Eco-score labels on meat products: Consumer perceptions and attitudes towards sustainable choices

IF 4.9 1区 农林科学 Q1 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Food Quality and Preference Pub Date : 2023-08-19 DOI:10.1016/j.foodqual.2023.104973
Victoria Williams, Orla Flannery, Ajay Patel
{"title":"Eco-score labels on meat products: Consumer perceptions and attitudes towards sustainable choices","authors":"Victoria Williams,&nbsp;Orla Flannery,&nbsp;Ajay Patel","doi":"10.1016/j.foodqual.2023.104973","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Non-profit organisations have developed labelling strategies to communicate the environmental impact of food products, helping consumers make more informed purchase decisions. The evidence on whether environmental food labelling can change behaviours toward environmental meat choices is unclear, due to context factors within shopping environments and differences in attitudes towards meat and the environment. This study investigates attitudes towards an eco-score label on meat products by measuring the influence of meat and environmental attitudes and identifying drivers and barriers through a mixed-methods design. An online questionnaire (N = 255) posed questions concerning meat consumption, label perceptions, and use intentions. Recruitment was via convenience sampling under the criteria of UK dweller, omnivorous diet and over 18 years of age. Nine semi-structured interviews explored the drivers and barriers for intended use through thematic analysis. Perceptions Scores (PS) and Purchase Intention (PI) scores of the label were positive. Results showed an individual’s Meat attachment (affinity) score (MAAS) negligibly influenced PS but provided a moderately negative relationship with PI. Environmental label use and attitudes positively influenced PS and PI. The qualitative data identified label design and concept perceptions as drivers for use, whereas habitual shopping behaviours and perceived price were barriers. The research contributes to the transtheoretical model of behavioural change, identifying that 58% of participants contemplate label use but require more information. Explanations found for the gap between positive perceptions and low behavioural intentions support this, as poor label awareness and knowledge of the environmental impact of meat production were highlighted.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":322,"journal":{"name":"Food Quality and Preference","volume":"111 ","pages":"Article 104973"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Quality and Preference","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950329323001672","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Non-profit organisations have developed labelling strategies to communicate the environmental impact of food products, helping consumers make more informed purchase decisions. The evidence on whether environmental food labelling can change behaviours toward environmental meat choices is unclear, due to context factors within shopping environments and differences in attitudes towards meat and the environment. This study investigates attitudes towards an eco-score label on meat products by measuring the influence of meat and environmental attitudes and identifying drivers and barriers through a mixed-methods design. An online questionnaire (N = 255) posed questions concerning meat consumption, label perceptions, and use intentions. Recruitment was via convenience sampling under the criteria of UK dweller, omnivorous diet and over 18 years of age. Nine semi-structured interviews explored the drivers and barriers for intended use through thematic analysis. Perceptions Scores (PS) and Purchase Intention (PI) scores of the label were positive. Results showed an individual’s Meat attachment (affinity) score (MAAS) negligibly influenced PS but provided a moderately negative relationship with PI. Environmental label use and attitudes positively influenced PS and PI. The qualitative data identified label design and concept perceptions as drivers for use, whereas habitual shopping behaviours and perceived price were barriers. The research contributes to the transtheoretical model of behavioural change, identifying that 58% of participants contemplate label use but require more information. Explanations found for the gap between positive perceptions and low behavioural intentions support this, as poor label awareness and knowledge of the environmental impact of meat production were highlighted.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肉类产品的生态评分标签:消费者对可持续选择的看法和态度
非营利组织已经制定了标签策略来传达食品对环境的影响,帮助消费者做出更明智的购买决定。由于购物环境中的环境因素以及对肉类和环境态度的差异,关于环境食品标签是否能改变人们对环保肉类选择的行为的证据尚不清楚。本研究通过测量肉类和环境态度的影响,并通过混合方法设计确定驱动因素和障碍,调查了对肉类产品生态评分标签的态度。一份在线问卷(N = 255)提出了有关肉类消费、标签认知和使用意图的问题。招募采用方便抽样,标准为英国居民,杂食性饮食,年龄在18岁以上。九个半结构化访谈通过专题分析探讨了预期用途的驱动因素和障碍。认知得分(PS)和购买意愿得分(PI)的标签是积极的。结果表明,个体的肉类依恋(亲和)评分(MAAS)对PS的影响可以忽略不计,但与PI呈中等负相关。环境标签的使用和态度正向影响PS和PI。定性数据确定标签设计和概念感知是使用的驱动因素,而习惯性购物行为和感知价格是障碍。这项研究有助于行为改变的跨理论模型,发现58%的参与者考虑使用标签,但需要更多的信息。对积极认知和低行为意图之间差距的解释支持这一点,因为强调了肉类生产对环境影响的标签意识和知识不足。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Food Quality and Preference
Food Quality and Preference 工程技术-食品科技
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
15.10%
发文量
263
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Food Quality and Preference is a journal devoted to sensory, consumer and behavioural research in food and non-food products. It publishes original research, critical reviews, and short communications in sensory and consumer science, and sensometrics. In addition, the journal publishes special invited issues on important timely topics and from relevant conferences. These are aimed at bridging the gap between research and application, bringing together authors and readers in consumer and market research, sensory science, sensometrics and sensory evaluation, nutrition and food choice, as well as food research, product development and sensory quality assurance. Submissions to Food Quality and Preference are limited to papers that include some form of human measurement; papers that are limited to physical/chemical measures or the routine application of sensory, consumer or econometric analysis will not be considered unless they specifically make a novel scientific contribution in line with the journal''s coverage as outlined below.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board What differentiates the choice of certain foods? An exploratory analysis of food choice patterns among couples from the dyadic NutriAct Family Cohort in relation to social and health-associated determinants Parental norms and attitudes in Relation to Children’s sugar consumption − A mediation analysis of the “Are You Too Sweet?” intervention study Impact of olfactory priming on mental representations of food concepts and subsequent food choice Animal welfare has priority: Swiss consumers’ preferences for animal welfare, greenhouse gas reductions and other sustainability improvements in dairy products
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1