*Corresponding Author:

Adelia Bovell-Benjamin

Professor of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Department of Food & Nutritional Sciences, Tuskegee University, 1200 W. Montgomery Rd., Tuskegee, AL 36088, USA; Tel: (334) 727-8717; E. mail: abovellbenjamin@tuskegee.edu

 

ABSTRACT

Limited research has focused on organic food knowledge, availability, preference, beliefs, and consumption by consumers in Southeast America. This study assessed consumer acceptance of three organically grown squash (Cucurbita pepo L.) varieties and also the shopping behaviours, beliefs, knowledge levels, awareness, utilization, and purchase intent for organic food products among grocery store shoppers in Macon and Lee counties, Alabama. Three study sites in the two counties were identified: two in Macon County and one in Opelika, Lee County. Consumers (N = 209) evaluated the three squash varieties for specific attributes and overall preference, using a nine-point hedonic scale. An organic food frequency survey (Org-FQ) was administered to 300 consumers at the three study sites to evaluate consumers’ demographics, shopping habits, beliefs, knowledge, awareness, usage, and intent to purchase organic foods. The findings revealed that the degrees of liking for the overall preference of the samples were significantly (P< 0.05) lower at one site than the others. Taste, texture, and appearance squash were also acceptable to all the consumers. Results for the Organic Food Questionnaire revealed that consumers in both counties wanted to learn more about organic foods and had a desire to consume organic food. However, there was a greater preference for organic foods among participants in Macon County. Consumers in Macon County were also willing to pay a higher price for organic food than those in Lee County. These findings could pave the way for targeted strategies, bolster organic farming efforts, increase consumer knowledge and utilization while stimulating economic growth in the region simultaneously.

 

Keywords: Consumer acceptance, African Americans, organic squash, organic food beliefs; purchase intent; perceptions of organic foods.

 

INTRODUCTION

Mounting consumer interest in organically grown foods is revolutionizing the food industry nationally and globally. Since the early 1990s, the organic food industry has expanded to meet increasing consumer demand globally [1]. Consumer demand for organically grown produce continues to show growth, providing market incentives for the United States (U.S.) and global farmers across a broad range of products. The global organic food market is expected to reach $381 billion in 2025 at a compound annual growth rate of 14.5% [2].

Organic food sales grew in 2020 despite the pandemic. For example, in the U.S., organic fruit and vegetable sales accounted for more than 33% of all organic food sales [3]. Additionally, according to the Organic Trade Association [4], more than 15% of the fruits and vegetables currently sold in the U.S. are organic. In 2020, all four geographic regions of the U.S. experienced double-digit growth in sales of organic produce [5].

Organic sales in the U.S. increased 12.4% to $61.9 billion in 2020 [3]. This increase represented a growth rate of more than twice that of 2019 (4.6%). During the first quarter of 2021, organic fresh produce sales recorded a continued, significant increase above those grown conventionally [5]. Fresh fruits and vegetables have consistently maintained their position as the leading category within the organic food industry since its inception. Retail sales of organic fresh fruits and vegetables were an estimated $19.2 billion in 2021 and have progressively grown over the past twenty years according to the Nutrition Business Journal [6]. Organic dollars increased by 9.3% versus 2.9% for conventionally grown fresh produce. Additionally, the growth of organic produce for March 2021 increased by 5.7% while conventionally grown produce declined by 0.6% [5]. For the first time in 2022, organic food sales in the U.S. reached $60 billion, nearly doubling 2021’s growth and currently accounting for 6% of total food sales in America [6]. Total organic sales, including non-organic food sales, were $67.6 billion. According to Fruit Growers News, in 2022, organic fresh produce sales amounted to $22 billion, accounting for 15% and 40% of all fruit and vegetable sales and organic food sales, respectively, for 2021 in the U.S. [7].

Consumers’ perceptions are influenced by physical needs, such as food, health, environmental protection, and socio-cultural aspects including religion, education level and income [8-10]. It is also well known that consumers’ perceptions contribute significantly to decision making regarding food choices [11]. Pieniak et al. [12] postulated that familiarity and direct experience with foods are important predictors of organic food consumption. Taste has been seen as the prime consideration in consumer food choice [13]. For example, in a four-country research study designed to assess the motive factors of food selection, Januszewska et al. [14] found that the highest motivational factor was sensory appeal for consumers in three of the four countries.

It was also reported that sensory appeal, including taste, smell, and texture have a great impact on food consumption choice [15-16]. Although health is considered a major advantage of organic food, the health factor is less important than taste for some consumers [17]. In general, researchers have classified factors that impact food choices into three main groups: i) intrinsic (colour, aroma) and extrinsic features (information and packaging) [18]; ii) individual difference such as hunger, taste, cooking skills, mood, preferences, and family [19, 20]; and iii) society-related factors such as culture, price, and income [21]. Overall, sensory analysis is most important for consumers in determining their choice followed by their awareness of intangible qualities such as safety and nutritional value [22].

Limited research has focused on organic food knowledge, availability, preference, beliefs, and consumption by consumers in the Southeastern U.S. such as Alabama, and Mississippi. Most southern states have less certified organic farms than other parts of the country; however, the South has seen much growth in organic farming since 2011 [23]. The South continued to report increased organic produce consumption, with sales of over $2.5 billion, an increase of 14.7% from 2019, and growth in volume of 17.8% over the same period [5]. With the continued growth in organic farming in the southeast U.S., it is important for stakeholders and researchers to better understand consumers’ perceptions, acceptance, and consumption patterns of organic foods in rural Alabama.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, real-time information regarding the availability of organic foods in Tuskegee is limited. However, the Organic Agriculture Institute (OAI) at Tuskegee University operates a certified organic farm, which serves as a direct source for locally produced and sold organic vegetables and fruits, including tomatoes, bell peppers, squash, sweet potatoes, mustard greens, kale, black-eyed peas, and blueberries. In addition to the OAI operations, targeted strategies have been implemented to promote the significance of organic agriculture, with a specific focus on engaging students. Initiatives include offering summer internships and college-level courses accessible to both graduate and undergraduate students. Furthermore, a state-wide organic farming forum has been organized to bring together farmers, producers, agencies, and universities.

Collaboration in the form of a Southeast Organic Partnership, uniting seven universities has also been established. This collaborative effort extended to comprehensive research involving 40 farms, consumer education, and extension activities within the region. To disseminate knowledge about organic agriculture, a series of consumer-oriented workshops have been conducted across nine cities in Alabama, USA. Additionally, an annual organic food forum has been consistently organized for college-age students, spanning the past seven years. These efforts collectively contribute to addressing organic farming efforts, consumer knowledge and utilization while stimulating economic growth in Tuskegee and the region while fostering a broader understanding and appreciation for organic agriculture among students and communities at large.

Pieniak et al. [12] postulated that familiarity and direct experience with foods are important predictors of organic food consumption. A study reviewing 1,820 publications reported that food beliefs were 46% higher as predictors of food decision making than food knowledge [24]. As organic farming continues to expand in the southeastern U.S., it is becoming increasingly important to identify and understand the diverse demographics of organic consumers in this region. This study assessed consumer acceptance of three organic squash varieties (Gentry, Spineless Beauty, and Zephyr) and also the shopping behaviours, beliefs, knowledge levels, awareness, utilization, and intent to purchase organic food products among grocery store shoppers in Macon and Lee counties, Alabama, U.S.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Human Consent and Certification

Permission to conduct the study was obtained from the Human Participant Research Committee (HPRC), Tuskegee University, and the participating grocery store managers. Each shopper who volunteered to participate in the study gave oral consent. Before conducting the study in the grocery stores, the researchers were required to have Safe Serve Certification.

 

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Consumers had to be willing to participate in the study, have the ability to communicate, read and write English and be prepared to follow the study’s instructions. Potential participants who were allergic to squash and sick (self-reported) were excluded from the study.

 

Study Location

The study was conducted in three grocery stores at different locations in two Alabama counties, southeastern U.S.: i) Sites 1 and 2, Tuskegee, Macon County; and ii) Site 3, Opelika, Lee County. Two of the grocery stores were larger, national chain stores, and one was a smaller local entity in Tuskegee, Alabama, U.S.

 

Participant Recruitment

The Shopper-Intercept (SI) method as described by Borradaile et al. [25] and Pelletier et al. [26] was utilized to recruit participants for the sensory evaluation and grocery store shoppers’ survey aspects of the study. Briefly, the researchers stood in pairs in pre-assigned positions at the main entrances of the grocery stores to recruit. Researchers held clipboards to their chest with a recruitment flyer attached to the back, which customers could see as they approached the stores’ entrances. All adults entering the grocery store were intercepted and invited to participate. The researchers introduced themselves as part of the Tuskegee Organic Agriculture Institute (formerly the Southeast Organic Partnership) at Tuskegee University. Researchers stuck to a recruitment script, gave a brief overview of the study, conducted a verbal eligibility screen, read an informed consent statement, and distributed written information about the study.

 

Data Collection and Participation Incentives

For data collection, the reviewers conducted the interviews in the assigned fruit and vegetable section at the grocery stores. The grocery stores announced the study via their intercommunication-systems periodically since each person who volunteered to participate was given a moderately priced in-store gift certificate to compensate for their time.

 

Sensory Evaluation of Squash Samples

Consumers evaluated three different varieties of organically grown squash from the Tuskegee University Certified Organic Farm (Figure 1).

 

Sample Preparation

For the sensory testing, two different formulations were prepared from the squash varieties, one seasoned and the other unseasoned (Table 1). The samples were steamed, placed in covered, clear plastic containers, and labelled with three-digit random codes (Table 2).

 

Study Protocol – Sensory Testing

Figure 2 shows the setup for the sensory testing at the sites. Male and female participants (untrained judges) evaluated six samples each in one session (Table 2). The participants tasted each of samples from left to right and rinsed their mouths with water (22±2°C) prior to, and between tasting each sample. The participants evaluated the squash samples, for specific attributes (taste, texture, colour, appearance) and overall liking, using a 9‐point hedonic scale ranging from “9 = like extremely; 5 = neither like nor dislike; and 1 = dislike extremely” [27, 28].

 

Grocery Store Shoppers’ Survey

Design and Survey Instrument

A cross sectional study design was used. A modified version of the Organic Food Questionnaire (Org-FQ) was utilized to survey grocery store shoppers [29]. The Org-FQ was divided into five sections: i) Section A contained seven questions, which captured information about demographics of the participants; ii) Section B consisted of 13 questions, which focused on the participants’ shopping habits; iii) Section C consisted of eight questions with a focus on the participants’ beliefs regarding organic foods; iv) Section D consisted of 14 questions regarding the participants’ awareness and usage of organic foods; and v) Section E had five questions, which elicited information regarding the participants’ purchase intent of organic foods.

 

Protocol

The sample was a convenience one, that is, as consumers entered the store, they were intercepted and invited to participate as described earlier. The surveys were conducted in the grocery stores during the times given by the respective store managers. The Org-FQ was administered by trained interviewers and took approximately 10 minutes to complete. The survey had predominantly closed-ended questions, with a limited number of open-ended ones.

 

Pilot Testing of the Study Tool

In preparation for the formal study, a pilot study of the ORG-FQ was conducted in Tuskegee and Opelika, Alabama. The survey questionnaire was pilot-tested on 15-persons (not included in the formal study) for logistics such as: wording of questions and/or responses for questions, research protocol, and data collection. The pilot study also tested for sensitive and/or inappropriate questions as well. It was also utilized to identify potential problem areas and deficiencies in the study tool and protocol prior to implementation of the formal study [4]. After the pilot study, the questionnaire was revised and a consumers’ intent to purchase organic food was added based on the feedback received. Some questions were also revised to provide consumers with more closed- rather than open-ended questions, which the consumers found to be time consuming. The final version of the Org-FQ resulted in a more concise tool comprising of 47 questions in five categories. Figure 3 shows the participant setup in the grocery store.

 

Permission courtesy participants for pictures

Data Analysis

For the sensory evaluation, one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to the hedonic ratings for the different sites to determine differences among samples. Mean hedonic ratings were compared using Tukey HSD test at p<0.05 to determine where the differences lie. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the grocery store shoppers’ survey.

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Only Sensory Testing

A total of 509 consumers participated in the year-long study. Table 3 shows the demographic characteristics of the sensory study participants, all Sites combined. For the sensory testing, 209 consumers at the three study locations participated. Of all the study locations, Site 3 had the least participants (N=46), while Sites 1 and 2 had 100 and 63 participants, respectively. There were three possible designations for both age and income range (Table 3).

 

Taste Attribute

The results for the consumers’ liking of the taste attribute are shown in Table 4. At Sites 2 and 3, the degrees of liking (DOL) for the three cultivars of squash for the taste attribute were not significantly different (Table 4). However, at Site 1, the GENUNS was significantly (p<0.01) less liked than the GENSEA, SPBUNS, and ZEPSEA (p<0.05), but equally liked as the ZEPUNS and SPBUNS. At all the Sites, the taste attribute of the samples was acceptable to the consumers since hedonic ratings ranged from 6.5±2.3 to 7.4±1.5.

 

Texture Attribute

There were no significant differences in degrees of liking for the texture of the squash at any of the three sites (Table 4). The texture of the different cultivars of squash was acceptable to all the consumers. At Sites 1, 2, and 3, the texture of the squash was liked moderately, very much and slightly, respectively.

 

Colour Attribute

There were no significant differences in degrees of liking for the colour of the squash at Site 3 (Table 4). The degrees of liking for the colour of the SPBUNS and ZEPSEA samples among consumers at Site 1 and Site 2 were significantly (p< 0.05) more liked as shown in Table 4. The colour of all the samples was acceptable to all the consumers at the three sites. Although the GENUNS sample was acceptable to consumers, it was significantly (p <0.05) less liked than GENSEA, ZEPSEA, and ZEPUNS, and also significantly (p<0.01) less liked than SPBUNS (Table 4). The colour of the SPBUNS squash was liked very much by consumers, and significantly more than the SPBSEA, although they were both acceptable (Table 4).

 

Appearance

In regard to the data captured separately at each Site about the hedonic rating of the appearance of the samples, there were no significant differences in the consumers’ degree of liking for the samples (Table 4). The acceptability of the samples for the appearance attribute ranged from 6.5±2.4 to 8.0±1.7, that is, from “like slightly” to “like very much” (Table 4).

 

Overall Preference

There were no significant differences in degrees of liking for the overall preference of the squash samples at Sites 2 and 3 (Table 4). The degrees of liking for the overall preference of the samples among consumers at Site 1 were significantly (P< 0.05) lower as shown in Table 4.

The GENUNS and ZEPUNS samples, although acceptable, were liked slightly, and significantly (P<0.01) less liked than the others by the consumers at Site 1. Overall, the squash samples were acceptable to all the consumers at the three sites. The taste of the unseasoned Spineless Beauty squash was the most preferred at the three Sites (Table 4). This finding is in contradiction with Luu et al. [30] and Nikolaus et al. [31] who indicated that added seasoning to vegetables increased likability. It can be speculated that the consumers who had lower degrees of liking for the taste of the unseasoned squash would be less likely to purchase the squash [32].

It has been demonstrated that food texture impacts the pace of food consumption, while tactile sensations often enhance the overall hedonic experience [33-34]. Texture has emerged as a significant determinant in food selection [35]. Among participants at the three Sites, those at Lee County liked the texture of the squash the least, although it was still acceptable to them. Perhaps the primary difference in degrees of liking for the texture of the squash samples among consumers from Macon and Lee counties is cultural. Consumers in Lee and Macon counties were primarily Caucasians and African Americans/Blacks, respectively. According to Dirks and Duran [36] and Noia et al. [37], African American culture routinely consumes squash much more than any other races and ethnic groups. African Americans/Blacks food preparation methods also differ from other races, and this may impact on the texture, supporting the differences in degrees of liking seen in this study.

Visual cues like the colour of food have been associated with how a person perceives flavour and taste [38, 39]. Both colours green and yellow have been known to increase vegetable consumption [40]. Older and less educated individuals have associated green with health and healthiness [40, 41]. Green is a cool colour and has been connected to ripeness while yellow is considered a warm colour. Both colours have been associated with the taste of sour, primarily when associated with fruits [39, 42-43]. On a mental level, yellow food is categorized as stimulating and uplifting. Green foods have a balancing and peaceful effect on the psyche/mind [40, 44]. At Sites 1 and 2 in Macon County, consumers gave a high rating to the unseasoned Zephyr sample with a mixed green and yellow colour (Figure 1). However, the consumers at Site 3 gave it a significantly (p<0.05) lower rating (Table 4).

The overall preference of our samples among the three study Sites ranged between 7.0 and 8.0 on the 9-point hedonic scale. Andersen et al. [35] demonstrated that there is a strong proportional connection between consumers’ liking of taste and their overall preference. This was consistent with the findings in the current study. The participants at Site 1 liked the taste of the study samples moderately, and their overall liking or preference was also moderate. Similarly, participants at Site 2 rated their liking of the taste of the samples as “like moderately”, and their overall preference was the same. Additionally, the data obtained at Site 3 also support Andersen et al.’s [35] observations. Consumers at Site 3 reported taste and overall preference at a rating “like moderately” and “like very much”, respectively. It should be noted that the hedonic rating of the overall preference of the study sample at Site 3 increased to the next immediate level of liking on the 9-point hedonic scale when compared to their rating of taste.

 

Grocery Store Shoppers’ Organic Food Survey

Demographics of the Participants

A total of 300 men and women from Tuskegee, Macon County and Opelika, Lee County, U.S. participated in the shoppers’ survey. The characteristics of the participants are shown in Table 5.

 

Participants’ Shopping Habits

The shopping habits of the study participants are shown in Table 6. Most of the participants from all the sites indicated that they preferred organic foods.

 

Participants’ Beliefs about Organic food

Table 7 shows the beliefs of the study participants regarding organic foods.

 

Participants’ Organic Food Awareness, Usage, and Knowledge

The results for the participants’ awareness, usage, and knowledge of organic foods for the study are shown in Table 8.

More females than males participated in the Grocery Store Shoppers’ Org-FQ Survey. Our findings are consistent with other studies evaluating consumers’ attitude, knowledge, and beliefs [45]. Our data revealed that the consumers’ preference for organic food was greatest at Site 1 followed by Sites 3 and 2, respectively (Table 6). At Site 1, all the participants identified as African Americans/Blacks while those at Site 3 were primarily Whites. More African Americans/Blacks than Whites indicated a preference for organic foods. Although higher numbers of African Americans/Blacks expressed a preference for organic foods, the literature consistently reports that their consumption of these products is lower than Caucasians. Shahbandeh [46] and Molinillo et al. [47] reported that the majority of organic food consumers are Caucasians less than 29 years of age. The authors agree with studies from The Hartman Group [48] and Kongsom and Kongsom [49], which indicate the existence of other barriers that hinder their consumption of organic products.

Sites 2 and 3 had the highest number of millennials (ages 24 to 25 years) at 37% and 36%, respectively (Table 6). In the current study, it is worth noting that the majority of participants who indicated a preference for organic foods belonged to the age group ranging from 45 to 70 years old. This demographic trend underscores a significant disconnect between stated preferences and real consumption behaviours as reported by Shahbandeh [46] and Molinillo et al. [47]. It is important to note that the populations studied were different and our findings are not generalized to all African Americans/Blacks.

The majority of consumers from all three Sites affirmed that they bought organic products, and 32.7% reported buying them weekly (Table 6). Site 3 had the highest number of participants reporting that they bought organic foods weekly (Table 6). The reported frequency of organic food purchases varied from 32.7% of consumers who reported purchasing it ‘Once/week’ to 25.0, and 21.7% reported purchasing it ‘once every two weeks’ and ‘once/month, respectively. Pearson et al. [50] reported similar variations among consumers. A smaller percentage (15.7%) of consumers reported ‘never bought’ organic foods. It has been reported that the frequency of purchasing organic foods is associated with health and environmental reasons. For example, ‘incidental/once/month’ buyers recount health as a major reason for purchasing while the ‘heavy or regular’ buyers relate to environmental concerns and are usually willing to pay extra more frequently [42]. The classification of the 'never' and ‘other’ groups, representing 15.7% and 5.0%, respectively, of the study's sample, constitutes a valuable contribution to the existing literature. This categorization paves the way for future research aimed at unravelling the underlying reasons and implications behind these choices, which, in turn, can provide crucial insights into strategies for promoting increased organic food purchase and consumption.

Consumers reported that organic foods were not widely available in their areas (Table 7). Given the lower household income in Tuskegee in comparison to Opelika, it was surprising that the highest number of participants who indicated organic food was widely available were from Site 1. This finding is unclear, because Tuskegee has a single chain supermarket, which carries limited organic food choices. A possible explanation is that the respondents who said organic foods are widely available shop outside of Tuskegee. However, they reported being unwilling to travel far to purchase organic products. It should be reiterated that overall, the participants claimed that organic foods were unavailable in their communities. This finding is consistent with those of Alkon and Caji [51] and Lehner [52] who reported that organic food options are generally not available in less affluent communities.

Participants (33%) from Site 3 reported more willingness to travel further distances to purchase organic foods. It is speculated that this is because of higher median household incomes than those in Sites 1 and 2. The U.S. Census Bureau [53] reported a similar phenomenon. Many researchers have stated that Millennials are highly concerned with good health, environmental safety, and desire to play an active role in promoting health [47, 53]. However, the reports about Millennials’ willingness to travel further distances to buy organic was not borne out in the current study. Lack of access to organic food was confirmed by approximately 66% of all consumers in this study. Most consumers at all Sites reported organic food intake at 0 to 25%, which we speculate would be higher if availability and income were not issues [53-54]. Researchers from Denmark showed that if consumers cannot find organic foods in nearby supermarkets, they are unlikely to travel long distances in search of it, and the tendency will be to purchase non-organic products. This is consistent with our findings, which showed that participants in Tuskegee were less willing to travel more than 16 miles to shop for organic products (Table 9).

The majority of participants viewed organic products as healthier, more environmentally friendly, and more physically appealing than non-organic foods. However, the majority of consumers (84.3%) at all three Sites believed that non-organic foods tasted better than organic foods (Table 7). When asked why they believed that non-organic foods tasted better, they replied “because they never experienced organic labelled foods.” When probed further many consumers, especially the older ones who were raised on foods from the garden considered their food organic even though it was not labelled as such. This is consistent with the results reported by the Pew Research Center [55], indicating that 59% of Americans believed that organic products have the same taste as conventionally grown ones, and 71% of these individuals did not typically consume organic foods.

Other studies have reported that organic foods taste better than those grown by conventional methods [56-59]. Nutritionally, organic fruits and vegetables are higher in flavonoids than conventionally grown produce [60]. Plants rich in flavonoids are also highly tasty because flavonoids tend to bind sugars in the plant. Furthermore, taste has been seen as a prime criterion for purchase and consumption of organic food. In our study, perhaps the reverse-wording of the question led to misinterpretation. It was shown by Sonderen et al. [61] that reverse wording used to minimize and/or prevent response bias is typically ineffective.

A high percentage of the consumers in this study confirmed that organic food had a better appearance than non-organic foods (Table 7). A similar study with 1,000 consumers found that appearance was a less important barrier to the purchase and consumption of organic food [62].The findings in this study revealed that healthy eating was important to consumers (84.7%) at all Sites (Table 7). In corroboration with our findings, other studies have revealed similar outcomes. For example, Michaelidou and Hassan [63] found that health and ethical concerns were the primary motives for the consumption of organic food.

When asked, ‘where they got their food safety, organic food, and nutritional information updates’, a large number of consumers responded primarily from television (Table 7).This is in agreement with Tanner et al. [64] who reported that local television is a key source of consumer information for Americans. Buzby and Ready [65] also revealed in their study that 71% of the participants obtain food safety information from the television. Advertisements for healthy lifestyles and improving health through various means, including the consumption of organic foods are becoming more prevalent in America.

More than 80% of all study participants were concerned about genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and regarded organically grown food as better for the environment, were familiar with the term organic, and knew a type of organic food (Table 7). These findings suggest that consumers at all three Sites possess the prime motivational characteristics for organic food consumption as suggested by Kushwah et al. [66] who examined motives and barriers to organic food consumption. The researchers found that the primary motives for buying organic were: desire for products to be free of harmful ingredients like GMOs and/or concern for the environment.

In the current study, participants’ understanding of the term organic was consistent with the findings of Smith and Paladino [67] who reported that consumers knew the definition of organic food and viewed organic as being free of chemicals, and less processed than conventionally grown foods. In addition, Smith and Paladino [67] demonstrated that lack of familiarity can adversely impact organic food purchase and consumption. Based on this finding, it can be presumed that the participants in the current study at all three Sites would purchase organic foods if all other shaping factors such as preference, income and access were not barriers [66]. Participants were asked to state whether true or false to the statement that ‘Organic foods contain only non-organic substance.’ Slightly over half of the study participants responded true. This suggests that the participants would benefit from educational information regarding organic foods.

In a study that surveyed 44,000 households, Dimitri and Dettmann [68] found that 1,785 and 15,142 households bought organic milk and vegetables, respectively. Likewise, in the current study, consumers reported purchasing mostly organic vegetables, followed by organic dairy products at all sites (Table 7). In an Italian study, it was shown that consumers were only willing to buy or pay more for organic milk after being informed about animal welfare and environmental safety of organic farming [69]. In the current study, very few participants reported purchasing organic meats. This is supported by other studies, which find that organic meats and bread are less frequently purchased than other food items.

The most common reasons for choosing organic foods were health reasons and lack of pesticides at all Sites (Table 8). Combined, this shows that the majority of our study participants were concerned with health, which is in agreement with Kushwah et al.’s [66] findings. When consumers were asked about the duration of organic food consumption, their responses spanned a range, with 30.3% having consumed organic products for less than one year and 24.0% for more than nine years (Table 8). Overall the consumers agreed that it is essential to consume organic foods, however, there was only slight agreement from the Caucasians in Lee county versus the predominantly African American/Black groups in Tuskegee (Table 8). This response was similar to that of Zepeda et al. [70] who reported that African Americans viewed organic foods in a much more beneficial manner than their Caucasian counterparts.

According to Hjelmar [71], availability and ease of purchasing organic food is important when considering purchase intent. It is important to note that holding a positive attitude toward organic foods and expressing an intention to purchase augment the likelihood of future organic food purchases [8, 71]. An overwhelming majority (67%) of our study consumers indicated their interest in learning more about organic foods (Table 8). It can be speculated that participants are not very well informed and often buy based on curiosity. Aertsen, et al. [58] concluded that excitement and novelty can impact purchasing habits and often do with regard to organic foods. The desire to be educated could be of great interest to product marketers, health education advocates and governmental agencies to promote and maintain public health awareness and wellbeing [72-73]. Avenues such as the television, newspapers, social media, and radio could be used for future educational interventions regarding organic foods in the two cities.

The reported amount that participants in the current study were willing to spend per week on organic food varied as shown in Table 9. More participants indicated their willingness to pay >$100/week for organic food, higher than seen in the literature. A study in Germany reported that households making equivalent of $2,585 would spend $75 per week on organic food. More than 50% of the study participants were willing to pay for organic foods if it was less costly than conventional foods (Table 9). This finding was supported by Zepeda and colleagues [70] who reported that African Americans/Blacks valued organic food more than Caucasians and low- and middle-income African Americans were willing to pay more for organic food.

 

LIMITATIONS

There are a few limitations to our study. First, our small sample size cannot be generalized to all African Americans/Blacks or Caucasians. Future work should encourage larger sample sizes to allow for full generalizability of findings. The study was cross-sectional, providing only a static view of the variables being studied. However, the study also had strengths, it provided a deeper insight of consumers in Tuskegee and Opelika, Alabama regarding their knowledge, beliefs, shopping behaviours, habits and purchasing intention as related to organic and its consumption.

 

CONCLUSION

The current study revealed that the taste, texture, appearance, and overall preference of three cultivars of organically grown squash were acceptable to all the consumers who participated. Knowing this should prompt organic vendors, grocers, established stores, government entities and other stakeholders to invest in providing organic food options in Macon and Lee counties, Alabama. Organic foods are not widely available in Tuskegee. Although the southeast region is reporting increased organic produce availability, organic consumption has not spilled over to the Alabama Black Belt (ABB) counties. The consumers in Tuskegee, an ABB county were all African Americans/Blacks, who reported a greater preference for organic foods than their counterparts in Opelika. The literature indicates that African Americans / Blacks consume fewer organic foods than Caucasians; our findings suggest that there are other barriers. For example, there was a general notion about organic food but a lack of understanding as to what organic means.

The reality is that the changes in knowledge, availability, buying, and consumption habits are coming about slowly in Tuskegee. To encourage the growth of organic produce and consumption in the southeastern U.S., it was critical to identify and better understand the varied demographics of organic consumers, their acceptance, beliefs, and purchase intention. These findings could pave the way for targeted strategies, bolster organic farming efforts, increase consumer knowledge and utilization while stimulating economic growth in the region simultaneously.

 

 

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding to conduct the study was received from the USDA/NIFA Competitive Grant Program, Grant #2016-51300-2575. The researchers also wish to thank all the participants, store managers and graduate students for their input.

 

REFERENCES

1. Dimitri C., Greene C. 2002. Recent Growth Patterns in the U.S. Organic Foods Market. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Market and Trade Economics Division and Resource Economics Division. Agriculture Information Bulletin Number 777/ AIB-777. Available at:

https: //www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications.

2. Organic Food Global Market Report 2021: COVID-19 Growth and Change to 2030. Available at: https: //www.thebusinessresearchcompany.com/report/organic-food-global-market-report.

3. Abbott. C. 2021. Record sales of organic food as pandemic boosts home cooking. Accessed 9/9/2021. Available at:

https: //www.agriculture.com/news/business/us-hunger-rate-is-lowest-since-start-of-pandemic

4. OTA (Organic Trade Association). 2021. U.S. organic sales soar to new high of nearly $62 billion in 2020. Accessed 9/9/2021. Available at: https: //ota.com/news/press-releases/21755

5. OPN (Organic Produce Network). 2021. State of Organic Produce 2021 Report Released. Available at: https: //www.organicproducenetwork.com/article/1585/state-of-organic-produce-2021-report-released; accessed 1/12/2024.

6. NBJ (Nutrition Business Journal). 2023. Organic food sales break through $60 billion in 2022. Available at: https: //ota.com/news/press-releases/22820; accessed 9/21/2023.

7. FGN 2023. Organic food sales hit record $61.7 billion in US in 2022. Available at:

https: //fruitgrowersnews.com/news/organic-food-sales-hit-record-61-7-billion-in-us-in-2022; accessed 6/28/2023.

8. Petrescu, A.G., Oncioiu, I., Petrescu, M. 2017. Perception of organic food consumption in Romania. Foods 6: 42.

9. Brown, E., Dury, S., Holdsworth, M. 2009. Motivations of consumers that use local, organic fruit and vegetable box schemes in Central England and Southern France. Appetite 53: 183–188.

10. Timmins, C. 2010. Consumer attitudes towards organic food: Survey of the general public; Beaufort Research: Cardiff, UK.

11. Pleger B, Villringer A. 2013. The human somatosensory system: From perception to decision making. Progress in Neurobiology 103: 76-97.

12. Pieniak Z, Aertsens J, Verbeke W. 2010. Subjective and objective knowledge as determinants of organic vegetables consumption. Food Quality and Preference 21(6): 581-588.

13. Fillion L, Arazi S. 2002. Does organic food taste better? A claim substantiation approach. Nutrition & Food Science 32(4): 153-157.

14. Januszewska R, Pieniak Z, Verbeke W. 2011. Food choice questionnaire revisited in four countries. Does it still measure the same? Appetite 57(1): 94-98.

15. Chekima B, Oswald AI, Syed Azizi Wafa Syed Khalid Wafa, Chekima K. 2017. Narrowing the gap: Factors driving organic food consumption. J Cleaner Production 166: 1438-1447.

16. Lee H-J, Yun Z-S. 2015. Consumers’ perceptions of organic food attributes and cognitive and affective attitudes as determinants of their purchase intentions toward organic food. Food Quality and Preference 39: 259-267.

17. Laaksonen O, Knaapila A, Niva T, Deegan KC, Sandell M. 2016. Sensory properties and consumer characteristics contributing to liking of berries. Food Quality and Preference53: 117-126.

18. Wang, Q.J.; Mielby, L.A.; Junge, J.Y.; Bertelsen, A.S.; Kidmose, U.; Spence, C.; Byrne, D.V. The role of intrinsic and extrinsic sensory factors in sweetness perception of food and beverages: A review. Foods 2019, 8, 211.

19. Rozin, P. Food Preferences, Psychology and Physiology of. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2015; pp. 296–299.

20. Shepherd, R.; Raats, M. The Psychology of Food Choice; Cabi: Oxfordshire, UK, 2006; Volume 3.

21. Rayner, G.; Lang, T. Ecological public health: Leaders, movements, and ideas to shift the boundaries between the normal and the desirable. In Healthy People, Places and Planet: Reflections Based on Tony McMichael’s Four Decades of Contribution to Epidemiological Understanding; ANU Press: Acton, Australia, 2015; pp. 617–641.7.

22. Thierman AB. 2000. Protecting health, facilitating trade or both? Annals N. Y. Acad. Sci., 916: 24-30.

23. Bialik K, Walker K. 2020. Organic farming is on the rise in the U.S. Pew Research Center. Available at: https: //www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/10/organic-farming-is-on-the-rise-in-the-u-s/. Accessed 9/21/2023.

24. Schreiber M, Bucher T, Collins CE, Dohle S. 2020. The Multiple Food Test: Development and validation of a new tool to measure food choice and applied nutrition knowledge. Appetite 150: 104647.

25. Borradaile KE, Sherman S., Vander Veur SS, McCoy T., Sandoval B., Nachmani J., Karpyn A., Foster GD. 2009. Snacking in children: The role of urban corner stores. Pediatrics 124 (5) 1293-1298.

26. Pelletier, JE, Caspi, CE, Schreiber, LRN., Erickson DJ, Harnack L., Laska MN. 2016. Successful customer intercept interview recruitment outside small and midsize urban food retailers. BMC Public Health 16, 1050.

27. Hein KA, Jaeger SR, Carr BT, Delahunty CM. 2008. Comparison of five common acceptance and preference methods. Food Quality and Preference. 2008; 19(7): 651-661.

28. Peryam, DR, Pilgrim, FJ. 1957. Hedonic scale method of measuring food preferences. Food Technology 11: 9-14.

29. Baudry J, Méjean C, Allès B, et al. 2015. Contribution of Organic Food to the Diet in a Large Sample of French Adults (the NutriNet-Santé Cohort Study). Nutrients 7(10): 8615-8632.

30. Luu L, Manero J, Lee S-Y, Nickols-Richardson S., Chapman-Novakofski K. 2020. Role of seasoning vegetables on consumer behavior: Purchase, intake, liking, and intention to pay for larger servings. Food Quality and Preference 82: 103890.

31. Nikolaus CJ, Ellison B, Heinrichs PA, Nickols-Richardson SM, Chapman-Novakofski KM. 2017. Spice and Herb Use with Vegetables: Liking, Frequency, and Self-efficacy among US Adults. Amer J Health Behavior 41(1): 52-60.

32. Dahm MJ, Samonte AV, Shows AR. 2009. Organic Foods: Do eco-friendly attitudes predict eco-friendly behaviours? J American College Health 58(3): 195-202.

33. Madzharov AV. 2019. Self-control and touch: when does direct versus indirect touch increase hedonic evaluations and consumption of food. J Retailing 95(4): 170-185.

34. Mosca AC, Torres AP, Slob E, Graaf KD, Mcewan JA, Stieger M. 2019. Small food texture modifications can be used to change oral processing behaviour and to control ad libitum food intake. Appetite 142: 104375.

35. Andersen BV, Brockhoff PB, Hyldig G. 2019. The importance of liking appearance, -odour, -taste and -texture in the evaluation of overall liking. A comparison with the evaluation of sensory satisfaction. Food Quality and Preference 71: 228-232.

36. Dirks RT, Duran N. 2001. African American dietary patterns at the beginning of the 20th Century. J Nutrition 131(7): 1881-1889.

37. Noia JD, Monica D, Cullen KW, Pérez-Escamilla R, Gray HL, Sikorskii A. 2016. Differences in fruit and vegetable intake by race/ethnicity and by Hispanic origin and nativity among women in the special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children. Preventing Chronic Disease 13.

38. Sousa MMD, Carvalho FM, Pereira RG. 2020. Colour and shape of design elements of the packaging labels influence consumer expectations and hedonic judgments of specialty coffee. Food Quality and Preference 83: 103902.

39. Vadiveloo M, Principato L, Morwitz V, Mattei J. 2019. Sensory variety in shape and colour influences fruit and vegetable intake, liking, and purchase intentions in some subsets of adults: A randomized pilot experiment. Food Quality and Preference 71: 301-310.

40. Hoppu U, Puputti S, Aisala H, Laaksonen O, Sandell M. 2018. Individual differences in the perception of colour solutions. Foods 7(9): 154. Jan.-Mar. 2021. Available at: https: //www.organicproducenetwork.com/amass/doc-get-pub/document/28/OPN%20Q1%202021%20quarterly%20report.pdf; accessed 5/12/2021.

41. Schuldt JP. 2013. Does green mean healthy? nutrition label colour affects perceptions of healthfulness. Health Communication 28(8): 814-821.

42. Schifferstein HN, Ophuis PAO. 1998. Health-related determinants of organic food consumption in The Netherlands. Food Quality and Preference 9(3): 119-133.

43. Spence C, Wan X, Woods A, et al. 2015. On tasty colours and colourful tastes? Assessing, explaining, and utilizing crossmodal correspondences between colours and basic tastes. Flavour 4(1).

44. Klotsche C. 1994. Colour medicine: the secrets of colour/vibrational healing. Sedona, AZ: Light Technology Pub.; 1994.

45. Kraemer HC, Mintz J, Noda A, Tinklenberg J, Yesavage JA. 2006. Regarding the use of pilot studies to guide power calculations for study proposals. Archives of General Psychiatry 63(5): 484.

46. Shahbandeh M. 2019. U.S. Organic consumers - Statistics & facts. Statista. Available at: https: //www.statista.com/topics/4738/organic-consumers; accessed 9/25/2023.

47. Molinillo S, Vidal-Branco M, Japutra A. 2020. Understanding the drivers of organic foods purchasing of millennials: Evidence from Brazil and Spain. J Retailing and Consumer Services 52: 101926.

48. The Hartman Group. 2018. Demographic profile of organic consumers. Available at: https: //www.hartman-group.com/infographics/2089199525/demographic-profile-of-organic-consumers; accessed 9/25/2023.

49. Kongsom W, Kongsom C. 2016. Consumer behavior and knowledge on organic products in Thailand. International J Economics Management Engineering 10(8): 2612-2616.

50. Pearson D, Henryks J, Parves S, Anisimova T. 2013. Organic food: Exploring purchase frequency to explain consumer behavior. J Organic Systems 8: 50-63.

51. Alkon AH, Cadji J. 2018. Sowing seeds of displacement: gentrification and food justice in Oakland, CA. International J Urban and Regional Research 44(1): 108-123.

52. Lehner M. 2018. Alternative food systems and the citizen-consumer. J Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development 10: 1-5.

53. U.S. (United States) Census Bureau. U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Opelika city, Alabama; Auburn city, Alabama; Tuskegee city, Alabama. Census Bureau QuickFacts. Available at: https: //www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/opelikacityalabama,auburncityalabama,tuskegeecityalabama/PST045219; accessed 9/25/2023.

54. Gyawu R, Quansah JE, Fall S, Gichuhi PN, Bovell-Benjamin AC. 2015. Community food environment measures in the Alabama Black Belt: Implications for cancer risk reduction. Preventive Medicine Reports 2: 689-698.

55. Pew Research Center. 2016. Americans’ views about and consumption of organic foods. Available at: https: //www.pewresearch.org/; accessed 9/25/2023.

56. Olsen S, Wagner K. 2018. Conventionally or organically grown peaches: what a farmers market taste test tells us. J NACAA 11(2).

57. Lockie S, Lyons K, Lawrence G, Grice J. 2004. Choosing organics: a path analysis of factors underlying the selection of organic food among Australian consumers. Appetite 43(2): 135-146.

58. Aertsens J, Mondelaers K, Verbeke W, Buysse J, Huylenbroeck GV. 2011. The influence of subjective and objective knowledge on attitude, motivation, and consumption of organic food. British Food J. 113(11): 1353-1378.

59. Wądołowska L, Babicz-Zielińska E, Czarnocińska J. 2008. Food choice models and their relation with food preferences and eating frequency in the Polish population: POFPRES study. Food Policy 33(2): 122-134.

60. Kumar S, Pandey AK. 2013. Chemistry and biological activities of flavonoids: an overview. Scientific World J. 162750.

61. Sonderen EV, Sanderman R, Coyne JC. 2013. Ineffectiveness of reverse wording of questionnaire items: Let’s learn from cows in the rain. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8(7).

62. Bryła P. 2016. Organic food consumption in Poland: Motives and barriers. Appetite 105: 737-746.

63. Michaelidou N, Hassan LM. 2008. The role of health consciousness, food safety concern and ethical identity on attitudes and intentions towards organic food. International J Consumer Studies 32(2): 163-170.

64. Tanner AH, Friedman DB, Zheng Y. 2015. Influences on the construction of health news: The reporting practices of local television news health journalists. J Broadcasting & Electronic Media 59(2): 359-376.

65. Buzby JC, Ready RC. 1996. Do consumers trust food-safety information? Food Review / National Food Review 19: 46-49.

66. Kushwah S, Dhir A, Sagar M, Gupta B. 2019. Determinants of organic food consumption. A systematic literature review on motives and barriers. Appetite 143: 104402.

67. Smith S, Paladino A. 2010. Eating clean and green? Investigating consumer motivations towards the purchase of organic food. Australian Marketing J (AMJ) 18(2): 93-104.

68. Dimitri C, Dettmann RL. 2012. Organic food consumers: what do we really know about them? British Food Journal 114(8): 1157-1183.

69. Scozzafava G, Gerini F, Boncinelli F, Contini C, Marone E, Casini L. 2020. Organic milk preference: is it a matter of information? Appetite 144: 104477.

70. Zepeda L, Chang H-S, Leviten-Reid C. 2006. Organic food demand: A focus group study involving Caucasian and African American shoppers. Agriculture and Human Values 23(3): 385-394.

71. Hjelmar U. 2011. Consumers’ purchase of organic food products. A matter of convenience and reflexive practices. Appetite 56(2): 336-344.

72. Colatruglio S, Slater J. 2016. Challenges to acquiring and utilizing food literacy: Perceptions of young Canadian adults. Canadian Food Studies / La Revue canadienne des études sur l'alimentation 3 (1): 96.

73. Kimura AH. 2010. Food education as food literacy: privatized and gendered food knowledge in contemporary Japan. Agriculture and Human Values 28(4): 465-482.

 

PEER REVIEW

Not commissioned. Externally peer reviewed.