British Food Journal

Emerald Article: Attitudinal inconsistency toward organic food in relation

to purchasing intention and behavior: An illustration of Taiwan consumers
Shih-Jui Tung, Ching-Chun Shih, Sherrie Wei, Yu-Hua Chen

Article information:
To cite this document:
Shih-Jui Tung, Ching-Chun Shih, Sherrie Wei, Yu-Hua Chen, (2012),"Attitudinal inconsistency toward organic food in relation to
purchasing intention and behavior: An illustration of Taiwan consumers", British Food Journal, Vol. 114 Iss: 7 pp. 997 - 1015
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00070701211241581
Downloaded on: 03-07-2012
References: This document contains references to 56 other documents
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by Emerald Author Access

For Authors:
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service.
Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in
business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as
well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is
a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0007-070X.htm

Inconsistency
Attitudinal inconsistency toward toward organic
organic food in relation to food
purchasing intention and
997
behavior
Received 9 December 2010
An illustration of Taiwan consumers Revised 20 March 2011
Accepted 28 March 2011
Shih-Jui Tung
Graduate Institute of Bio-Industry Management,
National Chung-Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan
Ching-Chun Shih
Department of Beauty Science, Chienkuo Technology University,
Changhua, Taiwan
Sherrie Wei
Department of International Business Administration,
Chienkuo Technology University, Changhua, Taiwan, and
Yu-Hua Chen
Department of Bio-Industry Communication and Development,
National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to examine the attitudinal inconsistency among Taiwanese consumers
toward organic agriculture/food, and its relationship to their willingness to pay a premium and
purchase for organic product.
Design/methodology/approach – A telephone survey consisting of 913 households was made to
reach an estimated 3.3 percent sampling error with 95 percent confidence level.
Findings – It was found that those who were female, who had higher occupation prestige, who had
college education levels, who were aged in their 40s, and who possessed an optimistic opinion toward
the necessity of organic farming tend to pay a premium for and buy organic food. The majority of
Taiwanese respondents showed a high level of concern about pesticides but a low trust in organic
food, which revealed an attitudinal inconsistency toward organic agriculture/food. A multiple
discriminant analysis with a moderating variable shows that consumers’ trust in organic food and
their pesticide concern jointly explain the respondents’ willingness to pay a premium and purchasing
behavior. The influence of consumers’ pesticide concern on their willingness to pay a premium and
purchase actually depends on their levels of trust.
Originality/value – As a whole, lack of trust and confusing organic product certification levels is
the main barrier to Taiwan’s organic agriculture development. Further communication and policy
modification is needed to reinforce consumers’ confidence in organic agriculture/food.
British Food Journal
Keywords Organic agriculture, Organic foods, Consumer attitudes, Willingness to pay a premium, Vol. 114 No. 7, 2012
Buying behaviour, Trust, Consumer behaviour, Taiwan pp. 997-1015
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Paper type Research paper 0007-070X
DOI 10.1108/00070701211241581
BFJ Introduction
114,7 With the remarkable rise of global organic agriculture and environmentally
friendly-oriented food industry, recently organic-product providers, policymakers
have an increasingly large stake in consumers’ attitudes toward organic
agriculture/food, intention to pay a premium, and the consequent buying behavior.
This stake remains despite the manifested controversies and contradictions over the
998 safety and quality of organic food in contrast with conventionally grown products
(Grunert and Juhl, 1995; Allen and Kovach, 2000; Magkos et al., 2006).
It is generally postulated that consumers’ attitudes toward a product are of
importance in predicting their purchase intention and behavior. The well-known
Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) supports this contention by positing that attitudes,
subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, jointly determine one’s behavioral
intentions and consequently lead to actual behavior. This theory sheds light on the
complex interrelationship between attitudes, intention, and consequent behavior, and it
has been applied in several green consumption studies (e.g. Kalafatis et al., 1999; Chen,
2007; Lobb et al., 2007; Kim and Chung, 2011). Even though there have been few direct
applications of TPB in studies on organic food consumption, a growing number of
studies have stressed that buying intention and behavior of organic products is related
to attitudes (Chen, 2007; Grunert and Juhl, 1995; Rimal et al., 2001; Lockie et al., 2004;
Padel and Foster, 2005; Rimal et al. 2005; Tarkiainen and Sundqvist, 2005).
In the area of organic food consumption, the spotlight has generally been on the
predictability between favorable attitudes and behavior. While many studies found
correlation between respective attitudinal dimension and behavior for green or organic
consumption (Davies et al., 1995; Grunert and Juhl, 1995; Tanner and Kast, 2003; Lockie
et al., 2004; Rimal et al., 2001, 2005; Tarkiainen and Sundqvist, 2005), the issues of
interaction and inconsistency among attitudinal components and its impacts on
behavior, however, is rarely investigated. Very likely, however, there exists attitudinal
inconsistency when ethics is introduced in the study of attitudes. One common
explanation for the inconsistency is that there is social desirability involved in
ethics-related themes, and people feel compelled to give responses conforming to the
rules of ethics. In studying consumers’ attitudes toward organic food and their buying
behavior, themes involved include ethics, the environment, and personal health issues
(Makatouni, 2002; Torjusen et al., 2001). Hence, this topic is not immune from problems
arising from the issue of giving socially responsive answers. The issue of attitudinal
inconsistency and interaction, in this sense, deserves more consideration. Ajzen (2001)
proposed the possibility of a co-existence of opposite attitude dispositions, referred to
as attitudinal ambivalence. He concluded that one could hold different attitudes toward
the same concept even in the same context. It is thus arguable that people’s behavior is
not necessarily predictable by their opinions of various attitudinal dimensions or single
attitudinal indicator, particularly when ethical judgment is involved.
In brief, following the TPB theory’s emphasis on the linkages among attitudes,
behavioral intention, and actual behavior, two features should be noticed in organic
food consumption study. First, the willingness to pay a premium is a better indicator of
buying intention due to the comparatively higher price of organic product. Second, the
inconsistency between attitudinal elements and its influence on behavior is greatly
noteworthy. Since the construct of consumer attitude is usually multi-faceted and the
congruency among diverse attitudinal dimensions of organic food consumers has
rarely been explored in existing studies, the possibility of attitudinal ambivalence and Inconsistency
its effect on intention to pay a premium and buying behavior deserve further toward organic
examination.
One interesting question to ask is whether the relationship between attitudes, food
intention and consequent behavior varies across cultures. It has been pointed out in one
study that consumers might demonstrate distinctive attitudes, purchase intention and
behavior toward organically grown food that vary based on the level of their country’s 999
development (Squires et al., 2001). By far, the great majority of organic-food
consumption researches investigating the relationship between attitudes, intention and
behavior have focused on consumers of European or North America countries
(e.g. Torjusen et al., 2001; Fotopoulos and Krystallis, 2002; Saba and Messina, 2003;
Krystallis and Chryssohoidis, 2005; Padel and Foster, 2005; Rimal et al., 2005;
Tarkiainen and Sundqvist, 2005). Moreover, most studies applying TPB theory
pertaining to organic food consumption have taken consumers of these countries as
target population (e.g. Kalafatis et al., 1999; Kim and Chung, 2011; Lobb et al., 2007).
Study of Asian consumers deserves more attention in the context of cultural
differences.
This study aims to take Taiwan as an illustration of organic product consumption
in Asian area. There are two reasons why the case of Taiwan is intriguing for study in
this area. First, consumers, in theory, might be positive toward organic agriculture and
increase their organic consumption as their income rises. The per capita GDP (Gross
Domestic Product) in Taiwan has been rising steadily for several decades to reach
18,603 US dollars in 2010, compared with 897 US dollars in 2001. Organic food is
becoming more affordable, in theory, for the public in general. However, Taiwan
governmental statistics show that, despite a slow, steady increase in the conversion of
farmland from conventional to organic cultivation in the past decade, organically
cultivated land has never exceeded one percent of total farmland. For instance, the
percentage of organically cultivated land has risen merely from 0.106 percent in 2001 to
0.484 percent in 2010. This shows that there is no comparable development of organic
agriculture vis-à-vis rising income in Taiwan which is quite different from that in
European countries. Second, the common perception of pesticide overuse in Taiwan,
along with speedy industrial development and a decreasing number of farmers, has
brought about anxiety in the general public about farming in general. As Batte et al.
(2007) stated that the most important reason for purchasing organic products was to
avoid intake of chemicals, and that one impetus for the rise of organic farming is the
abuse of agricultural chemicals, a natural assumption is that those who are worried
about the overuse of chemicals generally support organic consumption. If this is the
case, the organic food market in Taiwan should have burgeoned and grown
dramatically more than it actually has.
In theory, the rising level of economic development in Taiwan, in conjunction with
concerns about environmental degradation by the overuse of agricultural chemicals,
should have brought about galvanized support for organic farming. However, this is
not happening in Taiwan. Why not? Is the surprisingly low rise in organic
consumption related to contradictions in attitudes about organic agriculture? Does the
current low rate of organic food consumption indicate that Taiwanese people tend to
ignore pesticide overuse and be reluctant to pay a premium? Or are most of them just
BFJ distrustful that the organic food in Taiwan is truly free of agricultural chemicals? How
114,7 do their perceptions toward organic products affect their final purchasing decisions?
In light of the above questions, this study has two purposes. First, it seeks to
investigate Taiwanese consumers’ attitudes toward organic food and their willingness
to pay a premium and buying behavior. Second, it attempts to identify the level of
attitudinal inconsistency toward organic food and to determine how it affects
1000 consumers’ willingness to pay a premium and purchasing behavior.

Literature review
Organic food consumption
The concepts and principles of organic agriculture have been worldly acknowledged
and practiced. An organic product or food is described as being a “lately introduced
differentiated product” possessing a niche market share with brand awareness
(Chryssochoidis, 2000). According to IFOAM (2011), the global sales of organic
products in 2009 has totaled at nearly 55 billion US dollars and organic farming has
been found in 160 countries to contain approximately 37.2 million hectares of
agricultural land. Because farm input costs for organic production are high and yields
are low, the market share of organic products has increased in only a few market
segments. An organic-product consumer is generally classified as a “concerned
consumer” sensitive to moral and health issues (Weatherell et al., 2003). Concerns about
environmental ethics and health, and therefore methods of food production,
differentiate this group from the general consumer population in the food market.
In spite of the notable increase of organically grown products worldwide, the
so-called royal organic food consumers still accounts for a very limited portion of the
general population. As a whole, there are several primary reasons why consumers are
deterred from buying organic food. They include high prices, low availability and
accessibility, lack of trust that products labeled as organic were truly organically
grown, limited choices, and low perceived value (Soil Association, 2000).
Motives of self-interest (e.g. a desire for high food quality and safety to ensure
personal health) were widely cited in the literature as the key factors to explain
conumers’ purchasing decision of organic food (Carrigan and Attalla, 2001; McEachern
and McClean, 2002; Magkos et al., 2006). It has also been argued, however, that the
major purchasing motive for organic-food consumers might be altruistic. Some studies
showed that being environmentally friendly is the main motives for consumers’ buying
decision (Fotopoulos and Krystallis, 2002). Since motives are related to one’s attitudes,
attitudes toward organic agriculture/food are proposed to predict one’s buying
intention and behavior of organic product.

Consumers’ attitudes toward organic agriculture/food in relation to purchasing

intention and behavior
Consumers’ attitudes are essential contributors in predicting their buying intention
and behavior, so they are useful factors in explaining why some consumers switched
from being non-buyers to loyal buyers (Baldinger and Rubinson, 1996). Some studies
confirm that this is true with organic food consumption as well (e.g. Tarkiainen and
Sundqvist, 2005; Chen, 2007). Chen (2007) even used TPB in an investigation of organic
food consumers in Taiwan, which confirmed this relationship.
 Consumers’ attitudes toward organic food contain various dimensions of constructs Inconsistency
related to awareness, affection, and behavioral tendency. The key dimensions stated in toward organic
the literature include concerns over pesticides and food safety, perceptions of food
quality, concerns about the environment, trust in the veracity of organic food labeling, food
and opinions on the prospects of organic agriculture (Batte et al., 2007; Boccaletti and
Nardella, 2000; Grunert, 2005; Grunert and Juhl, 1995; Krystallis and Chryssohoidis,
2005; Padel and Foster, 2005; Saba and Messina, 2003; Tarkiainen and Sundqvist, 2005; 1001
Tuu and Olsen, 2009). The components of these attitudes are often interrelated and
correlated to purchasing decisions.
Pesticide concerns. Concerns about pesticide residue or other safety concerns, either
in regard to the environment or to personal health, are assumed to be the most
important determining factors in the decision to buy organic food (Swanson and Lewis,
1993). Modern farming techniques generally include the application of chemicals to
speed up growth process and to achieve high yields. These practices, however, can
deplete the soil, damage the environment, and create products that are unsafe to eat.
Brom (2000) uses the term “consumer concern” to describe consumers’ fears about food
safety and pesticide residue under modern food production systems. The perceived
pesticide risks was found to relate to consumers’ trust and buying of organic food
(Saba and Messina, 2003). The pesticide fear can cause consumers to buy organic
products in order to reduce their intake of food, which they consider to be unsafe.
Perception of the necessity of organic agriculture. Consumers’ perception of the
necessity of organic agriculture is also a crucial aspect of attitudes toward organic food
and was employed in prior studies (Soler et al., 2002; Saba and Messina, 2003; Lea and
Worsley, 2005). It generally refers to personal views about the development of organic
agriculture, abuse of chemicals and environmental degradation, and confidence in
organic products. Dreezens et al. (2005) found that organic agriculture was generally
rated high in terms of people welfare and nature protection. It is stated that consumers
concerned about environmental degradation, one of the major concerns of organic
farming, tend to pay a high premium for organically grown product (Gil et al., 2000).
Trust in organic products. Whether “consumer concern” leads to purchasing organic
products depends largely upon consumer confidence in the feasibility of the organic
farming process and confidence that food labeled as organic was truly produced
organically. Lobb et al. (2007) noted that, in addition to risk perception, trust should be
included in the TPB model when addressing food safety issues. Berger and Mitchell
(1989) also argued that consumer confidence significantly affected the
attitude-behavior relationship. Risk perception of pesticide is found to be an
indicator of organic food purchase (Rimal et al., 2005).
Trust, either in farming practices or certification, is a crucial factor in determining
consumers’ purchasing decisions in regard to organic product consumption (Krystallis
and Chryssohoidis, 2005). Lee and Holden (1999) pointed out that trust in organic
products, the certification system, and the integrity of producers are crucial for
sustainable consumption of organic products. While promoting their products as
organic gives firms a marketing edge (Munnichs, 2004), the trustworthiness of food
labeled as organic is difficult for the general public to determine, as there are still
controversies among experts surrounding the acceptable level of risks for human
bodies (Lingreen, 2003; Yee et al., 2005).
BFJ Willingness to pay a premium. The willingness to pay a premium (WTP) is an
114,7 important aspect of behavioral intention exhibiting close linkage with consumer
attitudes and buying behavior (Soler et al., 2002). For instance, Boccaletti and Nardella
(2000) state that perception of food risk is positively related to WTP for organic
produce. It is also positively related to organic-agriculture perception and purchase
behavior (Gil et al., 2000; Lockie et al., 2004). Once “consumer concern” about chemicals
1002 in non-organic products is substantiated and the truthfulness of organic products is
verified, WTP is a good predictor of purchasing behavior with regard to organic
products (Huotilainen et al., 2006). It is hypothesized that as one’s WTP increases, the
likelihood of purchasing organic products is expected to increase when other factors,
such as availability, accessibility, and variety, are also improved.

Attitudinal inconsistency
It is conventional wisdom that those who worried about pesticide abuse have a positive
outlook on organic agriculture/food, and are more inclined to trust organic product, but
this is not always the case. In addition to the discrepancy between consumers’ attitudes
and purchasing behavior, inconsistency across various attitudinal dimensions on
organically grown products deserves more discussion. In their case study of Belgium,
Vermeir and Verbeke (2006) found that some consumers’ intention to purchase
products that were grown with environmentally sustainable practices was positively
influenced by social pressure in spite of those consumers’ rather negative attitudes
toward organic agriculture.
In the past, it was usually accepted that organic food consumers possess similar
perceptions in all attitudinal dimensions, but this is not always the case. For instance,
risk perception of pesticide was shown to have a positive relationship with
willingness-to-pay (Boccaletti and Nardella, 2000), but the perception was also shown
to have a negative association with trust in organic food (Dreezens et al., 2005).
Consumers’ conceived risk of chemicals does not necessarily predict their trust in
organically grown product. Although food safety perception was deemed the most
important consideration for most consumers, some studies also cited that “organic”
food does not necessarily mean “safe” food for most consumers (Magkos et al., 2006),
especially when distrust is prevalent in the society.
It was even hypothesized that high consumer concern can result in eventual loss of
trust, both in conventional and sustainable farming systems (Dittus and Hillers, 1996;
Brom, 2000). It was found that consumers’ contradictory perceptions formed a barrier
against buying organic products (Fotopoulos and Krystallis, 2002). Contradictions in
consumers’ attitudes, coupled with organic food’s high price and inconvenience, often
decrease consumers’ intention to pay a premium and finally deter them from
purchasing organic food. It seems logical that concerns over pesticide overuse would
likely bring about an increase in the purchase of organic products. However, the same
suspicion over pesticides could, for some consumers, also indicate that they are likely
to have little trust in organic farming and therefore decrease their organic-product
consumption.
While attitudes toward organic agriculture play an increasingly important role in
consumers’ purchasing decisions, their causal relationship is often less obvious due to
some extraneous factors. For instance, consumers may possess positive attitudes
toward organic food, but they tend to be relatively passive in their purchasing
behavior, often due to having a limited budget (Grunert and Juhl, 1995) or some Inconsistency
personal characteristics. Padel and Foster state that prices and personal income remain toward organic
crucial barriers, but these barriers will be lessened and consumers will pay a premium
once they possess positive attitudes toward organic food and realize the reasons for food
organic food’s higher cost (Padel and Foster, 2005). Thus, consumers’ attitudes toward
organic agri-food could become a significant factor in influencing their buying
behavior once the personal factors were controlled. 1003
Other determinants of organic food purchasing intention and behavior
Considerable research has provided evidence that a number of socio-demographic
factors indeed influence attitudes and buying behavior related to organically grown
products. They should therefore be included in the analysis for control to see the net
contribution of attitudinal factors. Although some authors have posited that the
importance of socio-demographic variables in predicting green consumption has been
overestimated (Diamantopoulos et al., 2003), other researchers claim that consumers’
socio-demographic backgrounds make significant differences in their purchasing
habits.
Socio-demographic variables such as gender (Davies et al., 1995; Laroche et al., 2001;
Robinson and Smith, 2003; Lockie et al., 2002; Lockie et al., 2004; Lea and Worsley,
2005; Rimal et al., 2005; Oni et al., 2005), age (Thompson, 1998; Smith and Riethmller,
1999; Robinson and Smith, 2003; Rimal et al., 2005), educational attainment
(Thompson, 1998; Thompson and Kidwell, 1998; Lockie et al., 2002; Robinson and
Smith, 2003; Oni et al., 2005) have been suggested as having significant influence in
purchasing habits of organic food. These propositions were also confirmed by some
studies in Asian countries (e.g. Roitner-Schobesberger et al., 2008). In general,
consumers who are females, who are older, and who have higher educational
backgrounds tend to be positive about organic products and more inclined to purchase
organically grown products. Dining habits are also a possible determinant of organic
food buying behavior. These are rarely cited in previous research, but are included in
this study. Dining at home increases the probability of buying organic products. Hence,
the frequency of dining at home should be included in the analysis. The influence of
consumers’ occupations on their attitudes and purchasing behavior about organic
products has rarely been mentioned in the literature. As occupation is an important
part of a person’s socio-economic status, it is included in this study. Socio-economic
variables have been included in this study mainly for the purpose of acting as a
statistical control for explanatory variables.

Methodology
Research design and sampling
The target population was limited to Taiwanese adults who are in charge of the food
shopping in their household. To aid in questionnaire design and to gain an overall
understanding of respondents’ attitudes and buying behavior related to organic
agriculture/food, one focus group composed of six household representatives was
created. The draft structured questionnaire was carefully reviewed by both the focus
group members and three experts to ensure the validity of the measures. Then it was
pre-tested by phone interviews of 50 individuals who served as the primary food
purchasers in their households. The questionnaire was revised accordingly with minor
BFJ changes in wording. A nationwide telephone survey using a random-digit dialing
114,7 technique was conducted by the TVBS Company, a highly reputable poll company in
Taiwan. Data was collected during a one-week period in December of 2005. A total of
913 valid interviews were obtained, generating results with an estimated 3.3 percent
sampling error and a 95 percent confidence level.

1004 Measurements and analysis

Based on the TPB theory and literature, this study first explores the relationships
among Taiwanese consumers’ attitudinal dimensions toward organic
agriculture/food, and then examines their respective effects on respondents’
willingness to pay a premium and purchase. The questionnaire was composed of
sections for organic food attitudes, purchasing intention and behavior, and
socio-demographic variables. Attitudinal variables included concerns of pesticide
use, trust in organic food claims, and perception of the necessity of organic
agriculture. They were measured respectively by sentences such as “I do worry about
the pesticide residue of the fresh produce I regularly buy”, “I trust the organically
grown product as it claims”, and “I believe it is necessary to further promote organic
agriculture in Taiwan”. The purchasing intention was measured by the willingness to
pay a premium (WTP). It was measured by asking “I am willing to pay a premium
for certified organic food”. A five-point Likert Scale was used for the above
attitudinal variables and WTP, with five possible agreement levels: strongly agree (5
points), agree, no opinion, disagree, and strongly disagree (1 point). Purchasing
behavior was based on the respondents’ purchasing decisions within the six months
prior to the survey. There were five possible responses: almost every week, at times,
rarely, never, and don’t know.
Socio-demographic variables, such as respondents’ gender, age, educational
attainment, occupation, and dining habits, were included to control their possible
intervening or spurious effects on the relationship between attitudinal and buying
behavior variables. Age was classified into four categories: below 30, 30-39, 40-49, and
above 49. Respondents’ educational levels were categorized into below high school,
high school, and college or above. There were five occupational groups: public
employee, high-level manager/ professional, white-collar worker, entrepreneur, and
other. The other category included blue-collar workers, homemakers, and unemployed
persons, as indicated on the survey. There were three categories for dining habits:
always dine at home, usually dine at home, and frequently dine out.
Both bivariate and partial correlation analyses were employed to reveal the
interrelationships among attitudinal variables. In case there are evidences of
inconsistency, multiple discriminant analyses with moderating variables would be
employed to examine their joint effects in explaining respondents’ willingness to pay a
premium and purchasing behavior.

Results
Taiwan consumers’ attitudes, buying intention and behavior toward organic
agriculture/food
About 78 percent of the respondents were already familiar with the concept of organic
food at the time they agreed to take the survey, be it defined as certified or not certified.
For those respondents who were not familiar with the concept of organic food, the
interviewer explained it to them and the survey went on. A series of questions were Inconsistency
presented to all respondents regarding their attitudes and buying behavior related to toward organic
organic food. The descriptive results are shown in Tables I and II. As can be seen in the
table, over 90 percent of the respondents were concerned about overuse of pesticides, food
and nearly half of the respondents stated that they were “extremely concerned” about
pesticides. It is obvious that there is a high level of awareness about the issue of
pesticide overuse. Interestingly, however, nearly two-thirds of the respondents 1005
expressed extremely low confidence that products labeled as organic were truly
organically produced, and thus did not seek organic products.
The co-existence of a high level of concern about pesticides and a low level of trust
in the truthfulness of organic food labeling reveals the awkward situation of
organic-product marketers in Taiwan. For many respondents, the widespread use of
pesticides has eroded their confidence that products labeled as “organic” are truly
pesticide-free. The problem could be with the farming practices of supposedly organic
farmers, or with labeling. In regard to attitudes toward organic agriculture, an
overwhelming majority (90 percent) of the respondents agreed with the necessity of
developing organic agriculture. Less than half of the respondents show willingness to
pay higher price for organic produce. It would seem, then, that for Taiwanese
consumers to be willing to pay a premium for organic products, they would require
proof that the products were truly organic. The authenticity of being organic plays a
pivotal role in the decision-making process among consumers.
The finding that around half of the respondents have purchased organically
produced food within the six-month period was surprising. It is very likely attributable
to false claims of the authenticity of organic products in the market. Only 2.2 percent of
the respondents could be deemed loyal buyers who bought organic products almost
every week.

No
opinion/
Don’t
Attitudinal variables Extreme Fair Rare Not at all know

Pesticide concerns 435 (47.6) 319 (34.9) 74 (8.2) 41 (4.5) 44 (4.8)

Trust in organic products 74 (8.1) 182 (19.9) 356 (39.0) 236 (25.8) 65 (7.2)
Perception of the necessity Table I.
of organic agriculture 469 (51.4) 332 (36.4) 19 (2.1) 2 (.2) 91 (10.0) Consumers’ attitudes
Willingness to pay a premium 71 (7.8) 353 (38.7) 208 (22.8) 232 (25.4) 49 (5.4) toward organic
agriculture/food in
Notes: n ¼ 913; Figures in parentheses are percentages with row total of 100 percent Taiwan

Almost
every Don’t
Table II.
Attitudinal variables week At times Rarely Never know
Consumers’ buying
Buying behavior 20 (2.2) 188 (20.6) 236 (25.8) 438 (48.0) 31 (3.4) behavior toward organic
agriculture/food in
Notes: n ¼ 913; Figures in parentheses are percentages with row total of 100 percent Taiwan
BFJ The results of the survey reveal the possible existence of some contradiction in
114,7 attitudes held by most of the respondents. On the one hand, most respondents were
concerned by pesticide residue and hopeful for the development of organic agriculture.
On the other hand, they demonstrated a lack of trust in products marketed as
“organic”. The inconsistencies between these attitudinal dimensions deserve further
investigation.
1006
Inconsistency among attitudinal dimensions
A comparison of Spearman rank-order simple correlations and pair-wise partial
correlations controlling for all the other attitudinal variables was conducted to obtain
net relationships among attitudinal variables. It is hypothesized that all attitudinal
variables are positively related to each other. As shown in Table III, simple correlation
coefficients revealed that most of the attitudinal pairs of variables exhibit significantly
positive relationships except the relationship between perceived pesticide concerns and
trust in organic food, which had an insignificant negative relationship.
In an elaborated model analysis, however, when all the other variables were
statistically controlled, the partial correlation revealed the relationship between trust
and concerns over pesticides changed into a significantly negative relationship. This
showed that the seemingly unrelated bi-variate relationship between trust and
pesticide concerns existed once other attitudinal variables were taken into account. It
implies that those who show stronger anxiety over pesticide use tend to have lower
trust in organic products. This finding is consistent with the findings from Tables I
and II, in which about 48 percent of the respondents were extremely concerned about
pesticides, but only about 8 percent of them had extreme trust in organic products.
This finding, echoing that of Dreezens et al. (2005), is indicative that extension
education and a certification system for organic agriculture in Taiwan haven’t
persuaded the general population of consumers to trust organic products. The
inconsistency between pesticide concern and trust, as a whole, seems to exist and needs
to be taken care of in further statistical analysis.

Discriminant analysis of willingness to pay a premium and purchasing behavior

To handle the attitudinal inconsistency, multiple discriminant analysis, where the
effects of the socio-demographic variables were statistically controlled, was conducted
to analyze the effects of attitudinal factors on respondents’ WTP and purchasing
behavior for organic products. The five categories of WTP were re-classified into two.
The responses strongly agree, agree were recoded into “yes”, while no opinion,
disagree, and strongly disagree were recoded into “no”. The four groups of buying

Pesticide concern Trust Necessity

Pesticide concern – 2 0.079 * 0.291 *

Trust 2 0.044 – 0.112 *
Table III. Necessity 0.270 * 0.083 * –
Spearman simple and
partial correlations Notes: Left of the diagonal are bi-variable Spearman rank correlations; Right of the diagonal (in
among attitudinal italics) are partial correlations controlling for all the other attitudinal and socio-demographic variables;
variables n ¼ 913, * p , 0.05
behavior were collapsed into two for application of binary discriminant analysis. The Inconsistency
“purchase” category included the purchasing frequency responses of almost every toward organic
week, at times, and rarely. The “non-purchase” category included the never responses.
Adding interaction terms, in statistical analysis, to deal with moderating effect of food
attitudinal variables on purchasing intention of organic produce has been used in
previous study (Kim and Chung, 2011). Since the two attitudinal variables, pesticide
concern and trust, show inconsistency in previous correlation analysis, an interaction 1007
term by multiplication of the two variables was introduced to examine their possible
joint effect. Trust of organic food was employed as a moderating variable to explore its
interaction with consumers’ pesticide concern.
Two discriminant functions, with WTP and purchase as dependent variables and
with socio- demographic and attitudinal variables as independent variables, were
conducted. Socio-demographic variables were recoded into dummy variables with
respective reference categories. As indicated in Table IV, both functions were proved to
own fair model fit as indicated by the Wilk’s l statistics, canonical coefficients, and
predictive accuracy. A profile analysis was conducted to present how the independent
variables discriminate against the two dependent variables.
In the WTP model, the findings revealed that Taiwanese respondents’ gender,
educational attainment, occupation, age, all attitudinal variables and the interaction
terms showed significant discriminant power. Referring to Table V, respondents who
were female, who were public-sector employees or entrepreneurs, who had college
education levels, those whose age was 40-49, and those who thought organic
agriculture is necessary more often tended to exhibit intention to pay a premium for
organic product.
When buying behavior was taken as dependent variable, WTP was put as an
independent variable in the function. Again, gender, educational attainment,
occupation, age, WTP, and all attitudinal variables with interaction terms were
significantly discriminated. It was found that respondents who were female, who had
higher occupation prestige, who had college education levels, who were between 40-49
years of age, who possessed optimistic opinion toward the necessity of organic
farming, and those who were willing to pay a premium were significantly inclined to
purchasing organic products.
These findings confirm that all attitudinal variables, and the attidudinal
inconsistency implied by interaction term, are good discriminant variables for WTP
and buying behavior for organic food. The higher the consumers’ perception of necessity
of organic agriculture, the more likely they will pay a premium and buy organic product.
Although their trust in organic agriculture and concern over pesticide possess positive
influence on both WTP and purchase, the interpretation of these two attitudinal
variables should be more cautious due to the existence of inconsistency. It is now in order
to specify and analyzed by the interaction between trust and pesticide concern.

Moderating effects of attitudinal inconsistency on WTP and buying behavior

To examine the moderating effect of consumer’s trust of organic produce with their
pesticide concern on WTP and buying behavior, interaction terms were employed in
forming the original discriminant functions in the following format:


D ¼ a þ w1 X1 þ w2 X 2 þ w3 X 3 þ . . . þ wk X k þ wkþ1 Trust * Pesticide Concern
 BFJ
114,7

1008

Table IV.

willingness to pay a
premium and purchase
Discriminant analysis of
Dependent variable Willingness to pay a premium Purchase
Discriminant variable Discriminant loading Wilk’s l F Discriminant loading Wilk’s l F

Pesticide concerns 0.737 0.932 54.927 * * * 0.104 0.994 4.708 *

Trust 0.309 0.987 9.671 * * 0.143 0.988 8.925 * *
Necessity 0.571 0.958 32.996 * * * 0.121 0.992 6.362 *
Gender (refer: male) 0.156
Female 0.195 0.995 3.845 * 0.155 0.986 10.505 * * *
Age (refer: under 29)
Aged 30-39 20.069 0.999 0.482 20.014 1.000 0.088
Aged 40-49 0.197 0.995 3.920 * 0.115 0.992 5.743 *
Aged 50 or above 20.108 0.998 1.171 20.08 0.996 2.788
Educational attainment
(refer: Under High School)
High School 20.093 0.999 0.872 20.027 1.000 0.321
College or above 0.196 0.995 3.874 * 0.184 0.981 14.724 * * *
Occupation (refer: others)
Public employees 0.202 0.995 4.110 * 0.148 0.988 9.506 * *
Hi-level Managers/Pros 0.144 0.997 2.102 0.148 0.988 9.578 * *
White Collar Workers 20.184 0.996 3.412 0.056 0.998 1.370
Entrepreneurs 0.244 0.992 6.004 * 0.152 0.987 10.093 * *
Dining habits
(refer: frequently dine out)
Always dine at home 20.051 1.000 0.266 0.05 0.999 1.127
Occasionally dine at home 0.143 0.997 2.060 0.067 0.997 1.958
Interaction:
Pesticide Concern *Trust 0.622 0.951 39.139 * * * 0.193 0.979 16.169 * * *
WTP 0.146 0.988 9.351 * *
Model fit Wilk’s l ¼ 0.882, x2 ¼ 93.883 * * * Wilk’s l ¼ 0.635, x2 ¼ 340.056 * * *
Canonical coefficient 0.343 0.604
Percent predicted correctly 70.4% 77.5%
Notes: n ¼ 913; *p , 0.05; * * p , 0.01; * * * p , 0.001; parenthesized are categories for reference group
 Inconsistency
Willingness to pay a premium Purchase
Yes No Yes No toward organic
Pesticide concerns 3.46 (0.73) a
2.88 (0.93) 3.40 (0.77) 3.23 (0.87)
food
Trust 2.18 (0.93) 1.89 (0.80) 2.22 (0.95) 1.99 (0.85)
Necessity 3.61 (0.52) 3.29 (0.63) 3.59 (0.52) 3.48 (0.59)
Gender: 1009
Male 15.4% 20.3% 12.8% 20.8%
Female 84.6% 79.7% 87.2% 79.2%
Age:
Under 29 7.1% 6.1% 6.4% 7.4%
Aged 30-39 22.6% 21.1% 22.5% 21.9%
Aged 40-49 38.1% 25.9% 39.8% 29.8%
Aged 50 or above 32.2% 46.9% 31.4% 40.9%
Educational attainment:
Under High School 26.3% 35.3% 21.3% 36.6%
High school 40.7% 41.7% 41.8% 40.1%
College or above 32.9% 22.8% 36.9% 23.3%
Occupation:
Others 37.1% 55.1% 30.1% 53.9%
Public employees 13.6% 6.9% 15.3% 8.3%
Hi-level managers/pros 15.4% 10.6% 17.9% 10.2%
White Collar Workers 16.0% 18.8% 19.2% 14.0%
Entrepreneurs 17.9% 8.7% 17.5% 13.5%
Dining habits
Frequently dine out 5.7% 9.5% 3.4% 10.3%
Always dine at home 72.5% 75.0% 74.7% 71.5% Table V.
Occasionally dine at home 21.3% 15.1% 21.7% 17.6% Profile analysis of
consumers’ willingness to
Notes: aarithmetic means with standard deviation parenthesized; percentages of variable categories pay a premium and
are summed up into 100 by column purchase

Where D is the discriminant score of either WTP or buying behavior; a is the intercept;
w’s are the weights of the discriminant variables or called discriminant coefficients; k
stands for the number of independent variables.
To explore thenet relationship between the dependent variable and the two
interaction-relevant independent variables, the original dicriminant function was to be
reduced. In the following simplified interaction function, consisting of merely the
intercept and one independent variable, Trust was treated as a moderator interacting
with Pesticide Concern. The values of all the other independent variables, with the
exception of the variables forming the interaction terms, were replaced by their
respective arithmetic means. Then the constants and weights were calculated across
various levels of “Trust” variable to reveal its moderating effects. The simplified
function is shown below, where i is the level of Trust, and j stands for the dependent
variable numbers.

Dij ¼ aij þ wij ðPesticide ConcernÞ

The fluctuating discriminant weights presented in Table VI shows that Taiwanese

consumers’ pesticide concern indeed increase their intention to pay a premium for
organic food. But the positive effect decreases as their trust over organic agriculture
BFJ increases. The ordinal interaction mode, presented by the values and sign changes of
114,7 the discriminant coefficients, implies that as long as consumers’ pesticide worry indeed
trigger their WTP, those who possess lower faith in organic agriculture tend to have
stronger willingness to pay higher price for “real” organic food than those with higher
trust. Once one possesses sufficient trust in organic farming, the influence of pesticide
concern over WTP becomes less significant.
1010 It is noteworthy that, in contrast to that of WTP, consumers’ pesticide concern had
different effect on their purchase behavior once their trust in organic agriculture was
taken into account. The interaction relationship turned out to be a dis-ordinal type that
consumers’ pesticide concern presented negative impact on buying behavior for those
who expressed lower trust toward organic agriculture; whereas the impact turned into
positive as their trust in organic agriculture increased. It is inferred that once
Taiwanese consumers possessed lower faith in organic farming, the more anxious they
felt toward pesticide overuse, the less likely they will buy organic food. When
consumers had higher trust levels, their pesticide concern led them to be more likely to
purchase organically grown products. The moderating role of consumers’ trust over
organic agriculture, in both interaction models, proved that “trust” is a very crucial
factor in predicting their buying intension and behavior.

Conclusion and discussion

Summary and discussion
The inconsistency of consumers’ attitudes toward organic agriculture/food and its
influence on their buying intention and behavior has been rarely explored in prior
studies. In this Taiwan consumers’ survey, the inconsistency appears by the fact that
the overwhelming majority of respondents was concerned about pesticides, yet were at
the same time extremely skeptical of organic products. Among 416 respondents
showing extreme anxiety toward pesticide use, only 8.2 percent strongly believe there
are real organic products. In contrast, 22.2 percent, of those who rarely care about
pesticides, Taiwanese consumers, in this sense, exhibit some disparities in their
attitudes toward organic products. It implies that people’s high risk perception toward
conventional farming can not be automatically translated into their support of organic
agriculture. This conclusion challenges the common proposition that consumers weary
of agricultural chemicals are inclined to be loyal buyers of organic produce. Marketers
in the organic food industry should note this phenomenon to plan effective advertising
strategies.
Although the theoretical framework of this study is based on the Theory of Planned
Behavior, it specifically addressed to the issues of possible inconsistency among

Willingness to pay a premium Purchase

Moderator Independent variable: pesticide concern
Trust Intercept aij Discriminant coefficient wij Intercept aij Discriminant coefficient wij
Table VI.
Interaction analysis of Not at all 23.806 0.901 0.173 2 0.15
consumers’ willingness to A little 23.003 0.868 2 0.064 2 0.021
pay a premium and Fairly 22.516 0.835 2 0.3 0.108
purchase Very much 22.029 0.802 2 0.537 0.488
attitudinal components, which was rarely investigated. The application of Inconsistency
discriminant analysis with a moderating term in handling the association among toward organic
the attitudinal inconsistency, buying intention, and behavior toward organic food is a
useful approach. The statistically significant joint effect of concern about pesticides food
and trust in organic agriculture justifies these two ambivalent predictors of WTP and
organic food purchase in this study.
It could be argued that even though most people worry about the overuse of 1011
pesticides in Taiwan, the majority of them do not necessarily want to pay a premium or
pursue organic food, mainly due to lack of trust in the truthfulness of the “organic”
label. Only when consumers have stronger faith in organic agriculture, their worry
about pesticide will promote organic food purchase. Trust in both organic agricultural
practices and trust in product labeling is essentially the key factor in determining
consumers’ buying behavior in Taiwan. Lack of trust is responsible for the
inconsistency between respondents’ attitudes and behaviors toward organic food. This
conclusion, however, should be treated with caution when generalizing to other
countries before further cross-national or cross-cultural studies are conducted.

Policy implications
In the past, those wishing to develop organic industries in Taiwan utilized a strategy of
highlighting the dangers of pesticides in order to raise consumer concerns and
hopefully to encourage them to buy organic products. In light of the findings from this
study, this strategy should be fairly modified. Consumers did not necessarily purchase
organic products based on their worries about pesticides in the food that they eat.
Although part of the reason is the high price of organic products, the more important
reason is skepticism over the truthfulness of organic farming. The fundamental barrier
for extension education of organic agriculture is a lack of trust in products labeled as
“organic” and low confidence in the prospects of organic agriculture. Chen (2007)
conducted a consumer study in Taiwan and reported that Taiwanese consumers face
difficulty in identifying organic foods certificates and labels due to too many
certification agencies. Her findings might explain this problem to some extent from
another perspective. To enhance consumer trust in Taiwan, not only must a more
effective organic certification system and less confusing labels be implemented, but
farming practices must also be transparent. This conclusion is also suggested by a
consumer study in Thailand (Roitner-Schobesberger et al., 2008). There remains much
to be done by organic-food stakeholders, including farmers and supply-chain members,
to establish consumer trust in organic products.

Limitations and future research

One limitation of this study is that the validation of the measures of attitudinal
dimensions could be improved, as there was only one item or variable for each of the
attitudinal dimensions. This is partly attributed to the fact that data were collected
through a telephone survey, which restricts the number of items that can be included in
the questionnaire. Future studies could use qualitative methods to identify proper
indicators for attitudinal dimensions and purchasing behavior. In particular,
measurement of trust could be better understood and refined, first through
qualitative study and then by examination in quantitative studies. Based on the
indicators created, either mail surveys or personal interviews could be conducted to
BFJ give better measures for attitudes and behavior and to better understand their
114,7 relationship. As attitudes and behavior change over time, it may also be worthwhile to
create panel designs, which allow the same group of respondents to be studied over an
extended period.

References
1012
Ajzen, I. (2001), “Nature and operation of attitudes”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 52,
pp. 27-58.
Allen, P. and Kovach, M. (2000), “The capitalist composition of organic: the potential of markets
in fulfilling the promise of organic agriculture”, Agriculture and Human Values, Vol. 17
No. 3, pp. 221-32.
Baldinger, A.L. and Rubinson, J. (1996), “Brand loyalty: the link between attitude and behavior”,
Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 36 No. 6, November/December, pp. 22-34.
Batte, M.T., Hooker, N.H., Haab, T.C. and Beaverson, J. (2007), “Putting their money where their
mouths are: consumer willingness to pay for multi-ingredient, processed organic food
products”, Food Policy, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 145-59.
Berger, I.E. and Mitchell, A.A. (1989), “The effect of advertising on attitude accessibility, attitude
confidence, and the attitude-behavior relationship”, The Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 16, December, pp. 269-79.
Boccaletti, S. and Nardella, M. (2000), “Consumer willingness to pay for pesticide-free fresh fruit
and vegetables in Italy”, International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, Vol. 3
No. 3, pp. 297-310.
Brom, F.W.A. (2000), “Food consumer concerns and trust: food ethics for a globalizing market”,
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 127-39.
Carrigan, M. and Attalla, A. (2001), “The myth of the ethical consumer – do ethics matter in
purchase behavior?”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 560-77.
Chen, M. (2007), “Consumer attitudes and purchase intentions in relation to organic foods in
Taiwan: moderating effects of food-related personality traits”, Food Quality and
Preference, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 1008-21.
Chryssochoidis, G. (2000), “Repercussions of consumer confusion for late introduced
differentiated products”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34 Nos 5/6, pp. 705-22.
Davies, A., Titterington, A.J. and Cochrane, C. (1995), “Who buys organic food? A profile of the
purchasers of organic food in Northern Ireland”, British Food Journal, Vol. 97 No. 10,
pp. 17-23.
Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B.B., Sinkovics, R.R. and Bohlen, G.M. (2003), “Can
socio-demographics still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence
and an empirical investigation”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 56 No. 4, pp. 465-80.
Dittus, K.L. and Hillers, V.N. (1996), “Attitudes about the nutritional benefits and
pesticide-exposure risks from fruit and vegetable consumption”, Family and Consumer
Sciences Research Journal, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 406-21.
Dreezens, E., Martijn, C., Tenbult, P., Kok, A. and de Vries, N.K. (2005), “Food and values: an
examination of values underlying attitudes toward genetically modified- and organically
grown food products”, Appetite, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 115-22.
Fotopoulos, C. and Krystallis, A. (2002), “Purchasing motives and profile of the Greek organic
consumer: a countrywide survey”, British Food Journal, Vol. 104 No. 9, pp. 730-65.
Gil, J.M., Gracia, A. and Sanchez, M. (2000), “Market segmentation and willingness to pay for Inconsistency
organic products in Spain”, International Food and Agribusiness Management Review,
Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 207-26.
toward organic
Grunert, K.G. (2005), “Food quality and safety: consumer perception and demand”, European
food
Review of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 369-91.
Grunert, S.C. and Juhl, H.J. (1995), “Values, environmental attitudes, and buying of organic
foods”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 39-62. 1013
Huotilainen, A., Pirttilä-Backman, A. and Tuorila, H. (2006), “How innovativeness relates to
social representation of new foods and to the willingness to try and use such foods”, Food
Quality and Preference, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 353-61.
IFOAM (2011), “Growth in organic continues”, available at: www.ifoam.org/ (accessed
11 February 2011).
Kalafatis, S.P., Pollard, M., East, R. and Tsogas, M.H. (1999), “Green marketing and Ajzen’s
theory of planned behavior: a cross-market examination”, Journal of Consumer Marketing,
Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 441-60.
Kim, H. and Chung, J. (2011), “Consumer purchase intention for organic personal care products”,
Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 40-7.
Krystallis, A. and Chryssohoidis, G. (2005), “Consumers’ willingness to pay for organic food:
factors that affect it and variation per organic product type”, British Food Journal, Vol. 107,
pp. 320-43.
Laroche, M., Bergeron, J. and Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001), “Targeting consumers who are willing to
pay more for environmentally friendly products”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18
No. 6, pp. 503-20.
Lea, E. and Worsley, T. (2005), “Australians’ organic food beliefs, demographics and values”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 107 No. 11, pp. 855-69.
Lee, J.A. and Holden, S.J. (1999), “Understanding the determinants of environmentally conscious
behavior”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 373-92.
Lingreen, A. (2003), “Trust as a valuable strategic variable in the food industry: different types of
trust and their implementation”, British Food Journal, Vol. 105 No. 6, pp. 310-27.
Lobb, A.E., Mazzocchi, M. and Traill, W.B. (2007), “Modelling risk perception and trust in food
safety information within the theory of planned behavior”, Food Quality and Preference,
Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 384-95.
Lockie, S., Lyons, K., Lawrence, G. and Grice, J. (2004), “Choosing organics: a path analysis of
factors underlying the selection of organic food among Australian consumers”, Appetite,
Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 135-46.
Lockie, S., Lyons, K., Lawrence, G. and Mummery, K. (2002), “Eating green: motivations behind
organic food consumption in Australia”, Sociologia Ruralis, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 23-40.
McEachern, M.G. and McClean, P. (2002), “Organic purchasing motivations and attitudes: are
they ethical?”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 85-92.
Magkos, F., Arvanitif, F. and Zampelas, A. (2006), “Organic food: buying more safety or just
peace of mind? A critical review of the literature”, Critical Review in Food Science and
Nutrition, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 23-56.
Makatouni, A. (2002), “What motivates consumers to buy organic food in UK? Results from a
qualitative study”, British Food Journal, Vol. 104 Nos 3/4/5, pp. 345-52.
BFJ Munnichs, G. (2004), “Whom to trust? Public concerns, late modern risks, and expert
trustworthiness”, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, Vol. 17 No. 2,
114,7 pp. 113-30.
Oni, O.A., Oladele, O.I. and Inedia, O.F. (2005), “Consumer willingness to pay for safety labels in
Nigeria: a case study of potassium bromate in bread”, Journal of Central European
Agriculture, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 381-8.
1014 Padel, S. and Foster, C. (2005), “Exploring the gap between attitudes and behaviour:
understanding why consumers buy or do not buy organic food”, British Food Journal,
Vol. 107 No. 8, pp. 606-25.
Rimal, A., Fletcher, S.M., McWatters, K.H., Misra, S.K. and Deodhar, S. (2001), “Perception of food
safety and changes in food consumption habits: a consumer analysis”, International
Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 43-52.
Rimal, A.P., Moon, W. and Balasubramanian, S. (2005), “Agro-biotechnology and organic food
purchase in the United Kingdom”, British Food Journal, Vol. 107 No. 2, pp. 84-97.
Robinson, R. and Smith, C. (2003), “Associations between self-reported health conscious
consumerism, body-mass index, and attitudes about sustainably produced foods”,
Agriculture and Human Values, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 177-87.
Roitner-Schobesberger, B., Darnhofer, I., Somsook, S. and Vogl, C.R. (2008), “Consumer
perceptions of organic foods in Bangkok, Thailand”, Food Policy, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 112-21.
Saba, A. and Messina, F. (2003), “Attitudes towards organic foods and risk/benefit perception
associated with pesticides”, Food Quality & Preference, Vol. 14 No. 8, pp. 637-45.
Smith, D. and Riethmuller, P. (1999), “Consumer concerns about food safety in Australia and
Japan”, International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 724-41.
Soil Association (2000), “Biodiversity benefits of organic farming”, available at: www.
soilassociation.org/web/SA/saweb.nsf/ (accessed 9 December 2008).
Soler, F., Gil, J.M. and Sánchez, M. (2002), “Consumers’ acceptability of organic food in Spain”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 104 No. 8, pp. 670-87.
Squires, L., Juric, B. and Cornwell, T.B. (2001), “Level of market development and intensity of
organic food consumption: cross-cultural study of Danish and New Zealand consumers”,
Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 392-409.
Swanson, R.B. and Lewis, C.E. (1993), “Alaskan direct-market consumers: perception of organic
produce”, Home Economics Research Journal, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 138-55.
Tanner, C. and Kast, S.W. (2003), “Promoting sustainable consumption: determinants of green
purchases by Swiss consumers”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 10, pp. 883-902.
Tarkiainen, A. and Sundqvist, S. (2005), “Subjective norms, attitudes and intentions of Finnish
consumers in buying organic food”, British Food Journal, Vol. 107 No. 11, pp. 808-22.
Thompson, G.D. (1998), “Consumer demand for organic foods: what we know and what we need
to know”, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 80, pp. 1113-8.
Thompson, G.D. and Kidwell, J. (1998), “Explaining the choice of organic produce: consumer
preferences”, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 80 No. 5, pp. 277-87.
Torjusen, H., Lieblein, G., Wandel, M. and Francis, C.A. (2001), “Food system orientation and
quality perception among consumers and producers of organic food in Hedmark County,
Norway”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 207-16.
Tuu, H.H. and Olsen, S.O. (2009), “Food risk and knowledge in the satisfaction-repurchase loyalty
relationship”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 521-36.
Vermeir, I. and Verbeke, W. (2006), “Sustainable food consumption: exploring the consumer Inconsistency
‘attitude-behavioral intention’ gap”, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics,
Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 169-94. toward organic
Weatherell, C., Tregear, A. and Allinson, J. (2003), “In search of the concerned consumer: UK food
public perceptions of food, farming and buying local”, Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 19
No. 2, pp. 233-44.
Yee, W.M.S., Yeung, R.M.W. and Morris, J. (2005), “Food safety: building consumer trust in 1015
livestock farmers for potential purchase behavior”, British Food Journal, Vol. 107 No. 11,
pp. 841-54.

Further reading
Essoussi, L.H. and Linton, J.D. (2010), “New or recycled products: how much are consumers
willing to pay?”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 458-68.

Corresponding author
Shih-Jui Tung can be contacted at: sjtung@nchu.edu.tw

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints