The Effect of Attitudinal and Sociodemographic Factors on the Likelihood of Buying Locally Produced Food

Abstract

This study explores the factors associated with Canadian consumers locally produced food purchase intention. Data from an Internet-based survey of consumers (n = 1,139) was analyzed using a bivariate probit model. The bivariate probit model related attitudinal, behavioral and sociodemographic factors to the intention to purchase fresh and nonfresh locally produced foods. Although sociodemographic characteristics play a limited role in shaping local food purchase intentions, attitudinally based variables have far greater influence. Positive views towards local farmers and agriculture in general, as well as food quality, are positively related to purchase intention. The importance placed on brand-specific quality is inversely related to the intention to buy local food. Consumers with heightened levels of food involvement, either growing food or preparing most meals from scratch, are more likely to purchase local foods.

Determinants of local food purchase Insight from a consumer survey in South Tyrol (Italy)

“…In fact, deeper quantitative analysis showed that South Tyrolean rural consumers place significantly more importance on quality compared with the other groups. The high consideration of this attribute confirms previous evidence pointing to quality and better taste as main drivers motivating consumers to purchase local food (Adams-Adams 2011, Cranfield et al 2012, Feldmann-Hamm 2015.…”

“…Previous studies associated more supportive attitudes towards local food in elderly respondents living in rural areas (Racine et al 2013, Megicks et al 2012, MirosaLawson 2012, Khan-Prior 2010, Tregear-Ness 2005, Brown 2003, Wolf 1997, with women generally exhibiting more positive attitudes than men (Cholette et al 2013, Pelletier et al 2013, Cranfield 2012, Bellows et al 2010). Notably Chambers et al (2007) 'could not identify any differences in attitudes between urban and rural consumers' (Feldmann-Hamm 2015: 156).…”

“…In the case of South Tyrol, rural consumers, for instance, may produce food themselves or have more awareness of farming practices and communities, in contrast with urban respondents, factors determining different perceptions and purchasing behaviours across groups. Memery et al (2015Memery et al ( : 1223 report that consumers exercise selfinterest to attain individual benefits, since they associate local food with higher quality (Adams -Adams 2011, Cranfield et al 2012, freshness (Hempel-Hamm 2016b, Zepeda-Deal 2009, Chambers et al 2007), safety (Hempel-Hamm 2016a, Yue-Tong 2009, Darby et al 2008, healthiness (Naspetti-Bodini 2008, Wawrzyniak et al 2005, and environmental sustainability (Hempel-Hamm 2016b, Brown et al 2009, Burchardi et al 2005). …”

Matching Local Food Messages to Consumer Motivators: An Experiment Comparing the Effects of Differently Framed Messages

“…Despite the sample of college students, findings should still prove useful. Cranfield et al (2012) suggest that attitudes are more important than socioeconomic factors in predicting local food purchasing habits, while demographic variables do not seem to be important in predicting local food purchases (Brown, 2003). Participants were recruited on a volunteer basis via announcements through instructors of several general education courses at a large, public university.…”

“…Although a definition of local foods is somewhat ambiguous and often personalized by individual consumers depending upon their local market and product (Cranfield, Henson, & Blandon, 2012;Martinez, 2010), several common, broad purchase motivators became apparent after a comprehensive review of the literature. Messages highlighting empirically established purchase motivators in local food messaging might invoke a stronger intent to purchase locally grown food.…”