In the Italian apple market, where consumption is deeply rooted in tradition and innovation increasingly focuses on developing climate-resilient varieties, consumer preferences are evolving accordingly. This study applies principal component analysis (PCA) and best-worst scaling (BWS) methods to identify the key factors driving apple purchasing decisions in a sample of 2,096 Italian consumers and examines how these preferences relate to attitudes towards sustainable and novel apple varieties. Particular attention was given to the influence of food neophobia and neophilia in shaping consumer responses to innovation and sustainability-related attributes. Three clusters were identified: sustainability-oriented innovators valued all three pillars of sustainability, environmental, economic, and social, and showed strong interest in certifications, local origin, and novel varieties, while being less price-sensitive. Sustainability-oriented traditionalists also prioritized environmental and economic sustainability and placed the highest importance on sensory qualities and local origin but were more conservative toward novelty. Sustainability-reluctant, in contrast, showed low interest in sustainability-related attributes, and were more price-driven, assigning relatively greater importance to brand and variety. Findings highlight the heterogeneity in consumer expectations and the central role of sustainability, particularly economic and short supply chain, in shaping preferences. Organoleptic characteristics remain crucial, especially for tradition-oriented consumers, while openness to innovation aligns with stronger engagement in sustainability. These insights have strategic implications for producers, marketers, and policymakers aiming to support sustainable innovation in the fruit sector. Targeted communication and product development strategies should align with the values of distinct consumer profiles to foster a more resilient and sustainable agri-food system.
Citation: Antonina Sparacino, Giulia Mastromonaco, Filippo Brun, Simone Blanc, Valentina Mari Merlino. Balancing sustainability, tradition, and innovation: How neophobia shapes consumer preferences for apple varieties[J]. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 2026, 11(3): 487-509. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2026025
In the Italian apple market, where consumption is deeply rooted in tradition and innovation increasingly focuses on developing climate-resilient varieties, consumer preferences are evolving accordingly. This study applies principal component analysis (PCA) and best-worst scaling (BWS) methods to identify the key factors driving apple purchasing decisions in a sample of 2,096 Italian consumers and examines how these preferences relate to attitudes towards sustainable and novel apple varieties. Particular attention was given to the influence of food neophobia and neophilia in shaping consumer responses to innovation and sustainability-related attributes. Three clusters were identified: sustainability-oriented innovators valued all three pillars of sustainability, environmental, economic, and social, and showed strong interest in certifications, local origin, and novel varieties, while being less price-sensitive. Sustainability-oriented traditionalists also prioritized environmental and economic sustainability and placed the highest importance on sensory qualities and local origin but were more conservative toward novelty. Sustainability-reluctant, in contrast, showed low interest in sustainability-related attributes, and were more price-driven, assigning relatively greater importance to brand and variety. Findings highlight the heterogeneity in consumer expectations and the central role of sustainability, particularly economic and short supply chain, in shaping preferences. Organoleptic characteristics remain crucial, especially for tradition-oriented consumers, while openness to innovation aligns with stronger engagement in sustainability. These insights have strategic implications for producers, marketers, and policymakers aiming to support sustainable innovation in the fruit sector. Targeted communication and product development strategies should align with the values of distinct consumer profiles to foster a more resilient and sustainable agri-food system.
| [1] |
Oyenihi AB, Belay ZA, Mditshwa A, et al. (2022) "An apple a day keeps the doctor away": The potentials of apple bioactive constituents for chronic disease prevention. J Food Sci 87: 2291–2309. https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.16155 doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.16155
|
| [2] |
Preti R, Tarola AM (2021) Study of polyphenols, antioxidant capacity and minerals for the valorisation of ancient apple cultivars from Northeast Italy. Eur Food Res Technol 247: 273–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-020-03624-7 doi: 10.1007/s00217-020-03624-7
|
| [3] | ISMEA (2024) Tendenze e dinamiche recenti Frutta - Focus mele. |
| [4] |
Denver S, Jensen JD (2014) Consumer preferences for organically and locally produced apples. Food Qual Prefer 31: 129–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.08.014 doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.08.014
|
| [5] |
Marcoz EM, Melewar TC, Dennis C (2016) The Value of Region of Origin, Producer and Protected Designation of Origin Label for Visitors and Locals: The Case of Fontina Cheese in Italy. Int J Tour Res 18: 236–250. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2000 doi: 10.1002/jtr.2000
|
| [6] |
Rivaroli S, Spadoni R, Tartarini S, et al. (2023) Drivers of liking and value perception for a new apple cultivar in Italy. Br Food J 125: 410–424. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-10-2022-0865 doi: 10.1108/BFJ-10-2022-0865
|
| [7] |
MacKenzie JR, Duizer LM, Bowen AJ (2022) Apple flavor and its effects on sensory characteristics and consumer preference. J Sens Stud 37: e12735. https://doi.org/10.1111/joss.12735 doi: 10.1111/joss.12735
|
| [8] | Carrillo-Rodriguez L, Gallardo RK, Yue C, et al. (2013) Consumer preferences for apple quality traits. 2013 Annu Meet August 4-6 2013 Wash DC. |
| [9] |
Amin MD, Badruddoza S, McCluskey JJ, et al. (2026) Product differentiation in the fruit industry: Lessons from trademarked apples. Agribusiness 42: 148–174. https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.21937 doi: 10.1002/agr.21937
|
| [10] |
Qu R, Chen J, Li W, et al. (2023) Consumers' preferences for apple production attributes: Results of a choice experiment. Foods 12: 1917. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12091917 doi: 10.3390/foods12091917
|
| [11] |
Ben Abdelkader A, Thalheimer M, Petrillo M, et al. (2022) Automatic irrigation scheduling based on soil water potential thresholds allows water savings in a highly productive apple orchard. Acta Hortic 563–570. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2022.1346.71 doi: 10.17660/ActaHortic.2022.1346.71
|
| [12] |
Tokala VY, Afrifa-Yamoah E, Singh Z (2024) Impact analysis of ethylene antagonists, storage environments and storage periods on postharvest physiology of 'Cripps Pink' apple fruit. Acta Physiol Plant 46: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-024-03729-6 doi: 10.1007/s11738-024-03729-6
|
| [13] |
Weber A, Thewes FR, Sellwig M, et al. (2019) Dynamic controlled atmosphere: Impact of elevated storage temperature on anaerobic metabolism and quality of 'Nicoter' apples. Food Chem 298: 125017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.125017 doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.125017
|
| [14] | Gregori R, Berra, Nari, et al. (2023) Le varietà di melo che resistono agli effetti del cambiamento climatico. Fruttic E Ortofloric. |
| [15] |
Thøgersen J (2025) Sustainable consumer behaviour. The Routledge Companion to Marketing and Sustainability, London, Routledge, 185–199. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003412397-16 doi: 10.4324/9781003412397-16
|
| [16] |
Yang W, Anh B, Le P, et al. (2023) Do consumers care about environmentally sustainable attributes along the food supply chain?—A systematic literature review. AIMS Agric Food 8: 513–533. https://doi.org/10.3934/agrfood.2023027 doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2023027
|
| [17] |
Ventura V, Amatucci A, Tomasoni C (2026) Ecosystem Services in food labels: The role of different information layers in shaping consumers preferences. Econ Agro-Aliment Econ 28: 67–102. https://doi.org/10.3280/ecag2026oa21360 doi: 10.3280/ecag2026oa21360
|
| [18] |
Mandolesi S, Dudinskaya EC, Naspetti S, et al. (2023) Exploring organic consumer preferences for dried pasta. Econ Agro-Aliment Econ 25: 59–86. https://doi.org/10.3280/ecag2023oa15159 doi: 10.3280/ecag2023oa15159
|
| [19] |
Santos ÉM da C, Barbosa DM, Gomes DL, et al. (2025) From forest to table: The role of product naming in consumer expectations of biodiversity-derived foods. Food Qual Prefer 122: 105302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105302 doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105302
|
| [20] | Gassler B, Teuber R (2025) What role do attitudes, information and taste play in consumer preferences and willingness to pay for domestic alternatives to exotic superfoods? Food Qual Prefer 123: 105342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105342 |
| [21] | Lähteenmäki L, Arvola A (2001) Food neophobia and variety seeking—Consumer fear or demand for new food products. In: Frewer LJ, Risvik E, Schifferstein H (Eds), Food, People and Society: A European Perspective of Consumers' Food Choices, Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-04601-2_11 |
| [22] | Mandolesi S, Cubero Dudinskaya E, Zanoli R, et al. (2023) Exploring organic consumer preferences for dried pasta. Econ Agro-Aliment XXV 3 2023: 59–68. https://doi.org/10.3280/ecag2023oa15159 |
| [23] |
Jin S, Matsuoka Y, Yue M, et al. (2024) Does information about environmental considerations affect Chinese and UK consumers' purchase intentions for traced foods? A path analysis. Environ Dev Sustain 26: 32287–32318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-05097-0 doi: 10.1007/s10668-024-05097-0
|
| [24] |
Cerda AA, Garcia LY, Ortega-Farias S, et al. (2012) Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for organic apples. Cien Inv Agr 39: 47–59. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-16202012000100004 doi: 10.4067/S0718-16202012000100004
|
| [25] |
Murray AD, Gallardo RK, Prakash A (2024) Mexican consumers' attitudes toward irradiated and imported apples. Agribusiness. 41: 694–718. https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.21922 doi: 10.1002/agr.21922
|
| [26] |
Lanza B, Sabatini N, Bacceli M (2017) Influence of sensory quality on preferences for apples of primary school children. Food Sci Technol Int 23: 729–738. https://doi.org/10.1177/1082013217719338 doi: 10.1177/1082013217719338
|
| [27] | Hamam M, Maesano G (2022) Trends in consumers' preferences towards fresh-cut vegetables during the Covid-19 pandemic. Econ Agro-Aliment XXIV 2 2022: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3280/ecag2022oa13283 |
| [28] |
Yue C, Tong C (2011) Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for existing and new apple varieties: Evidence from apple tasting choice experiments. HortTechnology 21: 376–383. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH.21.3.376 doi: 10.21273/HORTTECH.21.3.376
|
| [29] |
Zhu Y, Wang S, Zhu B, et al. (2024) Relationship between consumer acceptance, sensory characteristics, and physicochemical characteristics of 'Fuji' apples from different origins. J Food Sci 89: 7944–7957. https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.17296 doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.17296
|
| [30] |
Botelho A, Dinis I, Lourenço-Gomes L, et al. (2017) The effect of sequential information on consumers' willingness to pay for credence food attributes. Appetite 118: 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.07.021 doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2017.07.021
|
| [31] |
Tait P, Saunders C, Dalziel P, et al. (2024) How much less? Estimating price discounts for suboptimal food with environmental and social credence attributes. Appl Econ 56: 1581–1594. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2023.2176460 doi: 10.1080/00036846.2023.2176460
|
| [32] |
Rombach M, Dean DL, Baird T, et al. (2022) COVID-19 and the locavores: Investigating the drivers of US consumer preferences for apples. Agronomy 12: 1691. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12071691 doi: 10.3390/agronomy12071691
|
| [33] |
Wortmann L, Enneking U, Daum D (2018) German consumers' attitude towards selenium-biofortified apples and acceptance of related nutrition and health claims. Nutrients 10: 190. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10020190 doi: 10.3390/nu10020190
|
| [34] |
Kleine‐kalmer R, Profeta A, Daum D, et al. (2021) Pre‐launch exploration of consumer willingness to purchase selenium‐ and iodine‐biofortified apples—A discrete choice analysis of possible market settings. Nutrients 13: 1625. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13051625 doi: 10.3390/nu13051625
|
| [35] |
Liu R, Wang J, Liang F, et al. (2022) What we can learn from the interactions of food traceable attributes? A case study of Fuji apple products in China. Appl Econ 54: 6829–6849. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2022.2084017 doi: 10.1080/00036846.2022.2084017
|
| [36] |
Kazimierczak R, Obidzińska J, Szumigaj B, et al. (2024) Sustainable foods: Consumer opinions and behaviour towards organic fruits in Poland. Sustain Switz 16: 3740. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093740 doi: 10.3390/su16093740
|
| [37] |
Cao X, Horváth-Mezőfi Z, Sasvár Z, et al. (2025) Influence of visual quality and cultural background on consumer apple preferences: An eye-tracking study with Chinese and Hungarian consumers. Appl Sci Switz 15: 773. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15020773 doi: 10.3390/app15020773
|
| [38] |
Marette S, Disdier A-C, Beghin JC (2021) A comparison of EU and US consumers' willingness to pay for gene-edited food: Evidence from apples. Appetite 159: 105064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.105064 doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2020.105064
|
| [39] |
Yang Y, Hobbs JE (2020) Food values and heterogeneous consumer responses to nanotechnology. Can J Agric Econ 68: 289–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12225 doi: 10.1111/cjag.12225
|
| [40] | Peano C, Merlino VM, Sottile F, et al. (2019) Sustainability for food consumers: Which perception? Sustainability 11: 5955. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11215955 |
| [41] |
Sogari G, Riccioli F, Moruzzo R, et al. (2023) Engaging in entomophagy: The role of food neophobia and disgust between insect and non-insect eaters. Food Qual Prefer 104: 104764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2022.104764 doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2022.104764
|
| [42] |
Sogari G, Menozzi D, Mora C (2019) The food neophobia scale and young adults' intention to eat insect products. Int J Consum Stud 43: 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12485 doi: 10.1111/ijcs.12485
|
| [43] |
Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16: 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555 doi: 10.1007/BF02310555
|
| [44] |
Tavakol M, Dennick R (2011) Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. Int J Med Educ 2: 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd doi: 10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
|
| [45] |
Loureiro ML, Dominguez Arcos F (2012) Applying Best–Worst Scaling in a stated preference analysis of forest management programs. J For Econ 18: 381–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfe.2012.06.006 doi: 10.1016/j.jfe.2012.06.006
|
| [46] |
Soto JR, Escobedo FJ, Khachatryan H, et al. (2018) Consumer demand for urban forest ecosystem services and disservices: Examining trade-offs using choice experiments and best-worst scaling. Ecosyst Serv 29: 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.009 doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.009
|
| [47] |
Tyner EH, Boyer TA (2020) Applying best-worst scaling to rank ecosystem and economic benefits of restoration and conservation in the Great Lakes. J Environ Manage 255: 109888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109888 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109888
|
| [48] |
Maleki S, Aghdaie SFA, Shahin A, et al. (2019) Investigating the relationship among the Kansei-based design of chocolate packaging, consumer perception, and willingness to buy. J Mark Commun 0: 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2019.1590855 doi: 10.1080/13527266.2019.1590855
|
| [49] |
Lagerkvist CJ (2013) Consumer preferences for food labelling attributes: Comparing direct ranking and best–worst scaling for measurement of attribute importance, preference intensity and attribute dominance. Food Qual Prefer 29: 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.02.005 doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.02.005
|
| [50] |
Chrysochou P, Tiganis A, Trabelsi Trigui I, et al. (2022) A cross-cultural study on consumer preferences for olive oil. Food Qual Prefer 97: 104460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104460 doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104460
|
| [51] |
Tiganis A, Chrysochou P (2024) Exploring tourist preferences for local food: A Best-Worst Scaling analysis and market segmentation approach. Br Food J 126: 4093–4107. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-01-2024-0068 doi: 10.1108/BFJ-01-2024-0068
|
| [52] | Louviere JJ, Flynn TN, Marley AAJ (2015) Best-Worst Scaling: Theory, Methods and Applications, Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107337855 |
| [53] |
Aprile MC, Punzo G (2022) How environmental sustainability labels affect food choices: Assessing consumer preferences in southern Italy. J Clean Prod 332: 130046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130046 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130046
|
| [54] |
Vallance S, Perkins HC, Dixon JE (2011) What is social sustainability? A clarification of concepts. Geoforum 42: 342–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.01.002 doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.01.002
|
| [55] | Venkatesan M (2021) Social and Sustainability Marketing and the Sharing Economy in the Coffee Shop Culture, 839–862. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003188186-34 |
| [56] |
Sacchi G (2018) The ethics and politics of food purchasing choices in Italian consumers' collective action. J Agric Environ Ethics 31: 73–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-018-9710-2 doi: 10.1007/s10806-018-9710-2
|
| [57] |
Toussaint M, Cabanelas P, González-Alvarado TE (2021) What about the consumer choice? The influence of social sustainability on consumer's purchasing behavior in the Food Value Chain. Eur Res Manag Bus Econ 27: 100134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2020.100134 doi: 10.1016/j.iedeen.2020.100134
|
| [58] |
Cao S, Xu H, Bryceson KP (2023) Blockchain traceability for sustainability communication in food supply chains: An architectural framework, design pathway and considerations. Sustainability 15: 13486. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813486 doi: 10.3390/su151813486
|
| [59] | Tessitore S, Iraldo F, Apicella AA, et al. (2020) The link between food traceability and food labels in the perception of young consumers in Italy. Int J Food Syst Dyn 11: 425–440. |
| [60] |
Shankar MU, Levitan CA, Prescott J, et al. (2009) The influence of color and label information on flavor perception. Chemosens Percept 2: 53–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12078-009-9046-4 doi: 10.1007/s12078-009-9046-4
|
| [61] |
Luby JJ, Bedford DS (2015) Cultivars as consumer brands: Trends in protecting and commercializing apple cultivars via intellectual property rights. Crop Sci 55: 2504–2510. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2014.10.0684 doi: 10.2135/cropsci2014.10.0684
|
| [62] |
Wang Q, Sun J, Parsons R (2010) Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for locally grown organic apples: Evidence from a conjoint study. HortScience 45: 376–381. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.45.3.376 doi: 10.21273/HORTSCI.45.3.376
|
| [63] |
Jensen JD, Mørkbak MR (2013) Role of gastronomic, externality and feasibility attributes in consumer demand for organic and local foods: The case of honey and apples: Role of gastronomic, externality and feasibility attributes. Int J Consum Stud 37: 634–641. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12049 doi: 10.1111/ijcs.12049
|
| [64] |
Joutsela M, Latvala T, Roto V (2017) Influence of packaging interaction experience on willingness to pay. Packag Technol Sci 30: 505–523. https://doi.org/10.1002/pts.2236 doi: 10.1002/pts.2236
|
| [65] | Noori S, Niknami M, Sabouri MS, et al. (2024) How does geographical branding improve the efficiency of the apple supply chain? Front Sustain Food Syst 8 1410737. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1410737 |
| [66] |
Crouch G, Louviere J (2007) International convention site selection a further analysis of factor importance using best-worst scaling. Tourism Manage 28: 918–928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2006.02.002 doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2006.02.002
|
| [67] |
Giuggioli NR, Merlino VM, Sparacino A, et al. (2023) Customer preferences heterogeneity toward avocado: a latent class approach based on the best–worst scaling choice modeling. Agric Food Econ 11: 46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40100-023-00289-0 doi: 10.1186/s40100-023-00289-0
|
| [68] |
Caputo V, Lusk JL (2020) What agricultural and food policies do U. S. consumers prefer? A Best–Worst Scaling approach. Agric Econ 51: 75–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12542 doi: 10.1111/agec.12542
|
| [69] |
Lannin DG, Barrowclough M, Vogel DL (2020) An examination of help-seeking preferences via best–worst scaling. J Clin Psychol 76: 1677–1695. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22945 doi: 10.1002/jclp.22945
|
| [70] |
Albahlal F, Potoglou D (2026) Using best-worst scaling to elicit individual choices for investing in cycling infrastructure. J Cycl Micromobility Res 8: 100114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmr.2026.100114 doi: 10.1016/j.jcmr.2026.100114
|
| [71] |
Sparacino A, Ollani S, Baima L, et al. (2024) Analyzing strawberry preferences: Best–Worst Scaling methodology and purchase styles. Foods 13: 1474. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13101474 doi: 10.3390/foods13101474
|
| [72] |
Cooper AF (2024) Between randomness and arbitrariness: Some lessons for reliable machine learning at scale. arXiv: 2406.09548. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4860005 doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4860005
|
| [73] |
Greenacre M, Groenen PJF, Hastie T, et al. (2022) Principal component analysis. Nat Rev Methods Primer 2: 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-022-00184-w doi: 10.1038/s43586-022-00184-w
|
| [74] |
Massaglia S, Merlino VM, Brun F, et al. (2023) What do chocolate consumers want? Exploring individual preferences and profiles, considering lifestyle, food habits and socio-demographic features. Int J Gastron Food Sci 32: 100746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgfs.2023.100746 doi: 10.1016/j.ijgfs.2023.100746
|
| [75] | Backhaus K, Erichson B, Gensler S, et al. (2023) Cluster analysis. In: Backhaus K, Erichson B, Gensler S, et al. (Eds), Multivariate Analysis: An Application-Oriented Introduction, Wiesbaden, Springer Fachmedien, 453–532. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40411-6_8 |
| [76] | Ben-David S, Pál D, Simon HU (2007) Stability of k-means clustering. In: Bshouty NH, Gentile C (Eds), Learning Theory, Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 20–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72927-3_4 |
| [77] | Verma JP (2013) Cluster analysis: For segmenting the population, In: Verma JP (Ed.), Data Analysis in Management with SPSS Software, India, Springer, 317–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-0786-3_10 |
| [78] |
Hennig C (2007) Cluster-wise assessment of cluster stability. Comput Stat Data Anal 52: 258–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2006.11.025 doi: 10.1016/j.csda.2006.11.025
|
| [79] | Paccassoni P (2023) Marketing Around | L'uomo con il marketing intorno, Le Aree Nielsen, 2023. Available from: https://marketingaround.it/analisi/aree-nielsen/. |
| [80] |
Moser R, Raffaelli R (2012) Consumer preferences for sustainable production methods in apple purchasing behaviour: a non-hypothetical choice experiment. Int J Consum Stud 36: 141–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011.01083.x doi: 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011.01083.x
|
| [81] |
Chen S, Wang D, Wang J, et al. (2025) Consumer willingness to pay for hybrid food: The role of food neophobia and information framing. Nutrients 17: 2326. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17142326 doi: 10.3390/nu17142326
|
| [82] |
Rabadán A, González-Moreno Á, Sáez-Martínez FJ (2019) Improving firms' performance and sustainability: The case of eco-innovation in the agri-food industry. Sustainability 11: 5590. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205590 doi: 10.3390/su11205590
|
| [83] |
Sánchez-Bravo P, Chambers VE, Noguera-Artiaga L, et al. (2021) Consumer understanding of sustainability concept in agricultural products. Food Qual Prefer 89: 104136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104136 doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104136
|
| [84] |
Zarbà C, Allegra V, Zarbà AS, et al. (2019) Wild leafy plants market survey in Sicily: From local culture to food sustainability. AIMS Agric Food 4: 534–546. https://doi.org/10.3934/agrfood.2019.3.534 doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2019.3.534
|
| [85] |
Sparacino A, Mota-Gutierrez J, Rui M, et al. (2025) Exploring consumers' knowledge and level of importance of sustainable agri-food certifications in purchasing behavior. J Agric Food Res 22: 102127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2025.102127 doi: 10.1016/j.jafr.2025.102127
|
| [86] |
Aertsens J, Mondelaers K, Verbeke W, et al. (2011) The influence of subjective and objective knowledge on attitude, motivations and consumption of organic food. Br Food J 113: 1353–1378. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070701111179988 doi: 10.1108/00070701111179988
|
| [87] |
Faria AA, Kang J (2022) It's not just about the food: Motivators of food patterns and their link with sustainable food neophobia. Appetite 174: 106008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2022.106008 doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2022.106008
|
| [88] |
Moroșan E, Popovici V, Popescu IA, et al. (2025) Perception, trust, and motivation in consumer behavior for organic food acquisition: An exploratory study. Foods 14: 293. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14020293 doi: 10.3390/foods14020293
|
| [89] |
Abbas H, Zhao L, Gong X, et al. (2023) The perishable products case to achieve sustainable food quality and safety goals implementing on-field sustainable supply chain model. Socioecon Plann Sci 87: 101562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2023.101562 doi: 10.1016/j.seps.2023.101562
|
| [90] |
Török Á, Yeh C-H, Menozzi D, et al. (2023) European consumers' preferences for fresh fruit and vegetables—A cross-country analysis. J Agric Food Res 14: 100883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100883 doi: 10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100883
|
| [91] |
Hamam M, D'Amico M, Spina D, et al. (2024) The interplay of food-related lifestyle and eating behavior in Italian women. Front Nutr 11: 1338925. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2024.1338925 doi: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1338925
|
| [92] |
Gazdecki M, Goryńska-Goldmann E, Kiss M, et al. (2021) Segmentation of food consumers based on their sustainable attitude. Energies 14: 3179. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14113179 doi: 10.3390/en14113179
|
| [93] |
Mota-Gutierrez J, Sparacino A, Merlino VM, et al. (2024) Socio-demographic and cross-country differences in attention to sustainable certifications and changes in food consumption. Npj Sci Food 8: 31. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-024-00274-x doi: 10.1038/s41538-024-00274-x
|
| [94] |
Seppä L, Latvala T, Akaichi F, et al. (2015) What are domestic apples worth? Hedonic responses and sensory information as drivers of willingness to pay. Food Qual Prefer 43: 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.02.013 doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.02.013
|
| [95] |
Oke A, Ladas J, Bailey M (2020) Ethical consumers: An exploratory investigation of the ethical food consumption behaviour of young adults in the North East of Scotland. Br Food J 122: 3623–3638. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-10-2019-0801 doi: 10.1108/BFJ-10-2019-0801
|
| [96] |
Mancini P, Marchini A, Simeone M (2017) Which are the sustainable attributes affecting the real consumption behaviour? Consumer understanding and choices. Br Food J 119: 1839–1853. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-11-2016-0574 doi: 10.1108/BFJ-11-2016-0574
|
| [97] |
Dowd K, Burke KJ (2013) The influence of ethical values and food choice motivations on intentions to purchase sustainably sourced foods. Appetite 69: 137–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2013.05.024 doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2013.05.024
|
Antonina Sparacino, Giulia Mastromonaco, Filippo Brun, Simone Blanc, Valentina Mari Merlino. Balancing sustainability, tradition, and innovation: How neophobia shapes consumer preferences for apple varieties[J]. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 2026, 11(3): 487-509. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2026025
DownLoad: