Chapter 1 General introduction, objectives and thesis outline
1.5 Research contributions
The empirical contributions of this dissertation lie in the topics investigated. Many studies have evaluated consumers’ perception of health-related food aspects (Carrillo et al., 2011; Hoefkens et al., 2013; Mazzochi et al., 2015; Van Wezemael et al., 2014) or sustainability aspects (Grunert et al., 2014; Siegrist et al., 2015a; Vanhonacker et al., 2013). However, there is scant literature investigating both aspects simultaneously
(
Aschemann-Witzel, 2015; Garnett et al., 2015; Verain et al., 2015). With plant- based diets being advocated as healthier and more sustainable, the match or mismatch between the images of sustainable, healthy and plant-based diets is investigated.Health and environmental sustainability challenges with respect to food need to be tackled together from a policy perspective as they are closely connected (Aschemann-Witzel, 2015; Kjӕrgård et al., 2014). Food policies targeting both healthy and sustainable food consumption behavior may be potentially effective if, firstly, healthy and sustainable diets are available, affordable and attractive, and, secondly, consumers are motivated and able to make healthy and sustainable food choices. Regarding the first condition, various studies have shown the possibility to compose a diet that is both healthy and has a low environmental impact (Ciati and Ruini, 2012; Garnett, 2011, 2014; Macdiarmid
et al., 2012; Van Dooren et al., 2014; Westhoek et al., 2014), although sometimes trade-offs are needed as healthy food options may not necessarily be the most sustainable or cheapest option (Aschemann- Witzel, 2015; Macdiarmid, 2013). Specifically, reducing meat and dairy consumption, while eating more plant-based foods have been set forth as being beneficial for both the environment (Baroni et al., 2006; Pimentel and Pimentel, 2003; Reynolds et al., 2014; Sabaté and Soret, 2014; Stehfest et al., 2009), and public health (Reiss et al., 2012; Slavin and Lloyd, 2012). This was also suggested by the Barilla Center for Food and Nutrition who proposed a double food pyramid and suggested a connection between health and environmental sustainability as food with a higher recommended consumption level also has a lower environmental impact (Ciati and Ruini, 2012). However, nutritional and sustainability characteristics of diets are not necessarily aligned, meaning that healthier diets are not necessarily more environmentally friendly, nor are more environmentally beneficial diets necessarily healthier (Macdiarmid, 2013). Nonetheless, diets exist that are both healthy and have a low environmental impact (Garnett, 2014; Macdiarmid et al., 2012). For example, the Health Council of the Netherlands (HCN, 2011) identified dietary choices resulting in a win-win in terms of health and ecological benefits and recommended in this respect a shift to a less animal-based and a more plant- based diet. As part of an introduction to the sustainability in the food context, the first research objective of the dissertation focusses on the environmental dimension of sustainability and examines how an environmental sustainable diet is perceived and whether this aligns with a healthy and plan- based diet. It also evaluates current consumer involvement to healthy and sustainable eating. The involvement in sustainable diets can be a motivation to use sustainability labels, which leads to the main topic of this dissertation.
The main empirical contribution of the dissertation is on the influence of sustainability labeling on food choice, including both ethical and environmental labels (see also Section 1.1.3). Sustainability labeling can be used by policy makers as a policy tool to promote sustainable food choices and by producers, retailers, as a marketing tool. For policy makers but also for producers and others in the food supply chain, it is important to know about consumers’ preferences for sustainability claims. From an empirical point of view, this dissertation investigates consumers’ preferences and WTP for sustainability labels in three food categories: dairy (yoghurt) in Study 2, meat (chicken breast) in Study 3 and coffee in Study 4. A wide range of sustainability labels focusing on different facets of sustainability are included: Organic, Carbon footprint, Animal welfare, Free range, Fair Trade and Rainforest Alliance. The knowledge and awareness of organic labels are examined, which relates to the ability to use the label. Visual attention to sustainability label during food choice is investigated.
Since animal-based food products have the highest environmental impact, these products are under more pressure. Food policies which incorporate sustainability recommend limiting meat consumption and advice to choose sustainably produced meat, referring to organic, free range and improved animal welfare (SFA, 2015). For this reason, sustainability labels for dairy and meat products might gain in importance. For the study on yoghurt (Study 2), the focus is on organic labeling, including the awareness and knowledge of the EU organic logo. There are sustainability labels covering ethical aspects specifically for animal-based products such as animal welfare and free range labels. Consequently, in the study on meat (Study 3), consumers’ preferences and valuation for four types of sustainability claims are compared related to organic meat, free range, animal welfare and carbon footprint. Poultry (chicken breast) was chosen to be able to include the existing EU free range claims, which only exist for poultry meat. The coffee industry is viewed as a pioneering industry for sustainability certification schemes (Pierrot et al., 2011; Reinecke et al., 2012). Coffee also has the largest market share compared to other Fair Trade products. Due to the proliferation of these sustainability certification schemes for coffee and the trend for producers towards multiple certifications (Pierrot et al., 2011), it is common for coffee packages to carry several sustainability labels (Consumers International, 2005). For these reasons, coffee is used as a third food category (Study 4) in which trade-off between sustainability labels is studied.
1.5.2 Methodological contribution
This dissertation methodologically contributes to the literature on consumers’ valuation and WTP. Consumers’ WTP for sustainability labels are studied and analyzed using different stated preference methods including both contingent valuation (CV) and choice modelling (CM). CV uses direct elicitation by asking what respondents are willing to pay such as payment cards, while CM refers to making choices, ranking or rating different options described by attributes and attributes levels (such as choice experiments) (Batema et al., 2002). Firstly, payment cards were used where respondents select their maximum amount they were willing to pay extra for organic yoghurt from a list of possible prices (Study 2). Secondly, choice experiments (CE) are applied to study preferences for organic, free range, animal welfare, carbon footprint labels on chicken breast (Study 3). This is a more realistic approach as it mimics the choices consumers are confronted with at the point-of-purchase. In CEs, respondents make choices among different products. Each respondent is asked to make repeated choices between different product alternatives. Each product is described based on attribute and attribute levels which vary according to an experimental design. Respondents are asked to make trade-offs between changes in attribute levels. A no-buy alternative was also included in each set of alternatives which could be
selected if they would not choose any of the presented product alternatives. Based on the choices made, the WTP can be estimated. Thirdly, survey data from the CE was combined with observational data based on eye-tracking technology (Study 4). Eye-tracking data, a type of observational data, were recorded during the performance of the CE. This more advanced methodological approach incorporates visual attention based on the eye-tracking measures into the choice model. The use of eye-tracking technology in agricultural economic research is an innovative approach. Little studies incorporated eye-tracking measures in choice modeling (Balcombe et al., 2015).
A large body of literature employs self-reported use of sustainability labels (Grunert et al., 2014) or importance of sustainable food attributes when examining the effect of sustainability on food choices (Vanhonacker et al., 2013). This dissertation moves beyond the reliance on self-reported measures of sustainability label use, and instead uses eye-tracking measures to quantify the visual attention given to sustainability labels while making food choices.
Eye-tracking technology has led to useful insights into consumers’ use of nutritional information on food packages (Antúnez, et al., 2013; 2015; Ares et al., 2014; Bialkova and van Trijp, 2010; 2011; Bialkova et al., 2013; 2014; Graham and Jeffery, 2011; Graham et al., 2015; Jones and Richardson, 2007; Siegrist et al., 2015b; van Herpen and van Trijp, 2011; Visschers et al., 2010). For a review of eye- tracking and nutrition information, I refer to Graham et al. (2012). For example, Visschers et al. (2010) reported health motivation to stimulate consumers to attend to nutrition information when making a food choice. However, eye-tracking technology has not yet been applied to the assessment of the effect of visual attention to sustainability information on food packages. With an increasing number of sustainability labels, it is important to improve our understanding of consumers’ visual attention to sustainability labels. This dissertation hereby provides a first study addressing this research gap by studying visual attention to sustainability labeling and its relation to choice behavior. In addition to visual attention to attributes, which is “a continuous measure of the degree to which a respondent evaluates the attribute” (Balcombe et al., 2015, p 449), this dissertation also investigates visual attribute non-attendance (ANA). In contrast, attendance is “a discrete measure indicating whether respondents will be considered to have attended an attribute or not” (Balcombe et al., 2015, p 449). For a methodological point of view, this dissertation also contributes to the literature on ANA in CEs by implementing visual ANA using the eye-tracking technology.