Agro-biotechnology and organic food purchase in the United Kingdom

By Rimal,-A-P; Moon,-W; Balasubramanian,-S

Abstract

Purpose
The objective of this paper was to evaluate the role of consumers' perceived risks and benefits of agro-biotechnology in shaping the purchase pattern for organic food among UK consumers.

Design/methodology/approach
An on -line household survey of UK consumers was conducted using household panels maintained by the National Panel Diary (NPD) group. The data included organic food purchase pattern, perceived risks and benefits of agro-biotechnology, and socio-demographic information about the respondents. A regression model was used to examine the impact of consumers' general purchase behaviour, perceived risks and benefits of GM technology, and socio-demographic on organic food purchase.

Findings
Only 4% of the respondents purchased organic foods all the time, while 26% never purchased. Perceived risks of agro-biotechnology played a dominant role in influencing organic food purchase decisions. As the risk perception increased consumers were likely to buy organic food more often. Although premium prices of organic foods were of concern to many consumers, food safety was the most important consideration when making organic food purchase decisions. Household income positively influenced consumers' likelihood of buying organic food. Female respondents were likely to purchase organic foods more often than their male counter parts. Older respondents were less likely to buy organic foods compared to younger respondents.

Practical implications
The results of this study provide valuable information in formulating short and long-term marketing programmes for organic producers. Following the study results, food safety concern and perceived risks of GM food products need to be the overall theme of marketing programmes for organic products.

Originality/value
The study uses a large sample size in examining the relationship between perceived risks of agro-biotechnology and organic food purchase. The results are more robust and representative.

Citation
British-Food-Journal. 2005; 107(2): 84-97

IS: 0007-070X
UD: 200505
AN: 20053074970