| 3 | Trade-off between economic development and environmental protection | 7.007 |
| 4 | Consumer perspectives on environment’s future | 6.798 |
| 5 | Consumer contribution towards environmental protection | 6.064 |
| 6 | Consumer behaviour towards locally produced food | 4.900 |
| 7 | Consumer environmentally responsible behaviour towards environment | 4.391 |
| 8 | Actions related to environmental awareness | 4.109 |
| 9 | Environmental issue awareness | 3.325 |
| Total % of variance | 59.562 | |
| Components | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Socio-Economic Characteristics | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| Age | *** | *** | * | ||||||
| Gender | * | ||||||||
| Professional status | ** | *** | ** | ||||||
| Average monthly income | * | ||||||||
| Number of adult household members | * | * | |||||||
| Number of children in household | ** | ||||||||
| Your household lives in: | *** | ** | * | * | |||||
| Educational level | * | *** | * | * | *** | ||||
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 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.
Share and Cite
Kleisiari, C.; Belhadi, A.; Boudedja, K.; Bekkouche, A.; Kyrgiakos, L.-S.; Vasileiou, M.; Kleftodimos, G.; Kechri, K.; Tosiliani, D.-D.; Oikonomou, A.; et al. Understanding the Impact of Agroecological Products: The Algerian Case Study. Proceedings 2026, 134, 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2026134032
Kleisiari C, Belhadi A, Boudedja K, Bekkouche A, Kyrgiakos L-S, Vasileiou M, Kleftodimos G, Kechri K, Tosiliani D-D, Oikonomou A, et al. Understanding the Impact of Agroecological Products: The Algerian Case Study. Proceedings. 2026; 134(1):32. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2026134032
Chicago/Turabian StyleKleisiari, Christina, Aissa Belhadi, Karima Boudedja, Aissa Bekkouche, Leonidas-Sotirios Kyrgiakos, Marios Vasileiou, Georgios Kleftodimos, Kyriaki Kechri, Dimitra-Despoina Tosiliani, Asimina Oikonomou, and et al. 2026. "Understanding the Impact of Agroecological Products: The Algerian Case Study" Proceedings 134, no. 1: 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2026134032
APA StyleKleisiari, C., Belhadi, A., Boudedja, K., Bekkouche, A., Kyrgiakos, L.-S., Vasileiou, M., Kleftodimos, G., Kechri, K., Tosiliani, D.-D., Oikonomou, A., & Vlontzos, G. (2026). Understanding the Impact of Agroecological Products: The Algerian Case Study. Proceedings, 134(1), 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2026134032

