See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/303810790

Organic Food in School Cafeterias - impact on pupils'parents

Data · June 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 246

1 author:

Pernin jean-louis
Paul Valéry University, Montpellier 3
79 PUBLICATIONS   128 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Data papers View project

Opinion leadership and interpersonal influence View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Pernin jean-louis on 05 June 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Organic Food in School Cafeterias
Impact on pupils’ parents’ attitudes and behaviours1

(1) This is the translation of the following paper (in French) :

Pernin, J. L. (2014). Le bio à la cantine. Impact sur les attitudes et comportements des
parents d'élèves. Économie rurale, (1), 113-127.

Jean-Louis Pernin
Senior Lecturer in Management Science
Université Paul Sabatier-IUT de Tarbes
LERASS (ERPURs)
e-mail : jean.louis.pernin@iut-tarbes.fr

1
The author gratefully acknowledges the financial support for this research provided by “INRA” (French National Institute for Agricultural

Research), as part of its regional development programme funding, and the region of the Midi-Pyrénées.

Organic Food in School Cafeterias

1
 Impact on pupils’ parents’ attitudes and behaviours

Abstract
The objective of this research is to examine the impact that the introduction of organic food
products in school cafeterias can have on the beliefs and behaviours of children’s parents. In
theoretical terms, this introduction creates or reinforces subjective, injunctive and/or
descriptive, norms which, according to the theory of planned behaviour are antecedents of
behavioural intention. Results show a significantly strong impact on beliefs, attitudes and
frequency of purchase of organic food products by pupil’s parents as well as the moderating
role of frequency of introduction on this impact. Furthermore, the influence that children
exercise on their parents is identified as one of the mechanisms that explain this impact.

Key Words: subjective norms, theory of planned behaviour, child’s influence, school
cafeterias, organic products

2
During the “Grenelle de l'environnement” (Convention about environment issues), France
committed to introducing 20% of organic products in school canteens by 2012. According to
the 2010 calculations of the French agency for the development and promotion of organic
farming (named “Agence bio”), the percentage of parents (with a child / children between 3
and 18 years of age) whose children had organic products in the canteen on a regular or
occasional basis, increased from 24 % in 2008 to 33% in 2009 and 45% in 2010. Thus, since
the “Grenelle de l'environnement” there has been a consistent increase in the use of organic
food in school catering. This trend is confirmed by the study of organic food products and
institutional catering carried out by the research unit of the “Agence bio”. In 2011, 61% of
schools served organic food products as opposed to 51% in 2010. The objective of this
research is to examine the impact that this introduction may have on the beliefs and
behaviours of pupils’ parents.

This topic pertains to two theoretical fields: the theory of planned behaviour on one hand and
the socialization of consumers on the other. Regarding the theory of planned behaviour, the
introduction of organic food products in school cafeterias can be considered in terms of the
creation or reinforcement of subjective norms for pupils’ parents. A change is introduced into
the social environment of families (the school cafeterias), which is a direct social environment
with public legitimacy (the institution of the school) and this has an influence on an important
aspect of children’s lives - their diet. These subjective norms are one of the antecedents of
behavioural intention, which is a fundamental aspect of the theory of planned behaviour
(Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975, Ajzen, 1985). They operate as sources of influence which may have
an impact on beliefs and attitudes (Tarkianen & Sundqvist, 2005), behavioural intention and,
ultimately, the behaviour of consumers. Children’s influence is included among these sources
of influence. At this level, approaches dealing with consumer socialization can be mobilized
(Ward, 1974, Moschis & Moore, 1979, Brée, 1993). Indeed, practices in school canteens are
involved in creating children’s repository and frame of reference as regards their food
preferences (Ayadi & Brée, 2010). The introduction of organic products in these canteens can
participate in shaping their preferences in terms of organic products. If so, and if their
preferences move in a positive direction in favour of organic products, we can therefore
assume that children will be a source of influence on their parents, so the latter should buy
more organic products. This mechanism is called reverse socialization and is one of the
particular points in the theory of consumer socialization.

3
Firstly, we present the theoretical approaches underlying our research assumptions. Secondly,
we discuss the methodology that was implemented. The third part focuses on results and
discussion.

Subjective norms, attitudes and consumer behaviour

This section deals firstly with the role of subjective norms in relation to the theory of planned
behaviour and is followed by a discussion of research into consumer socialisation with
particular reference to reverse socialisation.

The role of subjective norms in the theory of planned behaviour

The theory of planned behaviour (TPB) is one of the dominant models that explain consumer
behaviour. This theory is an extension of the theory of reasoned action (TAR) (Fishbein &
Ajzen, 1975). According to TAR, behaviour results directly from behavioural intention, which
is itself determined by attitudes towards behaviour and subjective norms. Attitude
corresponds to the evaluation of behaviour and is determined by beliefs about the expected
results of behaviour. Subjective norms include both descriptive norms (an individual's
perception of the practices of his or her social entourage) and injunctive norms (an
individual’s perception of social pressure). Ajzen (1985) developed this social cognitive
model to create the theory of planned behaviour in order to take into account the fact that
some behaviours are not under the total control of individuals. The concept of “perceived
behavioural control” was introduced and is considered to have an impact on both purchase
intention and behaviour itself. In the field of organic products, the TCP was successfully used
to account for purchase intentions in various countries as evidenced by the literature review
published in 2009 by Aertsens et al. However, this research only concerns the impact of the
introduction of organic food products in school cafeterias on the beliefs about the expected
outcomes of behaviour, attitudes towards purchasing organic products and parents’ frequency
of purchase. The variable “perceived behavioural control” has not therefore been mobilized in
our work. More precisely, the issue we are interested in is to find to what extent the creation
of a subjective norm (the adoption of organic products in school canteens) can impact beliefs,
attitudes, and ultimately parents’ behaviours.

The TCP by definition includes the assumption that subjective norms impact behavioural
intentions and thus behaviours. As part of our research, this hypothesis corresponds to the
idea that parents tend to follow up on the effort made by the canteen, all the more so when

4
they believe organic products can benefit their children’s health. This trend may also be
related to a single chameleon effect relatively to the institution the school represents. When
parents see that this institution, with its aura of public legitimacy, engages in such food
policy, they can feel encouraged to take a serious view of the ways they feed their children
and emulate canteen practices. Parents’ motivations may also have to do with trying to avoid
guilt-feelings (Bamberg & Möser, 2007) associated with purchases of lower quality for their
children, in the face of the example set by the institution.
H1: the introduction of organic products in canteens positively influences the purchasing
behaviours of pupils’ parents.

The hypothesis of a link between subjective norms on one hand and beliefs and attitudes on
the other has been studied to a lesser extent. However, this hypothesis seems relatively
obvious: beliefs are stored mental representations and they can be shaped only through
information received either from the environment (society, media, and advertising stimuli) or
from the individual’s own experience. The hypothesis of the relationship between subjective
norms and beliefs (henceforth on attitudes) was already tested and validated regarding the
consumption of organic products in Finland (Tarkianen & Sundqvist, 2005). Möser and
Bamberg (2007), in their meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental
behaviours, confirm this hypothesis. Their work shows that injunctive norms have a greater
impact on attitudes and perceived behavioural control than on intentions.
H2: the introduction of organic products in canteens positively affects parents’ beliefs vis-à-
vis organic products.
H3: the introduction of organic products in canteens positively affects attitudes towards
purchasing organic products among pupils’ parents.

The core of TCP has been supplemented by various authors who have changed the theory by
adding variables likely to affect purchase intentions. This is particularly the case with regard
to work on organic products marketing and on consumers’ subjective knowledge. The level of
knowledge about organic products affects purchasing decisions insofar as it is the only
instrument consumers have when trying to differentiate between the attributes of bios
products from the others and many other studies show that lack of information is a major
reason why consumers do not buy organic products (Aertsens et al., 2009, Magistris T. &
Gracia, 2008). Within the TCP, the level of subjective knowledge has been successfully added
regarding organic products (from Magistris & Gracia, 2008 Aertsens et al., 2011). This level

5
of knowledge is itself a function of the information provided by the social and institutional
environment (de Magistris & Gracia, 2008). The introduction of organic products in canteens
is likely – thanks to the information and interest it generates among parents, but also because
it can lead to discussions between parents – to increase their subjective knowledge.
H4: the introduction of organic products in canteens positively affects the level of subjective
knowledge about organic products among pupils’ parents.

The activation of a subjective norm around the consumption of organic products for pupils’
parents at least implies that they are aware of their introduction. Moreover, the more frequent
the introduction of organic products will be, the more regular the flow of information on their
introduction and the more efficient it can be expected to be. If it is a one-off occasion during
the year (1 meal per year) it is very likely that parents will not be informed or, if they are, they
will quickly forget this event or give it little importance. A frequent introduction therefore
increases the potential impact on parents. Also, a frequent introduction is likely to generate
discussions between parents when they come to pick up their children at school or in the
neighbourhoods. Introduction frequency can be a moderating variable of the impact of their
introduction on beliefs, attitudes, subjective levels of knowledge and parents’ purchasing
behaviour.
H5: the more frequent the introduction of organic products in canteens is, the stronger its
impact on a) beliefs, b) attitudes, c) and on the level of subjective knowledge and d) parents’
purchasing behaviours.

The influence of children on parents’ purchasing decisions

The injunctive norms the introduction of organic products in canteens can generate include
the potential influence that children might have on their parents. Indeed, practices in canteens
are one of the factors involved in the construction of children’s food repository next to the
influence of parents, peers, media, or then again, grandparents (Ayadi & Bree , 2010). This
theme is part of the work on consumer socialization (Ward, 1974, Moschis & Moore, 1979,
Brée, 1993). This research focuses on children, even if recent approaches include the notion
that consumer socialization cannot be so restricted in scope and should cover all phases of
consumers’ lives (Ekström, 2006, De La Ville & Tartas, 2011). In this research we set as a
postulate that the introduction of organic products in school canteens affects children’ frame
of reference but we will not directly verify this item. The result will be noticed indirectly

6
through the influence of children on their parents. This is, within the theory of consumer
socialization, the theme of reverse socialization (Box 1).
Box 1: Reverse socialisation or the influence of children on the purchase decisions of
parents
Work on this topic (Easterling et al., 1995, Foxman et al., 1989, Gaumer & Arnone, 2010,
Gollety 1999, Levy & Lee, 2004, Larsson et al., 2010, Mangleburg, 1990, Martensen &
Grønholdt, 2008, Powell et al., 2011, Thomson et al., 2007) show that the influence of
children on parents’ purchasing decisions is real; their influence bears more on products
children consume themselves (cereals, candy, toys, etc..) (Levy & Lee, 2004, Martensen &
Grønholdt, 2008); the older the children, the greater their influence (Mangleburg, 1990,
Martensen & Grønholdt, 2008); that influence is perceived positively by parents and the
child’s knowledge of the product increases its potential influence because of his/her ability to
justify its purchase suggestions (Thomson et al., 2007). Note that recent research shows that
even young children (3-8 years) are likely to exert such influence (Powell et al., 2011). Other
research shows that children sometimes positively influence their parents on pro-
environmental behavior (Easterling et al., 1995, Larsson et al., 2010

As with the previous hypotheses, this influence may have an impact on beliefs, attitudes, level
of subjective knowledge and the purchase behaviour of parents.
H6: children who have consumed organic food products at their school cafeteria positively
influence a) the beliefs, b) the attitudes, c) the level of subjective knowledge and d) the
purchase behaviour of parents.

However, it seems necessary to qualify the intensity of this influence with at least two
moderating variables: children’s satisfaction vis-à-vis the organic products they ate in the
canteen and the frequency of introduction. It seems logical that the more satisfied children are
with these products, the more they will ask their parents to buy them. That influence will also
be conditioned by the fact that they have learned the reasons for, and the conditions of,
organic farming, and by their subsequent ability to persuade their parents of the validity of
their knowledge (Thomson et al., 2007). Now we can assume that the more frequent the
introduction is and the more likely it can be said to be the institution’s comprehensive policy,
and the more information children will have on what organic products are and the reasons for
their existence. Therefore, the frequency of introduction may be another moderating variable
of children’s influence on their parents.
7
H7: satisfaction levels of children moderate the influence that they exercise over their parents.
H8: frequency of introduction of organic food products in school cafeterias moderates the
influence that children exercise over their parents.

Methodology
From a methodological point of view the study is based, firstly, on the comparison between
beliefs, attitude, subjective knowledge and reported behaviours of parents whose children
receive organic products in their canteen (this survey is called “canteen investigation”
thereafter) versus those whose children have only “conventional” meals. As for parents
whose children only have “conventional” meals, we rely on a general survey administered
face to face to some the Midi-Pyrénées region consumers. This survey was designed in
conjunction with this study and was conducted by the same research team. It belongs, like the
present study, to the marketing component of the research program on organic farming in the
Midi-Pyrénées, funded by INRA and the Midi-Pyrénées regional authorities. This survey,
called “baseline survey” thereafter, is built on the basis of TCP (Ajzen, 1985), with a view to
understanding intentions to purchase organic products. For the comparison with the “canteen
investigation” to prove as relevant as possible, we have selected, in this baseline survey,
respondents whose children are 3-15 years old (in primary school and junior high school),
because the “canteen investigation” has been conducted at these school-levels.

Measuring instruments
Here are the variables common to both surveys (the “baseline” and “canteen” ones):
- Beliefs about the expected benefits (Likert scales in 6 points): beliefs about the higher taste
quality of organic products (item: How likely do you think it is that organic products might
taste better than conventional products), beliefs about the environmental benefits of organic
farming and beliefs about health benefits. These three beliefs are the main sources of
motivation to purchase organic products in whichever countries the studies were conducted in
(Aertsens, 2009);
- The overall attitude towards the purchase of organic products (6-point scale): In general,
your attitude towards buying organic food is ... 1 negative / 6 positive;
- The level of subjective knowledge (6-point scale): I know a lot about organic farming;
- The frequency of purchase, with the following item: among the following alternatives,
choose the one that best describes your purchasing behaviour of organic products (7 possible

8
answers: “I have never bought or planned to buy organic food” to “I buy organic products
whenever possible”).

The “canteen” survey includes, in addition to the variables from the previous survey,
questions about:
- Information about the introduction of organic products in the canteen;
- Children’s satisfaction vis-à-vis the organic products available in the canteen (6-point scale);
- Children’s requests, “has your child ever asked you to buy organic food? (Yes, while we
were shopping; Yes, during meals; Yes, back from school, No, he has never asked me for it);
- Parents’ wishes about having organic produce in the meals offered more often at the canteen
(a 6-point likert scale);
- Willingness to pay more (knowing that a meal at the canteen costs €2.501 on average, would
you be prepared to pay more for your child to enjoy organic food at the canteen? No, Yes, €
2.62 (i.e. 5% more than the current price of the meal) Yes, € 2.75 (i.e. 10% more than the
current price of the meal) Yes, 3 € (20% higher than the current price of the meal) Yes, € 3.25
(30% more than the current price of the meal).

Data Collection
The baseline survey was conducted with any type of consumer, face to face, in 3 cities
(Toulouse, Tarbes, Rodez) in the Midi-Pyrénées region. 1055 questionnaires were collected.
For the comparison with the “canteen investigations” to prove as relevant as possible we
extracted from the database a stratum containing only respondents with children going to
primary and junior high-school (between 3 and 15 years of age). This stratum contains 277
observations, 58.1% of which from women, 56.7% aged 40-49 and 37.5% aged 25-39.

For the “canteen investigation”, it was necessary, first, to identify and select school canteens
where organic produce is available. To locate these canteens we contacted several sources:
suppliers of organic food products for school cafeterias, associations of organic food
producers, organic farming advisors from the chambers of agriculture in French
“départements” (administrative districts), members of regional councils who are in charge of
school cafeterias and the association named “Les cuisiniers du midi”, whose members are
school cafeteria cooks in Midi-Pyrénées. An initial list of canteens was obtained as a result of

1
That price was found after a survey sent to school-bursars (see infra). Prices range between €2.12 and €2.87,
and €2.50 on average.

9
these interviews. Moreover, we conducted a questionnaire sent by Internet to all school-
bursars in the region, to identify their practices in terms of introducing organic products in
their canteens (type of ingredients, frequency, animation, number of meals, budget matters,
food prices, etc.). Questions also focused on the main challenges and on the need for a guide
in the matter. 42 bursars responded (out of around 350 of them).

These elements have allowed us to select canteens according to their feeding practices in
terms of introducing organic produce. Each school was then contacted by telephone to refine
the selection (with details on how to introduce organic food) and, subsequently, to obtain the
bursar’s and school principal’s permissions to administer questionnaires to parents (through
their children). Our selection led us to retain eight institutions (Table 1).

Table 1
The schools selected in the canteen survey
School Ways of introduction Number
Level
of
question
naires
1 Primary Ingredients (fruits, vegetables, bread, legumes) each week 191
2 Primary and Ingredients (meat, bread, legumes) sometimes during the
junior-high year 185

3 Primary and Ingredients (vegetables) sometimes during the year

junior-high 163

4 Primary Two 100% organic meal per week 83

5 Ingredients (fruits, végetables, bread, legumes) and
Junior high several 100% organic meals sometimes during the year 75
(in 2008)
6 Two 100% organic meal per week, all fruits served
Primary 51
during the week.
7 Primary and Ingredients (fruits, vegetables) sometimes in the year
junior-high 47

8 Ingredients (bread, vegetables) sometimes during the year

Junior high 24
(in 2008)
TOTAL 819

10
The overwhelming majority of the establishments selected were located in rural areas. In fact,
it was difficult in 2009 to find establishments in urban areas committed to an organic policy.
This clearly results from the fact that average sized towns and metropolises tend to have
central catering services. Smaller establishments more often have a self-managed catering
service and consequently they can be run more flexibly.

Data collection was carried out in 2009-2010 via a self-administered printed questionnaire to
parents by way of schools. Finally, 819 questionnaires were collected: 342 for elementary
schools, 477 for junior-high level. Mothers responded in most cases (84.2%). In terms of age
distribution, as in the baseline survey, distribution concerns mainly the 25-39 olds (45.3% of
the sample) and 40-49 years olds (46.8%). As for the socio-professional group (SPG), the
canteen survey shows, compared to the baseline survey, an overrepresentation of farmers
(8.3% against 1.5%) and under-representation of managers and higher intellectual professions
(11.7% against 18.1%). This is due to a difference in the places of administration: the baseline
survey was conducted rather in urban areas, and the canteen investigation rather in rural areas.
This difference is a bias to the study but this bias goes against our stated assumptions, since
the SPG+, according to the 2012 “Agence bio” barometer, are better informed about organic
produce and show higher frequencies of organic food consumption than others. Employees
represent the largest share of SPG for both surveys: 47.2% for the canteen survey, 37.8% for
the baseline survey.

Results and Discussion

Four steps will guide us in the presentation of results. The first is to check the main
hypotheses of this research: the introduction of organic food in canteens has an impact on
beliefs, attitudes, subjective knowledge and the behaviours of pupils’ parents. The second step
deals with narrowing down these results based on the frequency of organic food introduction
in the canteen. The third step will attempt to explain the results obtained by examining
children’s influence. The fourth step will address complementary results. It will address
parents’ expectations in terms of organic food in the canteen as well as their willingness to
pay more for it.
Overall impact on parents’ beliefs, attitudes, subjective knowledge and
behaviours

11
We will first deal with the impact on beliefs, attitudes and subjective knowledge; then, in a
second part, with parents’ buying behaviours.

Overall impact on beliefs, attitudes and subjective knowledge

The results (table 2) show a significant improvement in scores for the canteen-survey,
compared to the baseline survey, except regarding attitudes towards purchase. These include
belief scores in terms of taste that are improving (+25.1%) followed by those concerning
environmental benefits (+20.8%) and health (+13%). The subjective knowledge score
increased significantly but to a lesser extent (+9.2%). The reason for the non-significance of
attitudes towards purchasing could come from a) a high score in the baseline survey that
includes a higher percentage of SPG+ than in the canteen survey; b) the need to take into
account barriers to purchase.

Table 2
Comparison of scores (out of 6) for beliefs, attitudes and subjective knowledge
Environment Health Taste Purchase Attitude Subjective knowledge
canteen-survey 5.16 5.22 4.83 4.51 3.19
Baseline Survey 4.27 4.62 3.86 4.61 2.92
Variation +20.8% +13% +25.1% -2.2% +9.2%
F = 114.85 F = 50.05 F = 90.99 F = 7.02
F, p ns
p<0.000 p<0.000 p<0.000 p<0.008

 Overall impact on the frequency of purchase by parents

The second measure for the impact of the introduction of organic food products in school
cafeterias relates to the frequency of purchase by parents (table 3). Frequency was classified
by means of three groups:
- regular purchase: purchase whenever possible, every week
- occasional purchase: purchase 1 to 2 times per month, several times per year
- non-purchase

Table 3
Comparisons for frequency of purchase
Non-Purchase Occasional Purchase Regular Purchase TOTAL
canteen-survey 23.1% 45.8% 29.7% 100%

12
Baseline survey 37.5% 40.8% 21.7% 100%
Variation -38.4% +12.2% +36.8% 100%
chi2 = 21.89, ddl = 2, p<0.000

The results show a significant difference between the two surveys. Parents whose children
had consumed organic food at their school cafeteria made purchases of organic food products
much more often than the baseline survey population: 36.8% higher for regular purchase and
12.2% higher for occasional purchase. The use of organic food in school cafeterias is thus a
means for significantly increasing positive beliefs about organic food, subjective knowledge
and the frequency of purchase of organic food products.

The moderating role of the frequency of introduction

The purpose of this section is to test the hypothesis that more frequent introduction of organic
food products will have a greater impact on parents. This hypothesis is based on the idea that
in order for subjective norms to be activated parents need to be informed about the practices
of school cafeterias and the more regular this flow of information is, the more the impact will
be effective. Frequency of introduction is, in fact, very closely related to information given to
parents (chi2 = 347.41, p<0.000): 75.2% of parents state that they had never heard any
discussion of organic food products in their children’s school when the introduction is
occasional, whereas only 5.5% state this when the introduction is regular. This phenomenon
could be explained, in part, by information sent out by the school (menus sent to parents for
example), but equally parents may receive information by word of mouth when the
introduction is regular.

Two categories of school cafeterias are thus created: regular introduction of organic
ingredients or organic meals (n=325; 3 school cafeterias) v occasional introduction (n=395; 3
school cafeterias). As above, the comparison (table 4) relates to beliefs about the impact of
organic food on the environment and health, the superior taste of organic food, attitudes of
individuals towards the purchase of organic food products and the level of subjective
knowledge. For this comparison, children’s satisfaction in relation to organic food products
consumed at their school cafeteria has also been added. Scores are out of 6 for each variable.

13
Table 4
Comparison of scores (out of 6) for beliefs, attitudes, subjective knowledge and
children’s satisfaction
Purchase Children’s
Environment Health Taste Attitude Knowledge Satisfaction

Regular
5.23 5.23 5.01 4.74 3.30 4.45
introduction
Occasional
5.12 5.22 4.69 4.39 3.13 3.40
introduction
Variation +2.1% 0 +6.8% +8% +5.4% +30.8%
F = 9.38 F = 9.82 F = 2.39 F = 51.31
F,p ns ns
P<0.004 p<0.002 P<0.2 P<0.000
Baseline survey
4.27 4.62 3.86 4.61 2.92
(for reference)

The results (table 4) show significantly higher scores for school cafeterias where organic food
products are introduced regularly, for 4 out of 6 variables. This mainly applies to children’s
satisfaction (item: give a score for the level of satisfaction of your child in relation to organic
food products that are served at the school cafeteria) with a score above 30.8%, attitudes
towards the purchase of organic food products (+8%), belief about taste (+6.8%) and
subjective knowledge (+5.4%). These results tend to validate the moderating role of
frequency of introduction of organic food products in the school cafeteria, in relation to
parents’ beliefs and attitudes. Furthermore, a significantly strong impact on children’s level of
satisfaction is revealed. This could result from better management of supply sources (quality
and price of products) and methods for preparing products resulting from the training of
bursars and kitchen staff.

However, two significant biases may distort these results: overall satisfaction of children, in
general, in relation to the meals served at their school cafeterias and lack of information for
parents in the case of school cafeterias that make occasional introduction of organic food
products. The first bias concerns the possibility that parents’ replies are not related to the
organic food products served at the school cafeteria but rather they are related to the overall
satisfaction in relation to the meals served at the school cafeteria. It should be noted that each
category is based on 3 school cafeterias, which partly limits this bias. For the second bias, it
should be emphasised that 57.5% of the parents concerned (occasional introduction) did not

14
reply to the question about their child’s satisfaction, whereas the figure was only 24% for the
others (regular introduction). Thus, parents who were uninformed about the introduction of
organic food products at the school cafeteria generally did not reply. Lastly, the number of
responses is sufficient for the two categories: 247 responses for the “regulars” and 168
responses for the “occasionals”, but more in-depth research needs to be carried out in order to
confirm these results.

The moderating role of frequency of introduction is also shown for frequency of purchase of
organic food products (table 5): significantly more parents (chi2 = 18.07, p<0.000), whose
children had regularly consumed organic food products at the school cafeteria, were in the
category of regular purchasers (34% more).
Table 5
Comparison of frequency of use with frequency of purchase by parents
Non-Purchase Occasional Purchase Regular Purchase TOTAL
Regular introduction 13.8% 49.2% 37.0% 100%
Occasional introduction 26.1% 46.3% 27.6% 100%
Variation -47.1% +6.2% +34%
Baseline Survey
37.5% 40.8% 21.7% 100%
(for reference)

Over and above the simple observation that the introduction of organic food products in
school cafeterias has an impact on the beliefs, attitudes, subjective knowledge and purchase
behaviour of parents, it is necessary to try to understand the various mechanisms involved in
this. According to the marketing literature, the influence exercised by children over their
parents may be one of these mechanisms. The introduction of organic food products in school
cafeterias may contribute to changes in the range of food eaten by children (Ayadi & Brée,
2010) and children may become a link in terms of influence over parents and a new source for
parents’ injunctive norms.

The influence of children on the beliefs and behaviours of parents

21.2% of children who had consumed organic food products in their school cafeteria
requested their parents to purchase organic food products. These requests were mainly made
at the time of shopping, as opposed to meal times or when coming home from school.
Unsurprisingly, the percentage is significantly higher (chi2 = 13.86, p<0.0002) for children
who were satisfied with organic food products consumed at the school cafeteria (29.8%) than

15
those who were dissatisfied (11.8%). Similarly, and in line with results for the moderating
role of frequency of introduction, this percentage is significantly higher (chi2 = 6,21, p<0.01)
for school cafeterias where the introduction of organic food products is regular rather than
occasional (25.9% v 18%). A significant link (chi2 = 7.67, p<0.006) can also be noted
between the fact that parents were informed about the introduction of organic food products in
school cafeterias and requests made by children. 25.9% of children whose parents were
informed made such requests, as opposed to 17% for children whose parents were not
informed. Thus, it can be suggested that if parents are informed about the introduction of
organic food products at the school cafeteria, this results in the matter being discussed in the
family context and this may result in more requests being made by children.

The impact on parents of children’s requests can be seen in table 6. All scores are
significantly higher when children make requests to parents, especially in relation to
frequency of purchase (+35%) and subjective knowledge (+29%). These results would tend to
confirm the hypothesis that the influence exercised by children is at least part of the process
whereby the introduction of organic food products at school cafeterias has an impact on
parents’ attitudes, level of knowledge and behaviour.

Table 6
Children’s requests and parents’ beliefs, attitudes, subjective knowledge and frequency
of purchase
Children’s Purchase Frequency
Environment Health Taste Knowledge
Requests Attitude of Purchase
Yes 5.49 5.65 5.40 5.15 3.82 5.36
No 5.02 5.09 4.62 4.33 2.96 3.97
Variation +9.3% +11% +16.9% +19% +29% +35%
F, p F = 20.36 F = 25.41 F = 36.01 F = 34.97 F = 40.49 F = 67.28
P<0.000 P<0.000 P<0.000 P<0.000 P<0.000 P<0.000

Additional results: parents’ intentions and willingness to pay for organic food
at school cafeterias
84.1% of the parents surveyed for the school cafeteria survey stated they would like organic
food products to be used more often in meals served at their children’s school. Logically, this

16
wish is significantly related to children’s satisfaction in relation to organic products that are
served at their school cafeteria (chi2 = 45.90, p<0.000): 91.1% of parents whose children
were satisfied as opposed to 64.7% whose children were dissatisfied.

In terms of willingness to pay, 66.8% of parents stated that they were willing to pay more in
order for their children to be given organic food at the school cafeteria. If only the parents
who wanted more organic food to be served at the school cafeteria are included, this
percentage is 76.9%. This last group can be broken down as follows: the majority (52.3%)
stated they were willing to pay 5% more (2.62 Euros), 31.4% stated that they were willing to
pay 10% more (2.75 Euros) and 16.3% stated they were willing to pay 20% more (3 Euros or
more). This willingness is, of course, linked to SPG. Higher professional occupations were
predominant (chi2 = 40.14, p<0.008) amongst those who stated they were willing to pay an
additional 20%: 28.6%, as opposed to 16.3% on average.

Lastly, it should be noted that the financial commitment that parents state they are willing to
make is significantly linked to the various beliefs about the benefits of organic food products,
and attitudes about purchase, subjective knowledge and children’s satisfaction, as is shown by
the results presented in table 7. The most significant variables are, by order of importance,
attitudes towards purchase, beliefs about benefits for health and the quality of organic food
products in terms of taste. This can be linked to the previous results: the introduction of
organic food products in school cafeterias has a positive impact on parents’ beliefs and, as a
result of this, they are willing to pay more for organic food products at the school cafeteria.
However, this is subject to their children being satisfied and information being given both to
children and parents.
Table 7
Willingness to pay and beliefs, attitudes and subjective knowledge of parents and
children’s satisfaction
Purchase Children’s
Environment Health Taste Knowledge
Attitude Satisfaction
No 4.74 4.65 4.20 3.54 2.85 3.40
2.62€ 5.21 5.36 4.91 4.64 3.06 4.17
2.75€ 5.37 5.55 5.19 5.09 3.54 4.49
3€ + 5.62 5.72 5.42 5.41 3.69 4.17
F = 20.37 F = 32.03 F = 26.39 F = 60.37 F = 11.45 F = 11.96
F, p
P<0.000 P<0.000 P<0.000 P<0.000 P<0.000 P<0.000

17
Conclusion
The purpose of this research was to test the hypothesis that the introduction of organic food
products in school cafeterias is likely to have an impact on the pupil’s parents in terms of
beliefs, attitudes, level of subjective knowledge and frequency of purchase. Indeed, the
adoption of this practice by school cafeterias amounts to an extension of parents’ subjective
norms relating to the consumption of organic food products. Results show a significantly
strong impact for most variables (beliefs, subjective knowledge and frequency of purchase) as
well as the moderating role of frequency of use on this impact. Regular introduction (weekly),
as opposed to occasional introduction, markedly increases the impact on the various variables
investigated. Furthermore, the influence that children exercise on their parents has been
identified as one of the mechanisms that explain this impact. Lastly, the various variables
considered are significantly linked to the financial commitments that parents state they are
willing to make in order for their children to have more organic food at their school cafeteria.
From a theoretical standpoint, these results confirm the role of subjective norms in the
formation of beliefs, attitudes and purchasing behaviour, and also the influence exercised by
children in respect of the same variables. They also confirm other research, which has shown
that children can positively influence their parents in relation to pro-environmental behaviours
(Easterling et al., 1995, Larsson et al., 2010). These results also provide some new
information about the moderating variables for these relations: frequency of introduction and
children’s satisfaction.

In terms of actions, some proposals could be made to a) political authorities and b) school
administrators, bursars and kitchen staff. In the case of political authorities (local and regional
authorities), the main suggestion relates to the conditions for granting subsidies provided to
schools for the introduction of organic food products. Schools that introduce schemes for
regular introduction of organic food products (weekly, for example) should be prioritised. It
would seem to be more appropriate to introduce these products regularly rather than
occasionally, whether the meals simply use some organic ingredients or are 100% organic
meals. Regular introduction demonstrates a commitment by all the staff and a genuine school
policy. This then means that there is an institutional plan and leads to real learning, whether
this be in terms of managing supply sources or preparation of products by kitchen staff. In
fact, such a policy may also include kitchen staff training. The allocation of subsidies to

18
schools could specify the need for kitchen staff to participate in learning modules. In the case
of bursars (or managers), education authorities could provide appropriate training in the areas
of organic food sourcing and the control of additional costs associated with the use of organic
food products. According to the research unit of the “Agence Bio”, in institutional catering
services 9 institutions out of 10 that had used organic food products reported an increase in
costs, which is 25% on average. Apart from the guidance information that already exists on
the subject (the National Federation for Organic Farming, the Nicola Hulot Foundation and
Equisol), it should be noted that some institutions have managed to regularly introduce
organic food products in their cafeterias without a significant increase in costs. Thus, in one of
the institutions studied, the kitchen chef stated that the material cost for an organic meal was
1.65 euros, as opposed to 1.75 euros for a conventional meal. This is not an isolated case.
Public authorities could undertake to make a list of these pilot institutions in order to provide
transferable knowledge for all other institutions and to implement training and provide
practical guides for managers. More specifically, this training and practical guidance should
include information about organic food products (background information, nutritional aspects,
health assessment etc.), a public procurement guide, a list of local organic food suppliers in
the French region and “département”, methods for limiting additional costs for ingredients,
examples of menus and sources of information and communication (these points were clearly
made in the small survey of bursars).

For school institutions, apart from awareness that use should be frequent and that staff should
receive the best possible training, it would be appropriate to provide parents and children with
information. This information could be:
- provided to children – at the place of consumption (the cafeteria) by displaying
organic food products in order to give them greater credibility in children’s eyes
(specific presentations of bread for example) and by means of related information
provided in school classes. This would enable children to understand the rationale for
organic food, and the advantages associated with it, and consequently talk about this
with their parents;
- provided to parents – by means of menus sent out to parents, by an exhibition
organised by children during the year, by the involvement of associations for
children’s parents (for example by proposing the idea and requesting parents to
distribute information about this), and by means of an annual questionnaire on the
subject distributed by means of children. This last proposal would provide information

19
 to parents and also encourage discussions on the subject in the family context and
make it possible to measure children’s satisfaction so that possible corrective action
could be implemented. Furthermore, parents would then feel themselves to be
involved in the institution’s policy. This could be facilitated in part by means of IT
support, such as an online questionnaire.
For their part, apart from the need to be trained and present organic products, bursars and
kitchen staff should ensure that some products, such as bread, are freely available (as is
stipulated by the French decree of 30 September 2011 relating to the nutritional quality of
meals served at school cafeterias) in order to ensure that some children do not leave the
cafeteria still feeling hungry if they do not like the particular dishes served.

In more general terms, the results of this study show that school can be a source of education
for both children and parents. Consequently, school classes have an important role and can be
a means for modifying and diffusing certain practices such as reduction in the use of
packaging, sorting waste, energy saving, or even tackling obesity, for example.

This study has certain limitations and would benefit from further research. The main
limitation appears to be that linked to responses relating to children’s satisfaction with the
quality, as they perceive it, of school cafeteria meals, especially when the introduction of
organic food products is occasional. Here it is possible that the respondents were thinking
more about the overall quality of meals than the organic food products that were used from
time to time. One way to overcome this problem would be to carry out a longitudinal study of
one or more school(s) where organic food products are introduced, and examine each phase of
the introduction. Additional research could also be carried out in order to identify the
mechanisms relating to impact. Semi-structured interviews might make it possible to identify
the reasons for the impact on parents. Another limitation arises from the fact that the greater
majority of school cafeterias selected were in rural areas. An additional study of urban areas is
therefore necessary, even if the characteristics of the present study (especially the over-
representation of SPG+ in the baseline survey in relation to the school cafeteria survey)
suggest that the results, in terms of scores obtained, appear to be less significant than they
might otherwise be. Furthermore, this study has not dealt with the differences between the
influence of children according to their age. This may be worth investigating in future
research. Other studies could use the Theory of Planned Behaviour in order to identify the

20
determinants that give rise to intention, on the part of school staff, to introduce organic food
products in the school cafeteria. The issues raised here could also be taken further by
exploring other behaviours, such as sorting waste, reduction in the use of packaging,
consumption of fair trade products etc.

Lastly, the following observations about organic food products in school cafeterias should be
noted. In this survey, 33.2% of children were not satisfied by the organic products served at
their school cafeteria. This figure is high and needs some reflexion. The use of organic food
products in the school cafeteria is often one of the first experiences that children have of such
products and this contributes to the formation of their overall view of organic food in terms of
beliefs and general attitudes. Could it be that these first experiences influence their future
habits as consumers? Could it be they influence the way in which they speak about organic
food with their friends and family etc. and have an impact on the image of organic food?
Whatever the answer might be to these questions, it would seem necessary to ensure that
organic food is not discredited as a result of its use in school cafeterias and therefore care
should be taken over the quality of the products served in terms of taste as well as preparation.
When children find “maggots in their organic rice” or leave the cafeteria “still feeling
hungry”, as was expressed in an informal anecdotal way during the survey, this can give rise
to a significant rejection of organic food and can be a negative influence within the social
network of friends and family. The quantitative objective of 20% of organic food products to
be used in school cafeterias by 2012, set by the French “Grenelle de l’environment” Forum,
needs to also include a qualitative objective: 100% children satisfied and 100% parents
informed.

Bibliography

Aertsens J., Verbeke W., Mondelaers K. et Van Huylenbroeck G. (2009), Personal

determinants of organic food consumption: a review, British Food Journal, 111, 10, 1140-
1167.
Aertsens J., Verbeke W., Mondelaers K., Buysse J. et Van Huylenbroeck G. (2011), The
influence of subjective and objective knowledge on attitude, motivations and consumption of
organic food, British Food Journal, 113, 11.

21
Ajzen I. (1985), From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behaviour, In J. Kuhl et J.
Beckman (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behaviour, 11-39, Heidelberg, Germany:
Springer.
Ayadi K. et Brée J. (2010), Le rôle des interactions au sein de la famille dans la construction
du répertoire alimentaire chez l’enfant. Une approche mésosystémique, Management &
Avenir, 37, 195-214.
Bamberg S. et Möser G. (2007), Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new
meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour, Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 27, 1, 14-25.
Brée J. (1993), Les enfants, la consommation et le marketing, Presses Universitaires de
France, 310 p.
De La Ville V.I. et Tartas V. (2011), De la socialisation du consommateur à la participation
aux activités de consommation : apports de la psychologie socio-historique et culturelle,
Management & Avenir, 42, 133-151.
de Magistris T. et Gracia A. (2008), The decision to buy organic food products in Southern
Italy, British Food Journal, 110, 9, 929-947.
Easterling D., Miller S. et Weinberger N. (1995), Environmental consumerism: A process of
children's socialization and families' re-socialization, Psychology and Marketing, 12, 6, 531-
550.
Ekström K. (2006), Consumer socialization revisited. In R. Belk (ed.), Research in Consumer
Behavior, 10, 10, 71-98, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Fishbein M. et Ajzen I. (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to
Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Foxman E. R., Tansuhaj P. S. et Ekstrom K. M. (1989), Adolescents' influence in family
purchase decisions: a socialisation perspective, Joumal of Business Research, 18, 159-172.
Gaumer C. J. et Arnone C. (2010), Grocery Store Observation: Parent-Child Interaction in
Family Purchases, Journal of Food Products Marketing, 16, 1-18.
Gollety M. (1999), Lorsque parents et enfants s’apprennent mutuellement à consommer…,
Décisions Marketing, 18, 69-80.
Levy D. S. et Lee C.K.C. (2004), The influence of family members on housing purchase
decisions, Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 22, 4, 320-338.
Larsson B., Andersson M. et Osbeck C. (2010), Bringing environmentalism home: Children’s
influence on family consumption in the Nordic countries and beyond, Childhood, 17, 129-
147.

22
 Mangleburg T.F. (1990), Children's influence in purchase decisions: a review and critique,
Advances in Consumer Research, 17, 813-825.
Martensen A. et Grønholdt L. (2008), Children’s influence on family decision making,
Innovative Marketing, 4, 4, 14-22.
Moschis G. et Moore R.L. (1979), Decision-making among the young: a socialization
perspective, Journal of Consumer Research, 6, 101-112.
Powell S., Langlands S. et Dodd C. (2011), Feeding children's desires? Child and parental
perceptions of food promotion to the “under 8s”, Young Consumers: Insight and Ideas for
Responsible Marketers, 12, 2, 96-109.
Tarkianen A. et Sundqvist S. (2005), Subjective norms, attitudes and intentions of Finnish
consumers in buying organic food, British Food journal, 107, 11, 808-822.
Thomson E. S., Laing A. W. et Lorna McKee (2007), Family purchase decision making:
Exploring child influence behavior, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 6, 182-202.
Ward S. (1974), Consumer Socialization, Journal of Consumer Research, 1, 1-14.

23

View publication stats