Export file:

Format

  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text

Content

  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

Urban consumers’ attitudes and willingness to pay for functional foods in Iran: A case of dietary sugar

1 Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
2 Department of Food Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
3 Department of Agricultural Management, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran
4 North-West University (Vaal Triangle Campus), Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences, Johannesburg, South Africa
5 Università degli Studi di Palermo, Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie e Forestali (SAF)

Growing concerns for the incidence of incurable diseases and high costs of health care have attracted consumers to functional foods in the world. These foods are characterized with health improvement, lower risk of disease incidence and less health hazards. The present work examined consumers’ attitude and willingness to pay for dietary sugar in Rasht city, Iran. The studied sample included 125 citizens of Rasht in spring and summer of 2016 whose size was determined by Mitchell and Carson approach. Results of contingent valuation method on the basis of one-and-one-half-bound choice model revealed that the descriptive variable of bid had negative, statistically significant impact on the acceptance of bid by participants. In addition, the descriptive variables of respondent’s age, educational level, family size, monthly income of the family, record of diabetes in family, healthy purchase attitude, and attitude towards the benefits of dietary sugar had positive, significant influence on bid acceptance. Participants expressed their willingness to pay 35.59% extra for dietary sugar as compared to conventional sugar.
  Figure/Table
  Supplementary
  Article Metrics

Keywords contingent valuation method; Functional food; one-and-one-half-bound choice model (OOHB); interval of standard deviation from the mean (ISMD); willingness to pay (WTP)

Citation: Mohammad Kavoosi-Kalashami, Amir Pourfarzad, Siamak Ghaibi, Mohammad Sadegh Allahyari, Jhalukpreya Surujlal, Valeria Borsellino. Urban consumers’ attitudes and willingness to pay for functional foods in Iran: A case of dietary sugar. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 2017, 2(3): 310-323. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2017.3.310

References

  • 1. de Almeida MDV, Pinhão S, Stewart-Knox B, et al. (2006). A six-country European survey on consumer attitudes to the metabolic syndrome, genetics in nutrition and potential agro-food technologies: questionnaire design methodology. Nutr Bull 31: 138-44.    
  • 2. Council IF, Functional Foods Fact Sheet Report, 2006. Available from: http://www.ific.org/publications/factsheets/antioxidants.cfm
  • 3. Annunziata A, Vecchio R (2013b) Agri-food Innovation and the Functional Food Market in Europe: Concerns and Challenges. Euro Choices 12: 12-19.
  • 4. Hasnah Hassan S (2011) Consumption of functional food model for Malay Muslims in Malaysia. J Islamic Mark 2: 104-124.    
  • 5. Annunziata A, Vecchio R (2013a) Consumer perception of functional foods: a conjoint analysis with probiotics. Food Qual Prefer 28: 348-355.
  • 6. Markosyan A, Wahl TI, McCluskey JJ (2007) Functional foods in the marketplace: Willing ness to pay for apples enriched with antioxidants. Selected paper prepared for presentation at the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting. Portlan, Oregon.
  • 7. Technologists, I. o. (2012) Functional Foods Markets in USA Report. Available from: http://ift.org/research
  • 8. Bech-Larsen T, Scholderer J (2007) Functional Foods in Europe: Consumer research, market experiences and regulatory aspects. Trends Food Sci Technol 18: 231-234.    
  • 9. Cranfield J, Henson S, Blandon J (2012) The effect of attitudinal and sociodemographic factors on the likelihood of buying locally produced food. Agribu 28: 205-221.    
  • 10. Bilgic S, Yüksel A (2012) University students' perception and attitudes towards functional foods in Istanbul. In Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management Istanbul, Turkey.
  • 11. Center for Science in the Public Interest, Retrieved from Functional Foods: Public Health Boon or 21st Century Quackery? 1999. Available from: http://cspinet.org/library.
  • 12. Veeman M (2002) Policy development for novel foods: issues and challenges for functional food. Can J Agri Econ 50: 527-539.    
  • 13. Gardner C (2014) Non-nutritive sweeteners: Evidence for benefit vs. risk. Curr Opin Lipidol 25: 80-84.    
  • 14. Patil S, Ravi R, Saraswathi G, et al. (2014) Development of low calorie snack food based on intense sweeteners. J. Food Sci. Technol 51: 4096-4101.    
  • 15. Hu W, Chen K, Yoshida K (2006) Japanese consumers' percpetions and willingness to pay for credence attributes associated with canola oil. J Agri Appl Econ 38: 91-103.    
  • 16. Markosyan A, McCluskey JJ, Wahl TI (2009) Consumer response to information about a functional food product: apples enriched with antioxidants. Can J Agri Econ 57: 325-341.    
  • 17. Tra PV, Moritaka M, Fukuda S (2011) Factors affecting consumers' willingness to pay for functional foods in Vietnam. J Fac Agr Kyushu U 56: 425-429.
  • 18. Schnettler B, Miranda H, Lobos G, et al. (2015) Willingness to purchase functional foods according to their benefits. Brit Food J 117: 1453-1473.    
  • 19. Vecchio R, Van Loo EJ, Annunziata A (2016) Consumers' willingness to pay for conventional, organic and functional yogurt: evidence from experimental auctions. Int J Consum Stud 40: 368-378.    
  • 20. Özen AE, del Mar BM, Pons A, et al. (2014) Consumption of functional foods in Europe; a systematic review. Nutrición Hospitalaria 29: 470-478.
  • 21. Boyle K, Walsh M, Bishop R (1988) Validation of empirical measures of welfare change: Comment. Land Econ 64: 94-98.    
  • 22. Gunduz O, Bayramoghlo Z (2011) Consumer willingness to pay for chicken meat in Samsun Province of Turkey. J Anim Vet Adv 21: 331-333.
  • 23. Economic and Development Department, Application of the contingency value method in developing countries, 2017. Available from http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/x8955e/x8955e01.htm#TopOfPage.
  • 24. Cooper, JC, Hanemann M, Signorello G (2002) One-and-one-half-bound dichotomous-choice contingent valuation. Rev Econ Stat 84: 742-750.    
  • 25. Mitchell R, Carson R (1989) Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington DC: Johns Hopkins University Press for Resources for the Future.
  • 26. Kavoosi-Kalashami M., Heydari Shalmani M., Nazari M (2015) Estimating willingness to pay for organic rice in urban households of Guilan Province. J Envrion Sci 13: 113-124.
  • 27. Pedhazur EJ (1982) Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research: Explanation and Prediction, 2 Eds, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  • 28. Brooks C (2008) Introductory Econometrics for Finance, 2 Eds, London: Cambridge University Press.
  • 29. Adeyeye A, Jegede O, Akinwale Y (2013) The impact of technology innovation and R&D on firms' performance: an empirical analysis of Nigeria's service sector'. Int J Technol Learn Innovat Dev 6: 374-395    
  • 30. Kavoosi-Kalashami M, Sadeghpour H, Allahyari MS, et al. (2017). Evaluation of urban consumer willingness to pay for organic leafy vegetables. Int J Vegetable Sci 23: 195-206.    
  • 31. Goetzke B, Nitzko S, Spiller A (2014) Consumption of organic and functional food. A matter of well-being and health? Appetite 77: 96-105.
  • 32. Moro D, Veneziani M, Sckokai P, et al. (2015) Consumer Willingness to Pay for Catechin-enriched Yogurt: Evidence from a Stated Choice Experiment. Agribus 31: 243-258.    
  • 33. Pappalardo G, Lusk JL (2016) The role of beliefs in purchasing process of functional foods. Food Qual Prefer 53: 151-158.    
  • 34. Henson S, Masakure O, Cranfield J (2008) The propensity for consumers to offset health risks through the use of functional foods and nutraceuticals: The case of lycopene. Food Qual Prefer 19: 395-406.    
  • 35. Urala N, Lähteenmäki L (2003) Reasons behind consumers' functional food choice. Nutr Food Sci 33: 148-158.    
  • 36. Urala N, Lähteenmäki L (2007) Consumers' changing attitudes towards functional foods. Food Qual Prefer 18: 1-12.    
  • 37. Ares G, Gambaro A (2007) Influence of gender. Age and motives underlying food choice on perceived healthiness and willingness to try functional foods. Appetite 49: 148-158.
  • 38. Hailu G, BoeckerA, Hensen S, et al. (2009) Consumer valuation of functional foods and neutraceuticals in Canada, A conjoint study using probiotics. Appetite 52: 257-265.    
  • 39. Annunziata A, Vecchio R (2013) Agri-food Innovation and the Functional Food Market in Europe: Concerns and Challenges. EuroChoices 12: 12-19.    

 

Reader Comments

your name: *   your email: *  

Copyright Info: © 2017, Mohammad Kavoosi-Kalashami;Mohammad Sadegh Allahyari, et al., licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved