Zepeda and Deal, "Organic and Local Food Consumer Behaviour"

Organic and local food consumer behaviour:Alphabet Theoryijcs_814 697..705

Lydia Zepeda and David Deal

Department of Consumer Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA

Keywords

Consumers, local food, organic food.

Correspondence

Lydia Zepeda, Department of ConsumerScience, University of Wisconsin-Madison,1305 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA.E-mail: [email protected]

doi: 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00814.x

AbstractSemi-structured interviews are conducted to understand why consumers buy organic and/orlocal foods. The interview findings are consistent with existing theoretical frameworks forexplaining environmentally significant behaviour: Value-Belief-Norm (VBN) theory andAttitude-Behaviour-Context (ABC) theory. Findings show that organic food shoppers inparticular are motivated by values, beliefs and the creation of norms. However, the inter-views indicate that knowledge (K), information seeking (IS) and habit (H) are also impor-tant in understanding why consumers choose organic and local foods. Incorporatingdemographics (D) as well, the resulting VBN-ABC-D-K-IS-H or ‘Alphabet Theory’ ispresented as a new framework to explain organic and local food purchase behaviour.

IntroductionConsumer interest in organic and local foods has exhibited con-tinued growth for the past two decades. Organic food sales in theUS have grown at a rate of approximately 20% per year from$1 bn in 1990 to $17 bn in 2006, currently representing about2.5% of all food sales (Dimitri and Greene, 2002; Klonsky andGreene, 2005; Organic Consumers Association, 2007; OrganicTrade Association, 2007). Outlets for local foods such as farmers’markets and community-supported agriculture (CSA) have grownsimilarly in the US. CSA or box schemes are a direct buyingcontract between consumers and a local farmer in which the con-sumer pays upfront for periodic (often weekly) deliveries of foodthroughout the growing season. The concept was introduced to theUS in 1984; by 2006 the number of CSA farms had reached 1140(Robyn Van En Center, 2006). The number of US farmers’markets more than doubled between 1994 and 2006, from 1755to 4385 [US Department of Agriculture (USDA), AgriculturalMarketing Service, 2007].

The purpose of this study is to increase the understanding ofwhy consumers buy organic and/or local foods. Economic theorywould point to rising incomes and changes in preferences, thelatter proxied by demographic characteristics. Studies to developeconomic and demographic profiles of organic and local foodpurchasers have produced conflicting results (e.g. Govindasamyand Italia, 1999; Wang and Sun, 2003; Zhang et al., 2006). Thismay be because of the studies being at different times and places,or it may be that demographic characteristics are poor proxies ofpreferences. Investigators delving beyond demographics havefound differences in motivations for buying organic and localfoods including concerns about personal health, the environment

and the local economy (Dimitri and Greene, 2002; Harper andMakatouni, 2002; Zepeda and Leviten-Reid, 2004), interest incooking and lack of religious affiliation (Zepeda and Li, 2007).

Given the qualitative nature of data to address what motivatesshoppers to buy organic or local foods, semi-structured interviewsof food shoppers are conducted. The questions investigate findingsof previous studies (e.g. Dimitri and Greene, 2002; Harper andMakatouni, 2002; Zepeda and Leviten-Reid, 2004; Zepeda and Li,2007). Existing theories on environmentally significant consumerbehaviour explain some of what is found. However, the findingspoint to some gaps in current theory. A theoretical framework(dubbed ‘Alphabet Theory’) based on current consumer theory andmodified to address these gaps is presented to explain organic andlocal food purchases.

Relevant consumer theoryThe Health Belief model (Kirscht, 1974) can be used to framedecisions about diet that are health motivated; behaviour is drivenby the trade-off of the perceived threat of a disease and the per-ceived benefits minus any barriers or costs of the dietary change.This trade-off is influenced by cues to action such as media cam-paigns or expert advice. While there is evidence that some organicfood shoppers are motivated by health concerns, they are alsomotivated by environmental concerns (Dimitri and Greene, 2002;Harper and Makatouni, 2002). Local food shoppers are driven byenvironmental (distance travelled) as well as community (eco-nomic and social) concerns (Zepeda and Leviten-Reid, 2004).Because motivations for organic or local food purchases extendbeyond personal health concerns, may be different and can be

International Journal of Consumer Studies ISSN 1470-6423

International Journal of Consumer Studies 33 (2009) 697–705 © The Authors

Journal compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

697

viewed as a subset of general environmental concerns, relevanttheory is drawn from the environmental behaviour literature.

Stern (2000) provides a theoretical framework for environmen-tally significant behaviours in general, of which organic and localfood purchases are examples. Stern et al.’s (1999) Value-Belief-Norm (VBN) theory is prominent in Stern’s (2000) framework.VBN is used to explain several categories of behaviours: activism,non-activist public sphere behaviours (such as memberships, sup-porting policies), private sphere behaviours (such as recycling orbuying organic foods) and behaviours within organizations (suchas promoting energy efficiency). VBN theory encompasses threeother theories used to explain environmentally significant behav-iour: value theory, the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) and norm-activation theory. Value theory (Schwartz, 1994) essentiallyproposes that values underlie actions. The New Economic Para-digm (Dunlap and Van Liere, 1978) is a 12-point scale of environ-mental questions that measures the degree to which one agreeswith the world view of the ‘spaceship earth’ metaphor, i.e. the needto limit growth and be in balance with nature. Dunlap et al. (2000)have updated the NEP to a 15-point scale. Norm-activation theory(Schwartz, 1977) in the context of environmentalism impliesthat moral norms are activated when individuals become aware ofadverse consequences (AC) to themselves and others, and acceptresponsibility (AR) that their actions can avert these conse-quences. The Health Belief model is consistent with the moregeneral norm activation theory; the latter permits motivation oforganic food purchase to avoid adverse personal health conse-quences and/or adverse environmental consequences. Overall,VBN theory asserts that values (value theory) directly determinebeliefs (NEP, AC, AR), which in turn affects norms (norm-activation theory), and this determines behaviours.

White (1967) proposed a direct link between a particular set ofVBN and environmental behaviours. He claimed that Christiantheology is distinctly anti-environmental and Western technologyand science were forged in and continue to maintain, howeverunwittingly, the Christian ethic of dominion over nature.Researchers investigating whether religious beliefs play a role inenvironmental concerns and behaviours have found evidence tosupport White’s views (Eckberg and Blocker, 1989; Schultz et al.,2000; Zepeda and Li, 2007).

Empirical testing of VBN theory has shown that while it didsignificantly better at explaining pro-environmental behavioursthan the individual theories, it was able to explain less than one-fifth of the variation in consumer behaviour (Stern et al., 1999).Stern (2000) notes that empirically, attitudes matter only whenthere are no direct impediments or facilitations to the behaviours,while Kirscht (1974) states in reference to the Health Beliefmodel, ‘attitudes have rarely been demonstrated to predict specificbehaviors . . . situational forces provide powerful constraints onbehavioral expression of more general beliefs’. Put into economicterms, all bets are off when there are costs or benefits associatedwith the behaviors. Stern offers VBN theory as an approach that isbest suited for explaining environmentally supportive attitudesand proposes Guagnano et al.’s (1995) Attitude-Behaviour-Context (ABC) theory to explain behaviours. This theory proposesthat attitudes affect behaviour when context is neutral. Contextincludes policies, regulations, costs and other exogenous influ-ences. Schultz et al.’s (2000) findings are consistent with contexttrumping attitudes; while religious beliefs adversely affect

environmental attitudes, they found no statistical difference onenvironmental behaviours.

The ABC theory can be used to explain why studies find con-flicting results for many demographic variables. While demo-graphic variables might influence values, beliefs and norms, ABCtheory would argue that these attitudes would only be significantlycorrelated with behaviours depending upon context. How thendoes one explain why education is one of the few demographicvariables to consistently be associated with organic or local foodpurchase, while income is not (Yiridoe et al., 2005; Li et al.,2007)? It may be that education is measuring one’s level of knowl-edge and information seeking. Certainly, marketers hope thatinformation influences behaviour.

MethodsTo investigate why consumers buy organic and local foods andassess the relevance of VBN and ABC theories, semi-structuredinterviews were chosen. Given our interest in the lived experi-ences, values and beliefs of respondents, the interviews allow timefor extensive probing, avoid ‘group think,’ and avoid placing theinterviewee in a position where he or she may be reluctant toreveal his or her inner thoughts because of the presence of others.

Interviews were conducted during the period from October 2006to February 2007 in Madison, Wisconsin, USA. A conveniencesample was recruited from a variety of sources to target specificethnic and income groups: a South-East Asian gardening commu-nity, an African–American church group, members of a Slow Foodconvivium (to target higher-income participants) and shoppers at afood co-op (to target lower-income participants). Potential inter-viewees were informed that they would be interviewed about theireating and food shopping habits – the recruitment materials con-tained no mention of organic or local food to avoid samplingbias. No compensation was offered or given, and all respondentsabove the age of 18 were accepted. The first 25 respondents to therecruitment effort were interviewed. Interviewing was stopped after25 because the responses were very repetitive.

The second author conducted all the interviews in a location ofthe interviewee’s choice. The most common locations were public(16, or 64%, of the interviews), with the remaining held in theinterviewee’s home. All interviews began with information on thegeneral nature of the research being conducted and the signing ofa university-approved informed consent form. The interviewsaveraged 44.6 min, were digitally recorded and transcribed. Theinterviews were open-ended but followed a general set of ques-tions (see Appendix 1).

The resulting data were analysed for content, themes and pat-terns. The respondents were categorized into groups: heavyorganic buyers (HOB), light organic buyers (LOB) and non-organic/conventional buyers (NOB). These were based upon theirnarratives regarding the frequency and the proportion of their foodpurchases that are organic (see Table 1).

Motivations for buying organic foodsConsistent with VBN theory and with empirical findings (Dimitriand Greene, 2002; Harper and Makatouni, 2002; Zepeda andLeviten-Reid, 2004), organic food shoppers almost universallycite protection of the environment and health through avoidance of

Alphabet Theory L. Zepeda and D. Deal



698

Table 1 Summary of interview results

Intensity of intentional organic consumption

Heavy(11 interviewees)

Light(7 interviewees)

Rare or none(7 interviewees)

Reason for buying organicAvoid pesticides/hormones 11 (100%) 5 (71%) 1 (14%)Avoid soil degradation 4 (36%) 2 (29%) 0 (0%)Quality/taste 6 (55%) 2 (29%) 0 (0%)Better animal treatment 2 (18%) 3 (43%) 0 (0%)Avoid spread of disease 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%)Nutritional value is higher 3 (27%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)None of the above mentioned 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 5 (71%)

Specifically mentioned impetus to buy organicBirth of children 2 (18%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%)Death of a loved one 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%)Health issue in the family 2 (18%) 2 (29%) 0 (0%)None of the above mentioned 7 (64%) 4 (57%) 6 (86%)

Reasons people do not buy organicPrice/value issue 10 (91%) 4 (57%) 6 (86%)Lack of knowledge of benefits 2 (18%) 5 (71%) 4 (57%)Cynical/do not trust the labels 4 (36%) 4 (57%) 3 (43%)Habits/stuck in routine 1 (9%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%)Lack of convenience or inability to cook 1 (9%) 4 (57%) 1 (14%)Other 3 (27%) 3 (43%) 0 (0%)None of the above mentioned 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%)

Respondent’s dominant stereotype of organic food consumersHippy 2 (18%) 1 (14%) 5 (71%)Yuppy 4 (36%) 3 (43%) 0 (0%)Both hippy and yuppy 4 (36%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%)Foodie 1 (9%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%)Not discussed 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%)

Reason for buying localConcerns over wasted fuel 5 (45%) 4 (57%) 0 (0%)Supporting local economy 11 (100%) 6 (86%) 3 (43%)Trust issue/anti-corporate 8 (73%) 5 (71%) 0 (0%)Avoid spread of disease 2 (18%) 1 (14%) 2 (29%)National food security 1 (9%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%)Quality/freshness 7 (64%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)Animal treatment 3 (27%) 2 (29%) 0 (0%)Specific regions are better for specific foods 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%)Treatment of workers 2 (18%) 2 (29%) 0 (0%)Adds uniqueness to a region 2 (18%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%)Treatment of the land 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)Average number of reasons discussed 3.8 3.4 2.2Not discussed/do not buy 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%)

Average number of food outlets mentioned 4.1 3.6 2.9Shop at farmers’ market 8 (73%) 4 (57%) 3 (43%)Reason for shopping at farmers’ market

Interaction with farmers (social) 7 (64%) 2 (29%) 2 (29%)Interaction with farmers (informational) 6 (55%) 1 (14%) 1 (14%)Entertainment/ambiance 6 (55%) 4 (57%) 2 (29%)Fresh/quality produce 5 (45%) 3 (43%) 3 (43%)Other 2 (18%) 2 (29%) 1 (14%)Average number of reasons discussed 2.5 1.7 1.3Not discussed/do not buy 1 (9%) 1 (14%) 4 (57%)

Dietary restrictions in the homeVegetarian 4 (36%) 2 (29%) 0 (0%)Gluten intolerance 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%)Anaemia issue with child 0 (0%) 2 (29%) 0 (0%)High cholesterol 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%)

L. Zepeda and D. Deal Alphabet Theory



699

pesticides and hormones as reasons to buy organic foods (Table 1).Four of the 11 HOB mention life events (birth, death, health offamily members or friends) as motivators for buying organic, e.g.‘I know too many people with MS and Parkinson’s and breastcancer and all of these disorders that are linked to estrogeniccompounds in pesticides and other compounds in pesticides andtheir carriers’ (Respondent #7, HOB). The interviews revealed atrend wherein the more organics a person consumes, the morelikely he or she is to espouse environmental motivations overhealth concerns, particularly reduced soil degradation, as a reasonfor buying organic foods, ‘[Organic vegetables] come from ahealthy soil that hasn’t been depleted by those chemical fertilizersor whatever, so they are just so much more nutritious and better foryou’ (Respondent #2, HOB).

The fact that nearly all the organic consumers mention pesticideconcerns suggests that this is the dominant motivation for initialpurchase of these types of goods, whether for personal or environ-mental reasons. While these attitudes are given as the main reasonsfor buying organic foods, using national survey data, Zepeda andLi (2007) did not find a significant relationship at the 5% levelbetween personal health and organic food purchase, nor moregeneral environmental concerns and organic food purchase. Thus,as ABC theory predicts, context may be an important mitigatingfactor, overriding the influence of attitudes.

The interviews reveal that heavy organic shoppers are also morelikely than light organic or conventional shoppers to believe that

organic foods are more nutritious, have higher quality, or tastebetter. Typical comments about organic foods were ‘the quality ofthe food is just hard to beat’ (Respondent #8, HOB) and ‘it justtastes better’ (Respondent #7, HOB). This may reflect differencesin VBN. It may also reflect greater information-seeking behaviour;scientific research confirms that organic produce have lower pes-ticide and nitrate residues than conventional produce and thatsome organic foods have higher levels of antioxidants than theirconventional counterparts (Winter and Davis, 2007).

Both organic and conventional shoppers provided manyreasons why someone would not buy organic foods (Table 1), thechief reason being the price differential (context in the ABCtheory). However, both light organic and conventional shoppersalso cited lack of knowledge of benefits as an important reason,e.g. ‘I don’t know that I do [see any advantages] because, yousee, I can’t taste the chemicals’ (Respondent #23, NOB). Heavyorganic shoppers cited lack of availability (context) and cynicismor lack of trust (VBN) in the organic label as reasons preventingpurchase of organics foods, ‘Most places you can’t even [buyorganic food], you don’t have those choices’ (Respondent #6,HOB); ‘I’m not sure you can trust the organic label at aWalMart, considering almost everything they sell is made inChina . . . is it real or is it just fantasy organic?’ (Respondent #5,HOB).

While both organic and conventional shoppers cited price as animpediment to buying organic foods, high-income people found

Table 1 Continued

Intensity of intentional organic consumption

Heavy(11 interviewees)

Light(7 interviewees)

Rare or none(7 interviewees)

Sodium issue 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%)None mentioned 7 (64%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)

Age when cooking beganChild 3 (27%) 4 (57%) 3 (43%)Teen 3 (27%) 2 (29%) 1 (14%)College-aged 3 (27%) 0 (0%) 2 (29%)Adulthood 2 (18%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%)Not discussed 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%)

Reason for starting to cookNecessity 5 (45%) 4 (57%) 4 (57%)Pleasure 6 (55%) 3 (43%) 2 (29%)Not discussed 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (14%)

Passionate about/enjoys cookingYes 7 (64%) 7 (100%) 3 (43%)No 3 (27%) 0 (0%) 4 (57%)Not discussed 1 (9%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Specifically mentioned relying on other people for food knowledge 3 (27%) 3 (43%) 5 (71%)Gendera

Male 2 (18%) 2 (29%) 3 (43%)Female 9 (82%) 5 (71%) 4 (57%)

Agea,b

Under 30 0 (0%) 1 (14%) 0 (0%)30–50 6 (55%) 6 (86%) 1 (14%)Above 50 5 (45%) 0 (0%) 6 (86%)

aDemographic data are included for descriptive purposes only; these variables did not emerge as analytically relevant during the coding process(Strauss, 1987).bAges of respondents were extrapolated from responses to questions 1 and 2 in Appendix 1.




700

price as much of a barrier as low-income people. Yet those whobuy organic are no richer than those who do not. This is consistentwith a quantitative study by Li et al. (2007), who found no sig-nificant relationship between income and organic purchase. Thus,price differential (context) represents more of an attitudinal barrierrather than a financial barrier. Zepeda et al. (2006) make similarfindings in a focus group study; attitudes about organic pricespremiums are not tied to income. The implication is that stronglyheld attitudes can trump context. Indeed, many organic shoppersmention dealing with the price obstacle by placing healthy foodhigher on their list of priorities:

I’m not saying that we have a lot of money, because wedon’t. It’s how we choose to spend our money that makes adifference. (Respondent #10, HOB)The interviews investigated the possibility that stereotypes

(beliefs) regarding organic food consumers influence their pur-chases. Conventional shoppers tended to view organic shoppers as‘hippies’, whereas light organic shoppers believed the stereotypeto be ‘yuppies’, and heavy organic shoppers tended to view thestereotype as both or as an evolution from hippy to yuppy. As oneparticipant put it, ‘Its gone from hippy to hip!’ (Respondent #9,HOB). Many conventional and light organic shoppers viewedorganic shoppers negatively, characterized by one respondent as a‘long-haired, weeny-armed, solstice-celebrating, tree-hugging,flower punk’ (Respondent #11, LOB). These emotionally ladenrepresentations are likely to be an obstacle to purchase by those forwhom the implied value system is unappealing. The yuppy stereo-type, more common among actual organic purchasers, althoughnot always presented in a positive fashion, tends to be more posi-tive and mainstream:

The soccer mom. She’s concerned about pesticides andhealth. She’s concerned about her health, and the health ofher children. She wants to be, she fancies herself moreholistic, she’s into massage and yoga. She thinks plasticsare bad, and her husband makes a lot of money, and shelikes to think that she is making a good moral choiceand protecting herself and her family. (Respondent #16,LOB)Focusing specifically on religion as part of VBN, participants

were asked about connections between lack of religious affilia-tion and organic food purchases. Only one of the participantsthought that there might be a connection; the rest did not see anyconnection until they were told about the Zepeda and Li (2007)finding. Overall, participants were reserved about discussing reli-gion but offered several ideas as to why this correlation mightexist. One theme was trust in authority, characterized as ‘Godwill take care of it’ (Respondent #11, LOB). Another theme wasavoidance of ideas associated with liberals or hippies, thatorganic food was ‘associated with a liberal, licentious lifestylethat is viewed with suspicion’ (Respondent #11, LOB). Yetanother theme was that the religious have their attention andtime devoted elsewhere and simply do not know about or care togather information about food issues: ‘it just never comes up;they are busy focusing on other aspects of their lives’ (Respon-dent #2, HOB). A theme mentioned frequently was that non-religious people may be more open minded, that they are bynature free thinkers and hence more open to new ideas: ‘theyprobably don’t subscribe to a set of beliefs that they let someoneelse define’ (Respondent #16, LOB).

Knowledge and information seekingThe VBN theory suggests that consumers begin purchasingorganic foods because of a belief that these foods are better fortheir health. However, the theory does not incorporate informationseeking to justify the higher prices of organic foods. For some, thisinformation-seeking behaviour leads to more in-depth knowledgeof organic farming practices, reinforcing pre-existing environmen-talist values and increasing purchases because of the belief that anenvironmentalist norm can be supported through these purchases.In contrast, conventional shoppers offered few explanations ofwhy someone might buy organic foods, reflecting low levels ofknowledge and information seeking about organic products.

Not surprisingly, heavy organic shoppers are knowledgeableabout current trends in organic food and sustainable agriculture;several are even ‘culinary activists’,1 reflecting strong values-beliefs-norms. In addition, they are more likely to gather informa-tion from the Internet, books and cookbooks than light organicor conventional food buyers. Many heavy organic food buyerssubscribe to health and wellness magazines and read books on thesubject; a number of the respondents brought books with them tothe interview: ‘I read cookbooks like novels’ (Respondent #3,HOB). For these HOB, VBN drive information-seeking behaviour,leading to more knowledge, which reinforces attitudes.

On the other hand, conventional shoppers know little aboutorganic foods and do not go to great lengths to seek out informa-tion on food and food issues. Two-thirds report getting their infor-mation from other people. One might view this sort of advice fromfriends as ‘convenience information’ that will reinforce socialnorms because it originates from their social group.

Role of habitsIn addition to providing support for the VBN and ABC theories,the interviews revealed that habits play a key role in food-shopping decisions (Table 1). Organic food buyers shopped atmore venues (e.g. farmers markets, direct from farmers etc.) thandid conventional shoppers. These shoppers indicated that theyvalued knowing where their food came from and having a rela-tionship with farmers, indicating support for values, beliefs andnorms influencing food purchase habits.

Dietary restrictions were another motivation or distinctionbetween organic and conventional shoppers. Over half of theorganic shoppers were vegetarian or vegan or had a householdmember who was, while none of the conventional shoppers hadthis dietary restriction.

Cooking habits were also linked to organic food purchases.Conventional food shoppers were evenly distributed among thosewho learned to cook as a child, teen, college age or adult. Lightorganic shoppers learned to cook either as a child or a teen, whileheavy organic users were more likely to have learned to cook whencollege-aged or adult. Those who tended to learn to cook earlier inlife also learned associated shopping habits earlier in life. Becausemany heavy organic users learned to cook later in life, they maybe less affected by familial habits and may also have been exposed

1A culinary activist is defined as someone who actively promotes localfood, e.g. by providing a CSA drop-off point, organizing a local foodbuying club and promoting local foods in restaurants.




701

to greater availability of organic foods when they began tocook. Thus, light and heavy organic shoppers share commonpositive attitudes towards organic foods, but habits learnedearly in life mediate how those attitudes are translated into actualbehaviour.

Being forced to cook at a young age may also inculcate anattitude of ‘cooking as work’, an attitude that has not been con-ducive to a desire for greater information about food. Most con-ventional and light organic shoppers learned to cook out of need(context), while only half of heavy organic shoppers learned out ofnecessity, the rest being motivated by pleasure. Interestingly, allmale organic shoppers said that they learned to cook for pleasure:

Meals should be fun. Families should get together aroundfood. You know, communities should get together aroundfood. People should be celebrating their culture through food.(Respondent #1, HOB)

Local foodWhile the primary focus of the interviews was to determine whatmotivated consumers to buy organic foods, many heavy organicshoppers wanted to emphasize local foods and sustainabilityinstead. One participant alluded to Michael Pollan’s The Omni-vore’s Dilemma by stating, ‘I am starting to agree with the state-ment that local trumps organic’ (Respondent #15, LOB). Manyof the participants viewed their food purchasing behaviour as anevolution from organic to local in response to the increasingcommercialization of organic foods and industrialization oforganic farming practices (knowledge) because these enterprisesrepresent values (VBN) that are discordant with their own: ‘I’dmuch rather be able to give my money straight to a farmer ratherthan four middlemen who are all taking their cut’ (Respondent#1, HOB).

About a third of all organic food buyers felt that local food wasmore desirable than organic foods. Most of these supportersexplained this in terms of being anti-corporate in general, not justwith respect to food production. They believed that if local foodwere not supported, corporations would take over the food systemcompletely. Their preference for local over organic foods wasbecause they perceived that corporations had already taken overorganic foods. They viewed the availability of organic foods atWal-Mart through brands like Kellogg’s, etc. negatively, withtypical comments like ‘I’m just suspicious of Wal-Mart. I don’ttrust them at all’ (Respondent # 6, HOB). Their perceptions ofcorporations as a problem came out in two ways. One was thebelief that corporations do not care about consumers or the envi-ronment, obtaining the poorest-quality products at the cheapestprice to ensure the most profit even if what they do is bad for theircustomers. For example, one participant said, ‘industrialization oforganic agriculture, it’s the race to the bottom line’ (Respondent#11, LOB), and another, ‘When you are buying things from acompany whose bottom line is to make money and have a goodlooking product, or an easily shippable product, you give up a lotregarding taste and so forth’ (Respondent #8, HOB). The other lineof concern was that corporations are destroying the uniquenessand variety that used to exist in the US by driving local businessesto bankruptcy:

It puts small people out of business; Wal-Mart isn’t going tobe buying from Joe and Mary who raise, you know, 20 acres

or something. They are going to be buying from the big foodcompanies that will suddenly put half a million acres intoorganic because they got a market for it. (Respondent #23,NOB)The overall positive perception of local foods by all partici-

pants derived from different reasons for different shoppers, butall were based on values, beliefs and norms (Table 1). Conven-tional shoppers supported local foods for personal and culturalreasons; they believed that local food was fresher and better andthat by buying it they were supporting their local culture andpeople: ‘I like the fact that it’s local, I feel like I am supportingthe community’ (Respondent #24, NOB). Organic food shoppersheld these same views, but many were also motivated by thebelief that local food used less energy and that local producerstreated their workers and animals better. One shopper purchaseda particular brand of milk because he knew some of the produc-ers and knew they treated their cows well: ‘I feel that the milk isthe same, but I care about the cows enough that I am willing topay that much more for it’ (Respondent #11, LOB). A key dif-ference between conventional and organic shoppers was that foralmost all heavy organic shoppers and over half of the lightorganic shoppers, support for local food stemmed from distrustof corporations. In describing local food as compared with cor-porately produced food, participants referred to concepts of trust,integrity and ‘people who care’, attributes perceived to belacking in the industrialized food system. One participantdescribed her CSA farmer as ‘a nice Amish farmer . . . he’s notgoing to screw us over’ (Respondent #12, LOB).

As an example of how VBN affects behaviour, the theme thatlocal farmers take care of their land, their animals and the con-sumer came up independently among nearly all the organic shop-pers. The participants assigned almost parental characteristics tolocal farmers; they viewed them as nurturing, supportive, protec-tive people who were looking out for the participants’ interests andfeeding them safe food. In contrast, they believed that corporationscould not be relied upon to do any of this. The perception was thatin the pursuit of profit, corporations were hurting the environment,hurting animals, and so they must also be hurting them. Oneshopper characterized it as, ‘I feel like there are too many secretsand too much to hide and they are large enough to do so by buyingup smaller companies’ (Respondent #25, NOB). For that reasonshe preferred local foods: ‘the closer to home it is, the safer you’reultimately going to be’.

The importance of VBN in influencing attitudes and ulti-mately behaviour is reflected in the notion that especially fororganic shoppers, buying local was like belonging to a family. Itis a way for organic shoppers to build community by fosteringcommunity interaction not just with farmers but with other like-minded consumers at farmers’ markets, CSA pick-up points andlocal food events. Many interviewees mused fondly about suchinteractions: ‘I love to meet the vendors and hear their story andhow they are producing their food and it’s just – I love the atmo-sphere; everybody is in a happy mood and it’s social and it’snon-commercial compared to the grocery stores’ (Respondent#2, HOB). If the farmer is the parental figure, the like-minded consumers can be construed as siblings. For manyorganic shoppers, being a local food shopper provided a senseof membership in a community and was a salient part of theiridentity.




702

DiscussionSemi-structured interviews of food shoppers indicate support thatparticular values, beliefs and norms about the environment, per-sonal health, religion and the economy shape attitudes towardsorganic and local foods and motivate shoppers to purchase them.By buying local food in particular, many organic food shoppers areseeking to build community and establish or renew trust with theirfood system through development of personal relationships withfarmers and like-minded food shoppers.

The interviews lend credence to overtly linking VBN and ABCtheories as a framework for analysing consumer behaviour. VBNtheory provides a framework for how attitudes are formulated andABC theory describes how attitudes are transmitted or not intobehaviours. The interviews revealed that habits, informationseeking and knowledge also influence consumers’ organic andlocal food purchases.

Habits can influence other behaviours, but as behaviours them-selves, one’s habits are influenced by one’s context and attitudes.For example, organic shoppers tended to learn to cook later inlife and were less motivated by need than conventional shoppers.Thus, habits mediate between behaviour and attitudes/context.Behaviour itself can reinforce or create new habits.

The interviews reveal that knowledge and information seekingare important means through which attitudes are shaped and rein-forced. Many of the organic shoppers characterized themselves asinformation junkies; knowledge not only affects their attitudes,their attitudes motivate information seeking.

Although the small sample size of this study offers little infor-mation regarding the role of demographics, the latter are oftenused by researchers as proxies for preferences (e.g. Govindasamyand Italia, 1999; Wang and Sun, 2003; Zhang et al., 2006) andhence can be viewed as potential influencers of attitudes.

Explicitly linking the VBN and ABC theories and introducingthe elements of demographics (D), knowledge (K), informationseeking (IS) and habit (H) into this theoretical framework resultsin the VBN-ABC-D-K-IS-H theory, or more conveniently, Alpha-bet Theory (Fig. 1). Incorporating Stern et al.’s (1999) VBN

theory and Guagnano et al.’s (1995) ABC with demographics,knowledge, information seeking and habit is consistent with thefindings of the semi-structured interviews. In particular, organicfood shoppers are motivated by values, beliefs and the creation ofnorms. Heavy organic food shoppers actively seek informationabout food, which appears to reinforce their VBN system andfacilitate habits and hence behaviours. Both organic and conven-tional shoppers view context (such as price or availability) asstrongly influencing shopping behaviour. However, becausebehaviour is not linked to ability to pay, price serves as a barrierreflecting attitudes or habits. In other words, attitudes can overridecontext when attitudes are strong, even when context is notneutral.

Lack of knowledge and lack of information seeking aboutorganic foods characterize conventional food buyers. Becauseinformation is readily available about organic foods, it wouldappear that conventional food buyers’ lack of knowledge andinformation stem from their VBN. Whether deliberate exposure toinformation about organic foods would increase their likelihood ofbuying them is an empirical question. One possibility is that infor-mation exposure might not affect their behaviour because theirVBN could prevent accepting the information.

Alphabet Theory offers an explanation of why education is oneof the few demographic variables that is consistently correlatedsignificantly with organic and local food purchase. Rather thanreflecting demographics, education may reflect knowledge andinformation-seeking behaviour. This would imply that in futurestudies, one might wish to utilize variables that directly measureknowledge and information-seeking behaviour rather thaneducation.

Alphabet Theory also provides an explanation of the distinctionbetween LOB and HOB. This distinction stems to some extentfrom context (e.g. when one began cooking/came into contact withfood-buying decisions), the degree of information seeking, thedegree to which one’s VBN system is oriented to distrustingcorporations, and the degree to which one seeks to build commu-nity and personal identity through food networks. For HOB, theirpath has evolved from organic food buyer to local food advocate.

Figure 1 Conceptual framework of AlphabetTheory.

Knowledge Information Seeking

Attitudes:

Values Beliefs Norms Demographics

Habits

Behavior

Context




703

The perception by organic shoppers of buying local food ascommunity building, almost familial, may explain why Zepedaand Li (2007) found that organic shoppers are less likely to belongto an organized religion. The sense of belonging and trust invokedby the local food community is similar to that invoked by belong-ing to an organized religion. For many heavy organic food shop-pers, being part of a local food community was a notable part oftheir identity.

While these interviews represent a case study, they do provideinsights to develop a framework for why shoppers buy organic orlocal foods. Overall, the interviews indicate that these food shop-pers are motivated by values, beliefs and norms that shape theirattitudes towards purchasing organic and local foods. The inter-views identify the importance of knowledge in shaping their atti-tudes about organic and local foods and of information seekingin shaping that knowledge. They also highlight the importance ofhabits, particularly those developed early in life, and contextin mediating the impact of attitudes on their food-shoppingbehaviours.

AcknowledgementsThis project was supported by the National Research Initiative ofthe Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service,USDA, Grant #2002-01772 and is gratefully acknowledged. Theauthors would like to thank all those who participated in theinterviews. Gratitude is extended to the staff of the University ofWashington, Friday Harbor Marine Laboratory and to the HelenRiaboff Whiteley Center, where this paper was first drafted.

ReferencesDimitri, C. & Greene, C. (2002) Recent Growth Patterns in the U.S.

Organic Foods Market. U.S. Department of Agriculture, EconomicResearch Service, Washington, DC.

Dunlap, R.E. & Van Liere, K.D. (1978) The ‘new environmental para-digm’. The Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 10–19.

Dunlap, R.E., Van Liere, K.D., Mertig, A.D. & Jones, R.E. (2000) Mea-suring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEPscale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425–442.

Eckberg, D.L. & Blocker, T.J. (1989) Varieties of religious involvementand environmental concerns: testing the Lynn White thesis. Journalfor the Scientific Study of Religion, 28, 509–517.

Govindasamy, R. & Italia, J. (1999) Predicting willingness-to-pay apremium for organically grown fresh produce. Journal of Food Distri-bution Research, 30, 44–53.

Guagnano, G.A., Stern, P.C. & Dietz, T. (1995) Influences on attitude–behavior relationships: a natural experiment with curbside recycling.Environment and Behavior, 27, 699–718.

Harper, G.C. & Makatouni, A. (2002) Consumer perception of organicfood production and farm animal welfare. British Food Journal, 104,287–299.

Kirscht, J.P. (1974) Research related to the modification of healthbeliefs. In The Health Belief Model and Personal Health Behavior(ed. by M.H. Becker), pp. 455–469. Charles B. Slack Inc., Thorofare,NJ.

Klonsky, K. & Greene, C. (2005) Widespread adoption of organic agri-culture in the US: are market-driven policies enough? Selected paperpresented at the American Agricultural Economics AssociationMeeting, Providence, RI, 24–27 July.

Li, J., Zepeda, L. & Gould, B.W. (2007) The demand for organic foodin the U.S.: an empirical assessment. Journal of Food DistributionResearch, 38, 54–69.

Organic Consumers Association (2007) U.S. organic food sales upby 22%, hit $17 billion in 2006. Sustainable Food News. [WWWdocument]. URL http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_5109.cfm (accessed on 22 May 2007).

Organic Trade Association (2007) OTA’s 2006 manufacturer survey.[WWW document]. URL http://www.ota.com/pics/documents/short%20overview%20MMS.pdf (accessed on 2 May 2007).

Robyn Van En Center (2006) CSA farm totals by state. [WWW docu-ment]. URL http://www.wilson.edu/csasearch/search.asp (accessed on2 May 2007).

Schultz, P.W., Zelezny, L. & Dalrymple, N.J. (2000) A multinationalperspective on the relation between Judeo-Christian religious beliefsand attitudes of environmental concern. Environment and Behavior,32, 576–591.

Schwartz, S.H. (1977) Normative influences on altruism. In Advancesin Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 10 (ed. by L. Berkowitz),pp. 221–279. Academic Press, New York.

Schwartz, S.H. (1994) Are there universal aspects in the structure andcontents of human values? Journal of Social Issues, 50, 19–46.

Stern, P.C. (2000) Toward a coherent theory of environmentally signifi-cant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 407–424.

Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G.A. & Kalof, L. (1999) Avalue-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: the case ofenvironmentalism. Human Ecology Review, 6, 81–97.

Strauss, A. (1987) Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. CambridgeUniversity Press, New York.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service (2007)Farmers’ market growth. [WWW document]. URL http://www.ams.usda.gov/farmersmarkets/FarmersMarketGrowth.htm (accessedon 2 May 2007).

Wang, Q. & Sun, J. (2003) Consumer preference and demand fororganic food: evidence from a Vermont survey. Selected paper pre-sented at the American Agricultural Economics Association Meeting,Montreal, Canada, 27–30 July.

White, L. Jr (1967) The historical roots of our ecological crisis. Science,155, 1203–1207.

Winter, C.K. & Davis, S.F. (2007) Are organic foods healthier? CSANews, Vol. 52, No. 4, April 2007, 2–13.

Yiridoe, E.K., Bonti-Ankomah, S. & Martin, R.C. (2005) Comparison ofconsumer perceptions and preference toward organic versus conven-tionally produced foods: a review of the literature. Renewable Agri-culture and Food Systems, 20, 193–205.

Zepeda, L. & Leviten-Reid, C. (2004) Consumers’ views on local food.Journal of Food Distribution Research, 35, 1–6.

Zepeda, L. & Li, J. (2007) Characteristics of organic food shoppers.Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 39, 17–28.

Zepeda, L., Chang, H.-S. & Leviten-Reid, C. (2006) Organic fooddemand: a focus group study involving Caucasian and African-American shoppers. Agriculture and Human Values, 23, 385–394.

Zhang, F., Huang, C.L. & Lin, B-H. (2006) Modeling fresh organicproduce consumption: a generalized double-hurdle model approach.Selected paper presented at the Southern Agricultural EconomicsAssociation Meeting, Orlando, FL, 5–8 February.

Appendix 1

Interview questions

Food questions1. Tell me about your cooking habits – relative to the livingsituation (i.e. other people).2. Where did your ability/lack of ability in cooking come from?3. How long ago did you start cooking for yourself?4. Where do you buy food?




704

5. What is one of your favourite dishes to cook? What criteria areused when choosing the ingredients? Where do you get the ingre-dients?For those with children:

6. How do(es) your child(ren) influence your purchases of food?7. Do they require special meals, or do they eat the same food as

you?8. Do they help with meal planning/shopping?9. If not mentioned: Do they have an influence on your decision

to purchase/not purchase organic food?Organic questions10. Describe for me the typical organic food buyer.11. If not mentioned: What about political and religiousaffiliation.12. Why do you think they would be ⟨religion⟩?13. Why might someone buy organic foods?14. Why might someone prefer not to buy organic foods?

15. What is your history with organic foods?16. If an organic buyer: Please rank your reasons for buyingorganic from most to least important. If not an organic buyer:Please rank reasons for not buying organic.Local food questions17. Do you ever think about where your food comes from?18. How does the source of your food impact you?19. Does it matter if your food comes from a region near you?How?20. How would you define a region near you?21. If not already answered in the first section: Do you shop at afarmer’s market? Why or why not?Future directions22. Many major food corporations are now getting involved in theorganic market. What do you think of that?23. Do you think it will affect you? Will you buy more/less?




705

Documents

Zepeda and Deal, "Organic and Local Food Consumer Behaviour"