Whole food market Essay

Submitted By amandaigordon
Words: 2080
Pages: 9

1) CONSUMER AND PROFILE:

a. Why they buy organic?
i. 40 percent of our respondents who rated organic as "better" ii. approximately 60 percent perceived organics as safer and as having a salutary effect on the environment. iii. More than 50 percent identified perceived health benefits and nutrition value with organic products. Organic products also were perceived favorably in relation to freshness.

We have seen that purchasers of organic products highly value attributes such as safety, the environmental impacts of agricultural production practices, general health and nutrition impacts, freshness, and flavor.

2) Profile - Demographic factors: buyers of organic produce vs. non-buyers Mean scores for Variable
Buyer
Non-buyer t-values F-values
Educational Level
5.75
5.73
0.134
(0.897)
.0094
(.99)
Occupation
6.03
7.62
-3.097
(.002)
5.1880
(.0058)
Household income
43.7
43.2
.383
(.0702)
.4797
(.6192)
Age
40.9
48.6
-6.179
(.0000)
25.6156
(.0000)
Size of community
39.4
44.5
-4.069
(.0000)
11.1740
(.0000)

They value appearance less highly. This analysis seeks to further analyze the responses for systematic differences in demographic, economic, and psychographic characteristics between buyers and non-buyers. If there are significant differences, those factors on which they differ could be instrumental in the shaping of target marketing strategies. Since most of the consumer responses were translated into numerical scores, the data are amenable to parametric methods of statistical analysis. We employ analysis of variance to test for differences in means. F and t statistics are given for each pair of means and levels of statistical significance noted where appropriate.
The table presents data on buyer and non-buyer responses on demographic and economic characteristics and the results of ANOVA tests of the null hypothesis of no difference between buyer and non-buyer. As indicated, the null hypothesis is rejected for occupation, age, and size of community. Buyers tended more to have service and white-collar as compared with blue-collar occupations. Interestingly, average income was not significantly different. However, buyers tended to be significantly younger then non-buyers, and tended to live in smaller cities and towns than non-buyers.
3) Profile- Motivational Factors, Perceptions and Concerns Mean factors for Variables
Buyer
Non-buyer t-values F-values
Importance of nutrition
1.79
1.71
1.961
(.056)
1.9112
(.1487)
Food Safety
1.78
1.69
(.040)
2.056
(.1158)
2.1626
Healthfulness
1.74
1.63
(.008)
2.669
(.0251)
3.7037
Flavor
1.72
1.67
(.292)
1.055
(.0671)
2.7130
Cost of food
1.36
1.42
(.348)
-9.39
(.5014)
.6910
Rating of organic food
.45
.04
8.763
(.000)
45.7176
(.0000)
Level of concern for residues
4.37
3.92
7.279
(.000)
32.4995
(.0000)
Artificial coloring
3.88
3.22
(.000)
6.311
(.0000)
21.1306
Additives and preservatives
4.21
3.71
5.492
(.000)
17.5352
(.0000)
Radiation by-products
4.37
3.75
6.224
(.000)
20.0240
(.0000)
Cholesterol
4.02
4.01
(.883)
.210
(.4317)
.8407
Salt
4.14
3.87
(.004)
2.868
(.0122)
4.4326
Sugar
4.10
3.75
(.000)
3.867
(.0001)
9.3700
Fiber
3.95
3.86
(.339)
.957
(.2986)
1.209
Fat
4.22
4.11
(.228)
1.207
(.1248)
2.0877

We hypothesized that there may well be differences in the prime considerations that inform food-purchasing decisions. Consumers were asked to rate the importance of nutrition, food safety, healthfulness, flavor, and cost of food in their food purchasing decisions. They were also asked to rate organic foods in comparison with their conventional counterparts in terms of whether organics were "better than," "about the same," or "worse" than conventionally produced foods. Finally, respondents gave their ratings of their levels of concern for a number of food attributes-most of them associated with perceived levels of health risk.…