Surname- Ahmed First Name- Shakil

Unit Title- Masters Project Unit Code- EBSC7545

Project/Component/Essay/Dissertation Title- “Analysis of individuals in the United Kingdom of their preferences between organic and non-
organic food segments”.

Course Unit Leader

Year of Study (e.g. 1st/2nd etc.) Submission Date

For written work (essay, dissertation) please also confirm:

Word Count- 7649

Use of proof-reader/proof-reading service YES NO

(see guidance contained in Academic Misconduct Regulations

on appropriate use)

For practical work please also complete:

Describe the type and volume of work you are attaching Received
by:
(e.g. 1 x journal, 4 x images)

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Staff initials

By submitting this assessment you are confirming that you have understood and are complying with the University’s Academic
Misconduct Regulations (available to view under Student Regulations on myUCA).

Plagiarism Detection (Turnitin)

UCA uses Turnitin (an on-line text matching tool) to help identify cases of plagiarism. Turnitin will compare a submitted
assignment with a database of journal articles, books, web pages and previously submitted assignments. For more information
on plagiarism and Academic Integrity please see: https://mylibrary.uca.ac.uk/friendly.php?s=academicintegrity

Signature (Student): ___________________________ Date: _____________________

Abstract

Purpose – The study's focus is on British consumers, especially those Gen Z

generations, and their perspectives and habits in relation to organic and conventional
food items. The primary objective of this research is to provide light on what drives
people to make these choices and how factors like money and the environment
factor in.

Methodology– The sample size of this research was 40 participants from the United
Kingdom. Multiple regression analysis was used to examine the impact of factors
including price, quality, health, and consumer agency on people's preferences
between organic and conventionally cultivated goods.

Findings – According to the study's findings, price differences are the single most
important factor in influencing consumers' decisions across all age groups and
income levels in the United Kingdom. This points to the importance of economic
factors in influencing people's food choices. Results show that there is a
considerable discrepancy between how organic and conventionally cultivated
products are perceived in terms of quality by customers.

Practical implications – The results have practical consequences for food sector
policy makers and stakeholders in the United Kingdom. Pricing plans and marketing
campaigns may be aided by an awareness of the impact prices have on consumers'
decisions.

Originality/value– This research adds to the current body of knowledge by

illuminating the preferences of British consumers, with an emphasis on the millennial
generation, as it relates to the organic vs conventional food market.

Key word – Organic food, Non-organic food, Consumer preferences, Generation Z,

Pricing, Quality, Health, Decision-making, United Kingdom, Sustainability.
Acknowledgement

The completion of my dissertation would not have been possible without the help of
many people, and I am grateful to each and every one of them. My deepest gratitude
goes to my professors and other teachers who helped me much with my study. I owe
a great debt of gratitude to the individuals whose candid responses made this
research feasible. In addition, I appreciate the support and patience of my loved
ones during this ordeal. Their confidence in me was an unending source of drive.
Without the help of so many people and organisations, this study never would have
been completed.
Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction.......................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background of the Research.........................................................................................1
1.2 Problem statement and rationale.......................................................................................1
1.3 Research Aim, Objectives & Questions............................................................................2
Chapter 2: Literature Review.............................................................................................................4
2.1 Consumer behavior in the food industry............................................................................4
2.2 Factors affecting organic food prices.................................................................................5
2.4 Price trends in organic and non-organic food platform....................................................5
2.5 Gen Z as a target customer group.....................................................................................6
2.6 Impact of price hikes towards the Gen Z consumer behaviour......................................8
2.7 Research gap........................................................................................................................9
2.8 Structure for Evaluating Changes in Consumer Behaviour, Price Sensitivity, Value
Perception, Income, and Regulatory Policies.......................................................................10
Chapter 3: Methodology...................................................................................................................12
3.1 Research Model..................................................................................................................12
3.2 Philosophy...........................................................................................................................13
3.3 Approach.............................................................................................................................13
3.4 Methodological Choice......................................................................................................14
3.5 Strategy...............................................................................................................................14
3.6 Project Ethical Consideration............................................................................................15
Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion...............................................................................................16
4.1 Interview overview..............................................................................................................16
4.2 Data analysis- Regression................................................................................................16
4.3 Data analysis- Descriptive Statistics................................................................................19
4.4 Discussion...........................................................................................................................22
4.5 Study limitation...................................................................................................................23
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendation..............................................................................25
5.1 Conclusion...........................................................................................................................25
5.2 Recommendations.............................................................................................................26
Bibliography.......................................................................................................................................28
Appendix............................................................................................................................................33
List of Figures

Figure 1: Conceptual framework (self-made)............................................................10

Figure 2: Saunders Research Model (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2016)...........12
List of Table

Table 1: Respondents...............................................................................................16
Table 2: Gender group..............................................................................................16
Table 3: Age..............................................................................................................16
Table 4: Regression statistics...................................................................................17
Table 5: ANOVA........................................................................................................17
Table 6: Regression statistics detailed outcome.......................................................17
Table 7: Descriptive statistics....................................................................................20
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background of the Research
The study's context is the developing and ever-changing nature of the British food
sector, especially as it relates to organic and conventionally produced foods.
Because of health and environmental concerns, there has been a shift in recent
years toward healthier and more sustainable consumption practices as discussed by
Singh & M (2021:7). Generation Z, those people born between the late 1990s and
the early 2010s, have embraced this trend with their own ideals and perspectives on
food. Within this framework, the study intends to examine how price increases affect
the purchase habits of Generation Z customers in the UK, with a focus on the
distinction between organic and non-organic food goods. Given their prominence as
the demographic group most likely to shape the future of consumer markets, the
decision to zero in on Generation Z is crucial. Businesses, politicians, and marketers
that want to match their plans with shifting consumer tastes and environmental
concerns might benefit from understanding how this generation reacts to price
variations in the organic and non-organic food industries. It may also help us
understand the market for organic goods and provide suggestions on how to
encourage younger people in the UK to make healthier food choices.

1.2 Problem statement and rationale

Sustainability, health, and environmental issues have all become more important in
recent years, prompting widespread changes in the global food sector , according to
Bedford (2023). There has been a significant change, with the rising demand for
organic foods being a major factor. Food costs have also increased significantly
recently. This dissertation seeks to address the pressing problem of rising costs of
organic and conventional foods in the United Kingdom and their effect on the
spending habits of the millennial generation. Understanding how price variations
impact the decisions of this generation, born between the mid-1990s and the early-
2010s, regarding their purchases of organic and non-organic food is crucial since
this group constitutes a significant section of the consumer base and is distinguished
by its distinct views and tastes highlighted by Singh (2021:6).

1
The decision between organic and conventionally grown foods is not only an issue of
taste, but also of health, sustainability, and the environment. The purported health
advantages and lower environmental effect of organic food have led to a boom in
demand in the United Kingdom (Govt. UK, 2021). Nevertheless, inflation, supply
chain disruptions, and altering consumer tastes have all contributed to a rise in food
costs that has corresponded with the rise in demand. Businesses, governments, and
the agriculture sector would be well served by learning how Generation Z customers
are affected by these price increases. This study will shed light on whether or not the
increased cost of organic and non-organic food is discouraging Generation Z
consumers from making healthy and environmentally friendly purchasing decisions
and will provide suggestions for overcoming potential barriers to increasing
sustainable food consumption within these young people.

1.3 Research Aim, Objectives & Questions

Research aim: This research aims to determine whether higher prices for organic
products have an impact on consumers' purchasing decisions and preferences.

Research objectives:

 To examine the pricing differences between normal and organic food goods
on the UK market and determine how the cost gap would affect Generation Z
consumers.
 To comprehend the financial, budgetary, and environmental issues that
influence Generation Z customers' decisions between organic and non-
organic goods.
 To evaluate prospective changes in Generation Z consumers' purchasing
behaviour and to determine how recent price rises affect Generation Z
consumers' decisions to purchase organic and non-organic goods.
 To create practical suggestions for marketers, decision-makers, and organic
food businesses that would enable effective targeting of Generation Z
customers by matching marketing tactics to their tastes and price sensitivity.

Research questions:

 To what extent do price variations between organic and conventionally grown

food in the United Kingdom affect the purchasing habits of millennials?

2
 When deciding between buying organic and conventional products, what
impact do issues like cost and sustainability have in Generation Z customers'
decisions?

 What effect have the recent price increases in organic and non-organic food
goods had on the purchasing habits of UK consumers in the millennial
generation?

 How can these results be translated into actionable advice for organic food
producers, marketers, and decision-makers, keeping in mind the preferences
and price sensitivity of Generation Z consumers?

3
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Eating in a way that is more sustainable and being more health conscious are two of
the consumer concerns that are developing at the quickest rates, and both trends
have had a significant impact on the food industry. As a consequence of this, there
has been a continuously growing demand for organic food. This literature study aims
to provide a comprehensive understanding of the price increase analysis of organic
and non-organic items in the United Kingdom, with a particular focus on the
investigation of the shopping patterns of millennials and members of Generation Z.
In order to do this, we will conduct research on a wide range of topics to understand
more about the factors that determine the price of organically and conventionally
produced products, as well as how Generation Z consumers make sense of the
many available alternatives.

Conceptual Framework

2.1 Consumer behavior in the food industry

The organic and conventional food markets are complex, and only an understanding
of consumer behavior can help businesses navigate them. Attitudes, tastes, and
buying habits are only few of the topics already investigated in-depth by the current
corpus of research on consumer behavior. An important research was undertaken in
this setting by Bogueva, Diana, and Marinova’s (2020:148), which provides insight
into the dynamic nature of customer tastes. They discovered a noteworthy trend
among consumers, particularly among members of Generation Z (Gen Z): a
heightened concern for the environmental influence of food choices.

One factor that impacts market dynamics is the price structure of organic
commodities. Das et al., (2020:73) undertook an in-depth investigation in the farming
sector of these factors to help throw light on the many factors at play. Due to the
additional overhead associated with organic farming, the price of organic food is
often higher than that of conventionally farmed food. Higher production expenses are
associated with this method since it requires foregoing the use of synthetic inputs
like insecticides and fertilisers. De Roest et al. (2018:229) argued over the farming
within the supply and demand for organic foods have a crucial effect in determining
market prices. According to Rana, Jyoti, and Paul (2017:163) analysis in order to

4
evaluate the effects of price shifts, it is crucial to have an understanding of the
elements that affect the cost of organic food. Understanding the complicated nature
of price hikes in organic goods in light of the discerning tastes and moral convictions
of the millennial generation may require zeroing in on a few key drivers.

2.2 Factors affecting organic food prices

According to Organic Agriculture (2023) the rigorous certification criteria placed on
organic growers are also a significant driver. Additional expenditures in
infrastructure, paperwork, and compliance mechanisms are generally required to
meet the standards for organic certification. This increases the total cost of
manufacturing, which is then reflected in increased pricing for the final product. On
top of the initial investment, maintaining certification requires on-going testing and
inspections.

The stringent cultivation procedures used in organic agriculture contribute

significantly to the higher prices of organic commodities. According to Basha, Bilal,
and Lal (2019:99) organic farming's foundational rejection of synthetic pesticides and
fertilizers raises production costs. Organic farmers must spend more time and
money on non-chemical pest management and soil improvement strategies, which
drives up production costs.

Data from the Organic Trade Association (2023) suggests that the supply and
demand dynamics of the organic market directly affect the cost of organic goods.
Waltower explained in her news article (2023) that availability and changes in
customer demand are two factors that might affect the cost of organic goods.
Organic food costs may increase when demand exceeds supply, as has happened in
the past. The opposite is true during periods of oversupply or decreased demand,
when prices may level off or even fall.

As organic food prices continue to rise, it is important to have a firm grasp on the
many factors that go into setting such prices (Varanasi, 2019). The complexity of the
organic food supply chain is reflected in the higher costs associated with producing
and distributing these foods. This background information will be essential as we dig
into researching how Generation Z customers react to these price dynamics,

5
shedding light on the distinctive difficulties and potential of organic food pricing in the
UK.

2.4 Price trends in organic and non-organic food platform

Singh et al. (2017:480) study demonstrates that past pricing patterns for both organic
and conventional goods in the UK is crucial for understanding the current market
situation. The purpose of this literature review section is to provide useful
background for understanding the dynamics of price increases and their possible
repercussions by shedding light on trends and swings in prices within each of these
categories.

The relative pricing of organic and conventional foods have changed significantly
over the last decade, according to Milford et al. (2021:17-18). These swings, the
reasons of which are not necessarily directly connected to manufacturing costs, have
thrown into sharp relief the complexity of price dynamics. For instance, the cost of
organic produce may briefly rise if there is a surge in consumer demand. However,
price stability or even decline might result from economic downturns and shifts in
agricultural practises. However, research by Meemken et al. (2018:57) shows that
the higher price that organic goods seem to have is deceptive. Like the conventional
food market, the organic food market is very unpredictable. Seasonal fluctuations in
supply and demand, changes in consumer tastes, and the state of the global
economy might all play a role in these variations. Keeping an eye on these
tendencies over time might provide light on what drives price hikes and how that can
affect consumers' purchasing decisions. Schahczenski (2019) conducted a detailed
analysis of the price of organic and conventionally grown food and found a significant
price disparity. According to their findings, organic goods have consistently had a
higher price tag than their conventionally grown equivalents. Possible reasons for the
price difference include the fact that conventional farms often utilise synthetic inputs
like pesticides and fertilisers, while organic farms typically do not.

In conclusion, the historical price patterns of organic and non-organic foods

demonstrate that, although organic goods have consistently demanded higher costs
owing to their production techniques, both categories have been vulnerable to price
volatility. These shifts, which are caused by a web of circumstances, may tell us a lot
about the causes and consequences of price increases. We can better understand

6
the implications of price increases in organic and non-organic foods for Generation Z
consumers and the food industry in the UK if we have a firmer grounding in the
historical trends that have led to these increases.

2.5 Gen Z as a target customer group

People born in the 1990s and 2010s, who make up Generation Z, are becoming
more influential in the debate over whether or not organic or conventionally grown
foods are better for human health. Wang et al. (2017:545) found that this cost of
organic and non-organic costs impact towards the generation stands out from others
because of their predilection for making ethical and environmentally responsible
purchases. According to Ottman, Jacquelyn's research from (2017) the recent price
increases in organic goods, it would be interesting to learn more about Generation Z
and their pronounced dedication to social and environmental ideals. Studies by
Ghazali et al. (2017:160) and Meesala et al. (2018:266) examine how members of
Generation Z react to price increases has the potential to shed light on the strength
of their sustainability values and reveal the complex forces at work in their spending
habits.

The research by Martinez and Lee (2017) highlights the changing landscape of
consumer preferences by indicating that Generation Z is more likely to adopt
environmentally responsible buying habits than older generations. According to their
research, members of Generation Z are more likely to purchase goods and services
from companies who share their ethical beliefs and care about the environment. This
philosophy permeates even their dietary preferences; they show a marked
preference for organic foods because of the value they place on environmental
consciousness and health.

As the food business faces difficulties due to price increases in organic goods, it is
critical to comprehend how Generation Z responds to these shifts. Previous studies
show that consumers' price sensitivity varies across demographics, as explained by
Lee et al. (2023:257). Because of their inherent concern for the environment,
members of Generation Z may be better able to weather the inevitable organic food
price hikes. It is still important to study this group in depth since not all members of
Generation Z will react the same way to pricing adjustments. bAccording to research
by Dabija et al. (2018:201) on the nuances of consumer behavior since factors like

7
wealth, geography, and individual priorities all have the potential to affect consumers'
purchasing decisions.

Simply put, studying how members of Generation Z react to increases in the cost of
both organic and conventionally grown food may provide important information about
the depth of this demographic's commitment to sustainability and the variables that
influence their purchasing decisions. This study adds to our knowledge of the shifting
dynamics within the food sector as a whole and provides useful information for
companies who want to better serve this key demographic.

2.6 Impact of price hikes towards the Gen Z consumer behaviour

A major focus of this study is on how price increases affect the purchasing decisions
of consumers from Generation Z (Gen Z). Generation Z's sensitivity to price changes
in organic food provides valuable insight into their priorities and beliefs as shoppers.
Taylor et al. (2019) dug deep into the dynamics between price sensitivity and
consumer groups, finding that price perceptions vary widely across populations.

With this in mind, investigating the distinct shopping behaviours of Generation Z is

an intriguing area of study. People born in the 1990s and 2010s are often said to
have a deep moral commitment to eco-friendly practises and an acute awareness of
social and environmental challenges. According to an article of Social Samosa
(2022) members of Generation Z may have an uncommon capacity to endure certain
price increases in organic items due to their commitment to making environmentally
responsible choices.

However, Gazzola et al. (2020:2809) and Taher & Ghada (2021:162) mentioned
that there may be diverse subgroups within the Gen Z cohort who react differently to
price increases in organic goods. When confronted with higher organic food costs,
some millennials and gen z-ers may choose less healthy, less expensive options.
Recognizing the generation's wide range of reactions to price changes is key to
appreciating their resiliency. Argued by Goh et al. (2019:132) that organic foods
may be especially important to certain segments of the target market, Generation Z,
because of their strong beliefs in social justice and environmental consciousness.
According to Szymkowiak et al. (2021: 101565) study generation Z care about the
health of themselves and the planet, so much so that they are willing to spend extra

8
for organic food. Kapferer et al. (2021:310) study showed in this area is crucial
because customers' ethical convictions may influence their purchasing decisions
despite price increases.

This complex examination of how price increases affect millennials has implications
for both academics and the food industry. It helps us understand the complexities of
consumer behavior and educates organic food producers and politicians on the
possible outcomes of different pricing approaches. This study intends to provide light
on the long-term viability of ethical consumption patterns and the future trajectory of
the organic food business by analyzing the relationship between Gen Z's ethical
values and their reactions to price fluctuations.

2.7 Research gap

Despite the wealth of literature on consumer behavior in the framework of organic
and non-organic food markets, however is still a significant knowledge vacuum when
it comes to the complex reactions of Generation Z shoppers to price increases in the
UK's organic food industry. While previous research has shown that members of
Generation Z are more environmentally conscious and willing to pay a premium for
sustainable and organic goods, there has been relatively little empirical study of the
different segments of this population and their varying responses to price increases.
Closing this information vacuum is crucial because it might reveal more about the
financial status, geographic location, and personal priorities of Generation Z
consumers. If businesses and policymakers want to know if ethical consumption
patterns can be maintained in the long run and what kind of impact this could have
on the future of the organic food industry in the UK, they need to know how different
subsets of Generation Z react to price dynamics in the organic food market.

9
Theoretical Framework

2.8 Structure for Evaluating Changes in Consumer Behaviour, Price

Sensitivity, Value Perception, Income, and Regulatory Policies
If you want to know how millennials and Gen Zers in the United Kingdom's organic
food market think and feel about things like price elasticity, perceived value, income
and affordability, and government laws and regulations, you need to study the
market carefully. The environmental awareness and ethical ideals of Generation Z
are driving their demand for environmentally friendly and organic goods, and this
conceptual framework gives a structured lens through which to explore these novel
dynamics. Businesses and policymakers can better understand the nuances of
Generation Z's responses for pricing fluctuations and the future of the organic food
sector in the UK through delving into the cohort's price sensitivity, perceived value
evaluations, disparities in wealth, and the consequence of regulatory factors.

 Price elasticity

 Consumer behavior
trends

Impact Organic & Non-

 Perceived value
Price Hike Organic Foods in
 Income and the UK
affordability

 Government policies
and regulations

Figure 1: Conceptual framework (self-made)

There are a number of important reasons to investigate the impact of price hikes on
the demand for organic and conventional foods in the UK. Examining past consumer
behaviour patterns is the first step in predicting how individuals, particularly members
of Generation Z, will respond to price hikes in organic and non-organic items. The
consumer behaviour theory application implied that the generation Z shoppers have
significant weight in the organic food market because of their well-known preference
for ethical and eco-friendly goods. As prices increase, producers and regulators may
learn more about customers' propensity to forego organic products in favour of

10
cheaper, conventional ones. The effect of price hikes on customers' perceptions of
organic and conventional products is another factor to consider. If clients are willing
to compromise on quality or sustainability to keep costs down, it might show that
they put a greater value on organic goods.

Second, understanding how changes in food prices impact consumer demand

requires an examination of price elasticity. Elasticity is a measure of the
responsiveness of consumers to price changes. The competitive pricing theory
illustrates that the price between consumer demand can help businesses locate the
sweet spot where they can maximise profits while still meeting customer demand for
organic products, which often cost more than their conventionally produced
counterparts. Looking at the price elasticity of demand for conventional goods may
provide light on the extent to which consumers would switch away from organic
products when their prices increase. Manufacturers and retailers may use this
information to better react to market shifts by altering pricing and discounts
accordingly. Considering how customers' income and pricing impact their choices is
crucial in the UK's diverse market. An analysis of how price hikes affect individuals of
different income levels and their access to organic and non-organic options might
help shape more equitable laws and industry practises. And last, the future of the
organic and conventional food businesses is heavily influenced by government rules
and regulations. A thorough understanding of the feedback loop between rising
prices and the policies at play is essential for both producers and legislators.
Possible applications of this sort of research include the development of subsidy
programmes to reduce the price of organic food and the creation of legislation to
ensure accurate labelling and pricing.

11
Chapter 3: Methodology
3.1 Research Model
This dissertation's research methodology chapter makes use of the research model
developed by Saunders because of its solid foundation and broad application
throughout the social sciences. It provides a methodical strategy for studying the
preferences of people in the UK for organic and non-organic food, including research
philosophy, research design, data collecting, and data analysis. In order to conduct a
thorough study of customer preferences, it is crucial to combine quantitative and
qualitative approaches, which is made possible by the model's adaptability. In
addition, Saunders' approach highlights triangulation, which strengthens conclusions
by drawing from a variety of sources. This all-encompassing structure fits the many
facets of the subject of study well.

Figure 2: Saunders Research Model (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2016)

12
3.2 Philosophy
In the context of comparing the organic and non-organic food sectors in the United
Kingdom, primary survey research will benefit greatly from the positivist mindset. An
important tenet of positivism is an emphasis on empirical evidence, on objectivity,
and on quantifiable results. In this research, it paves the way for the systematic
investigation of customer preferences by collecting quantitative data using surveys
and questionnaires (Park, Konge and Artino, 2020). This study will get more precise
answers from surveys regarding things like pricing, health concerns, and
environmental issues that impact food preferences by taking a positivist stance.

Positivism's superiority over competing ideologies resides in its ability to provide

findings that can be applied to broader contexts (Park, Konge and Artino, 2020).
Positivism offers a strong foundation for data analysis and statistical modelling,
which is especially useful when trying to make sense of a big population's varied
dietary preferences. Research on the preferences of British consumers for organic
vs non-organic food might benefit from this philosophy because of its focus on
establishing causal links and seeing patterns. The goal of the research is to provide
unambiguous, data-driven insights into consumer preferences; yet, adopting an
interpretivist or constructivist philosophy can inject subjectivity and context-
dependent judgements that undermine this goal.

3.3 Approach
In the context of comparing the organic and non-organic food sectors in the United
Kingdom, a deductive technique improves the efficiency of primary survey research.
The process of deductive reasoning entails the generation of testable hypotheses
and subsequent verification via observation and experimentation (Woiceshyn and
Daellenbach, 2018). The study is organised by beginning with preexisting ideas and
research on consumer choices for organic and non-organic food. As a result, this
study carries better tailor the structure, content, and analysis of their surveys to
existing bodies of information (Woiceshyn and Daellenbach, 2018).

The capacity to precisely test hypotheses and derive broad generalisations makes
the deductive method particularly well-suited to this issue. This technique minimises
the potential for erroneous results by limiting the scope of the survey to questions on
respondents' preferences between organic and conventionally grown foods. It also

13
allows for the incorporation of previous research into the analysis, leading to a more
complete comprehension of the many elements that go into shaping consumers' final
decisions. The deductive method guarantees a more rigorous and theoretically
based inquiry, leading to useful insights on the tastes of individuals for organic and
food that is not organic sectors in the UK by methodically evaluating hypotheses
drawn from existing ideas.

3.4 Methodological Choice

This dissertation's use of quantitative methods is crucial to the success of the main
survey study on British consumers' organic and non-organic food choices. It offers a
methodical framework for gathering quantitative information suitable for statistical
analysis. Quantitative methods enable the collection of large, standardised data sets
via the use of instruments like surveys and questionnaires (Savela, 2018). Using this
strategy increases the likelihood that your results are applicable to a wider group.

Significant developments and patterns in consumer tastes can be uncovered with the
use of quantitative research since the magnitude and direction of correlations
between variables can be measured. Software and techniques for statistical analysis
allow for rigorous interpretation of information and hypothesis testing (Savela, 2018).
In addition, data analysis enables comparison of answers across different
socioeconomic categories, providing a more complete picture of the variables
impacting consumers' decisions.

Quantitative research is superior to qualitative approaches for this issue because of

its greater precision and objectivity in producing findings. It's a good option for
studying the complicated and varied topic of people's preferences for organic and
food that is not organic in the UK since it reduces researcher subjectivity and
prejudice and allows the study's to make valid conclusions from the data.

3.5 Strategy
The quantitative method was used for this investigation so that the data could be
collected and analysed in as much detail as possible. As the primary method of
information collection, we will be using structured questionnaires built on Google
Forms. The client preferences, price sensitivity, purchasing behaviours, and
demographics are all covered in the Likert scale questions that are included in the

14
online survey. This method has numerous advantages, one of which is its ability to
produce quantitative data that can be analysed statistically. This will make it easier to
identify trends and patterns in the preferences of consumers who are members of
the Z generation. Google Forms were used to collect answers from those who
participated in the survey. This was done to ensure that the examination into the
organic and non-organic food preferences of this specific UK population was carried
out in an effective and comprehensive manner.

The objective of this research is to collect data from forty individuals randomly
selected from the UK food market. The dependability of research results may be
improved by using a random sampling method, in addition to supplementing
statistical models to give further support for the findings of the study (Ponto, 2015).
Participants have been recruited via the use of social media sites such as Facebook
in order to give a representative cross-section of the population of the UK in terms of
their preferences for organically produced foods as opposed to conventionally
produced meals. This technique guarantees that the research will continue to be of
interest to the target demographic at an affordable price and with a little time
commitment required from them.

3.6 Project Ethical Consideration

This study surveys British residents to determine their preferences between organic
and conventionally grown food. Anonymization and secure data storage protect the
privacy of study participants (Yip, Han and Sng, 2016). Consent is gained after
explaining the nature of the research and the participants' free will, as recommended
by Yip, Han and Sng (2016). The poll was created to keep respondents at ease, so it
doesn't include any very personal questions. All participants' safety and rights are
protected, and the study provides useful information on the organic and conventional
food markets since it follows all applicable ethical standards.

15
Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion
4.1 Interview overview
Total respondents: 40

Table 1: Respondents

The research gathered data from 40 participants in the United Kingdom.

Gender

Male Female

32 8

Table 2: Gender group

The distribution of responders by gender is shown in this table. There were eight
female and thirty-two male responders. Based on the gender distribution, it seems
that men make up the majority of research participants.

Age

18-24 25

25-34 12

35-44 2

45-54 1

55-64 0

Table 3: Age

Understanding the respondents' demographics is crucial for this study, which is why
the age and gender distribution data is significant. When it involves organic versus
non-organic food choices, it can also be helpful for breaking down and evaluating the
preferences of various age and gender groups. The age distribution of those
surveyed among the gender groupings is shown in this table.

4.2 Data analysis- Regression

Regression Statistics

16
 0.87087507
Multiple R 1
R Square 0.75842339
Adjusted R 0.73081463
Square 4
0.25741214
Standard Error 6
Observations 40
Table 4: Regression statistics

ANOVA
Significance
df SS MS F F
1.82021613 27.4703939
Regression 4 7.280864542 5 9 2.28012E-10
0.06626101
Residual 35 2.319135458 3
Total 39 9.6
Table 5: ANOVA

Standard
Coefficients Error t Stat P-value
1.35689471 3.43707761 0.00153344
Preference 7 0.394781517 8 7
1.07331786 6.42357732 2.14525E-
Pricing 7 0.167090363 8 07
0.33927815 2.87735942
Quality 7 0.117913026 3 0.00678952
0.17902263 0.51644595 0.60879087
Health 8 0.346643508 8 3
-
Decision- - 3.13766932 0.00344623
Making 1.11110715 0.354118626 9 8
Table 6: Regression statistics detailed outcome

The major objective of this study is to compare and contrast how people in the
United Kingdom feel about their access to organic and conventional food options.
The statistical analysis of the data provides crucial understanding of the underlying
causes of these choices. Multiple regression analysis findings with a high R-squared
value (0.758) show that the model does a good job of capturing individual differences
in taste. The study's findings bear this out. Important proof for the sanity of the
respondents' decisions and their applicability to the study's aims is provided by the
analysis's results and the ANOVA table.

In addition, the research delves into the financial, economic, and environmental
concerns that are impacting Generation Z consumers' decisions between organic

17
and non-organic product options. The p-value for the coefficient of 0.339 in the
"Quality" variable is also statistically significant (0.00678952), as is the case with the
other variables. This suggests that those who are part of Generation Z are
concerned about the quality of the products they purchase. Organic products often
have a higher level of quality and are produced using production processes that are
more moral. As a result, the weight that greater quality has in their evaluation may be
inferred from this variable.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the price differences between organic and
non-organic food products on the UK market and the impact those price differences
have on consumers of Generation Z. According to the findings of the regression
analysis, the coefficient for the variable titled "Pricing" is found to be 1.073, and its p-
value of 2.14525E-07 indicates that it is statistically significant. This demonstrates
how important pricing is as a factor in determining the decisions that consumers
make. The findings of the study provide credence to the hypothesis that members of
Generation Z, like members of preceding generations, are sensitive to changes in
the cost of living. When the price of organic goods rises in relation to the cost of non-
organic alternatives, it is abundantly evident that individuals will be more prone to
base their selections on financial factors.

The study also investigates how the recent price increases in the market for organic
food may impact the shopping habits of the millennial age. Specifically, the study
looks at how millennials are more likely to purchase items with lower price tags. The
fact that the p-value for the "Decision-Making" variable is so low (0.003446238) gives
credence to the idea that it plays an important role in describing the decisions that
individuals make. It would seem to imply that as the price of organic items goes up,
consumers of Generation Z are more likely to pick alternatives that are not organic
because they are more predisposed to do so. This is in line with the study's primary
objective, which is to provide light on the influence that recent price rises have on the
decision-making processes of consumers.

The fact that the model is able to adequately explain shifts in preferences is further
reinforced by the model's R-squared value, which was found to be 0.730814634 after
being adjusted. This shows that the factors that were included in the regression
model explain a large portion of the difference in the preferences of customers

18
between organically produced food and food that was grown using conventional
methods.

One of the purposes of this research is to assist organic food marketers and
decision-makers in better comprehending the distinct preferences and financial
limitations of the future generation of consumers in order to better appeal to those
preferences and restrictions. The "Preference" coefficient comes in at 1.357, and its
p-value of 0.001533447 indicates that it is a highly significant statistic. This
demonstrates that individual preferences play a significant part in the decisions that
individuals make. As a result, businesses and marketers need to adapt their
marketing strategies and the items they sell to the diverse preferences of members
of Generation Z. It is crucial to have the understanding that there is no silver bullet.

The statistical data analysis provides strong support for the claims that British
consumers have made about their preferences for organic and non-organic food
categories. The analysis' findings on Generation Z customers' price sensitivity,
financial and budgetary constraints, shifting buying habits, and the primacy of
individual taste are highly congruent with the study's stated goals. The results
provide light on the preferences and price sensitivity of this group, providing useful
information for organisations and decision-makers. Informed decision-making and
marketing tactics in the food sector are dependent on a thorough knowledge of the
variables affecting consumers' choices in the organic food market, and this study
helps to that end.

4.3 Data analysis- Descriptive Statistics

Preferen Pricing Quality Health Decisio
ce n-
Making

Mean 3.6 Mean 3.7 Mean 3.3 Mean 3.2 Mean 3.1
916 125 25 75
67
Standard 0.0 Standard 0.1 Standard 0.0 Standard 0.0 Standard 0.1
Error 784 Error 626 Error 768 Error 742 Error 150
46 38 73 48 92
Median 4 Median 4.1 Median 3.2 Median 3.5 Median 3.6
666 5 666
67 67
Mode 4 Mode 4.6 Mode 3.2 Mode 3.5 Mode 3.6
666 5 666

19
 67 67
Standard 0.4 Standard 1.0 Standard 0.4 Standard 0.4 Standard 0.7
Deviation 961 Deviation 286 Deviation 861 Deviation 695 Deviation 279
39 15 87 88 03
Sample 0.2 Sample 1.0 Sample 0.2 Sample 0.2 Sample 0.5
Variance 461 Variance 580 Variance 363 Variance 205 Variance 298
54 48 78 13 43
Kurtosis - Kurtosis - Kurtosis - Kurtosis 0.1 Kurtosis 0.1
1.9 0.4 0.1 583 169
185 100 638 47 36
6 4 1
Skewness - Skewness - Skewness - Skewness - Skewness -
0.4 1.0 0.6 1.1 1.3
243 222 137 919 107
3 3 4 9 5
Range 1 Range 3 Range 1.7 Range 1.5 Range 2
5
Minimum 3 Minimum 1.6 Minimum 2.2 Minimum 2.2 Minimum 1.6
666 5 5 666
67 67
Maximum 4 Maximum 4.6 Maximum 4 Maximum 3.7 Maximum 3.6
666 5 666
67 67
Sum 144 Sum 151 Sum 132 Sum 129 Sum 127
.66 .5
67
Count 40 Count 40 Count 40 Count 40 Count 40
Confidenc 0.1 Confidenc 0.3 Confidenc 0.1 Confidenc 0.1 Confidenc 0.2
e 586 e 289 e 554 e 501 e 327
Level(95.0 73 Level(95.0 67 Level(95.0 9 Level(95.0 82 Level(95.0 95
%) %) %) %) %)

Table 7: Descriptive statistics

Mean values for each choice category (price, quality, health, and decision-making)
should be the first thing to examine. Prices received the greatest average score
(3.791), while health received the lowest (3.791). This suggests that, on average,
persons in the United Kingdom put a considerably larger premium on cost when
selecting their food decisions. This may be related to economics and the cost of
living in the area, indicating that cost is a major consideration.

The lower average score for Health suggests that, although important, health
concerns may not be the predominant motivator for food choice among the sample
population. Important information, since it implies that the widely held belief that

20
organic food is intrinsically healthier may not be as widespread as previously
thought.

Variation in answers within the sample is represented by the standard error values
for each preference category. The large range of answers (standard error =
0.162638282) for the Quality measure suggests that people's perceptions of the
quality of organic and non-organic foods might vary widely. The smaller standard
error for Health (0.07424837) shows more agreement in preferences on health-
related issues, but receiving lower average ratings overall.

Examining the distribution of answers, we notice that the median values for each
preference group are consistently higher than the mean values. This indicates that
the mean may be influenced by extreme values, but the vast majority of people have
a more favourable impression of these features than negative ones.

The mode, which indicates the most common answer, may also provide light on the
general patterns behind these choices. The mode of 4.66666667 in the Pricing
section suggests that many consumers are ready to pay more for organic options.
However, Health and Decision-Making have a lower mean, indicating that most
respondents do not rank them as highly.

How widely spaced are people's preferences within each grouping may be gleaned
from measures of dispersion like standard deviation and sample variance. The
greatest dispersion in opinion is shown for "Quality," both in terms of standard
deviation and sample variation; this reflects the vast variety of perspectives on the
relative quality of organic and non-organic foods. Perhaps the differences in opinion
stem from the elusive nature of good taste and individual tastes.

Information about the shape of the response distribution may be gleaned from
measures of kurtosis and skewness. If the kurtosis statistic for Price and Quality is
negative, it means that the replies are not particularly skewed towards the mean.
However, the Health and Decision-Making metrics also have positive skewness
values, indicating that people are more likely to give those metrics below-average
ratings.

When looking at the range (the difference between the highest and lowest values in
a given category), it becomes clear that the Pricing category has the narrowest

21
range, indicating a very concentrated distribution of answers. In contrast, there is
more variation in responses to the question of quality between organic and non-
organic foods.

The lowest and maximum numbers represent the least and maximum possible
ratings in each preference group. The breadth of responses to these values is
illuminating. The larger range of Pricing suggests that although some people are
prepared to pay a premium for organic produce, others are less willing to do so.

The cumulative preferences and the size of the sample may be shown by adding up
the sum and count values. It is apparent that Pricing is the category with the biggest
cumulative preference, since people tend to score it higher. That's why it's so crucial
that they include prices into their decisions.

Finally, the degree of confidence gives a sense of the extent to which the sample
mean may be trusted. The relatively low confidence levels show that the sample
means are near to the population means, strengthening the dependability of the
results.

4.4 Discussion
The results from the statistical research give useful insights into the preferences of
individuals in the United Kingdom when it comes to selecting between organic and
non-organic food products. To begin, it's obvious that prices have a major impact on
consumer tastes. People in the UK, on average, put a high value on price while
making food purchases, as shown by the fact that the mean score for pricing
obtained the highest rating. This focus on affordability may be strongly related to
economic concerns and the cost of living, indicating that pricing is a significant
priority for consumers. When deciding between organic and non-organic products,
many UK customers, especially members of Generation Z, are driven primarily by
cost considerations.

The results also provide insight into how Generation Z shoppers' concerns about
cost, waste, and the environment affect their preferences for organic and
conventional products. People seem to have different opinions on the relative quality
of organic and non-organic foods, as seen by the large range of answers under the
"Quality" category. Food marketers and producers must be aware of the complexities

22
of customer tastes in order to appeal to the wide range of people who have different
opinions on what constitutes high quality. While our research does not explicitly
account for environmental concerns, the fact that organic alternatives are often seen
as more sustainable suggests that consumers may also take this into account when
making purchases.

The results of the study also hint to prospective shifts in the buying habits of
millennials and the influence of recent price hikes on their final judgements. Despite
the importance of health concerns, the lower average score for "Health" suggests
that they may not be the major motivator of food choices among the sampled group.
This runs counter to the widely held notion that organic food is intrinsically healthier,
suggesting that factors other than nutrition may be more influential. The p-value for
the "Decision-Making" variable is statistically significant in light of the recent price
increases in the organic food market, showing that customers, especially members
of Generation Z, may switch their preferences to non-organic options as costs rise.
This suggests that even among younger, perhaps more health-conscious customers,
price is an important factor in selecting choices.

The study's results are consistent with the aims of the research and provide a
complete picture of the preferences of UK consumers across the organic and non-
organic food categories, with an emphasis on Generation Z. It becomes clear that
pricing is a major concern, suggesting that economics play a significant role in
shaping people's food preferences. These preferences are multidimensional, as
seen by the range of views on quality, the lesser priority placed on health, and the
susceptibility to price fluctuations. Marketers, manufacturers, and retailers in the food
business may use this information to better cater to the tastes and budgets of
customers in the United Kingdom. The key to successfully appealing to the wide
range of interests and priorities that make up Generation Z and beyond is realising
that no one approach will work for everyone.

4.5 Study limitation

The study's sample size of 40 participants is one of its limitations. While the data
gives useful insights into the preferences of people in the United Kingdom, it can not
adequately reflect the variety of the whole population, especially given the complex
and varied nature of consumer preferences. A more rigorous and representative

23
investigation of the UK population's perspectives on organic versus non-organic food
choices would have been possible with a larger sample size, perhaps showing more
subtle variances across age groups, genders, and geographical locations.
Furthermore, although the survey does a good job of illuminating the tastes of the
millennial age, it may not be representative of the larger demographic spectrum,
which includes previous generations and their own priorities when it comes to eating.

24
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendation
5.1 Conclusion
When it comes to deciding between organic and non-organic food categories, this
study sheds light on the preferences of British consumers, particularly those
belonging to Generation Z. The results underline the importance of cost in
influencing these tastes. The fact that pricing obtained the highest average score
demonstrates the weight that customers place on price when making purchases.
This is especially significant in the context of Generation Z, who are recognised for
their budget-conscious and cost-sensitive attitude to consumer decisions. Health
concerns may not be the major driver of food choices in the UK, despite the
widespread belief that organic foods are intrinsically better. Instead, it seems that
people are driven by a mix of variables including taste, quality, and cost according to
the wide range of views on the topic of quality, the relatively low importance placed
on health, and the sensitivity to price fluctuations.

The results of this study also show that the younger generations are sensitive to
price changes in the organic food industry. The significant p-value for the "Decision-
Making" variable indicates that customers, especially the younger generation, are
more likely to pick non-organic alternatives as the price of organic items increases.
This demonstrates how price changes affect purchasing patterns even among more
health-conscious consumers. These results show that adaptability in pricing and cost
management is critical to meet the ever-changing demands of Generation Z and the
general public, which has significant ramifications for the food sector and marketing
tactics.

It is worth noting that this research has several caveats, such as a small sample size
(40 participants), which may not accurately represent the variety of the whole UK
population. A broader and more diversified sample would give a more thorough
knowledge of customer preferences. In addition, although the study's concentration
on millennials and Generation Z offers valuable insights into those demographics'
tastes, it may not be representative of millennials and Gen Z as a whole. Despite
these caveats, the study shows the need for players in the food sector to modify their
tactics to accommodate the different tastes and economic restrictions of consumers

25
in the UK by emphasising the relevance of cost, quality, and taste in customer
decisions. To succeed in the organic food industry and cater to the specific
preferences of the next generation of consumers, businesses must have a firm grasp
of the complexities that go into consumer decision-making.

5.2 Recommendations
Several suggestions has been made in light of the study's results and limitations to
improve this research knowledge of customer preferences between the organic and
non-organic food markets in the United Kingdom. As a first step, this research could
have broaden the scope of their studies by collecting data from a wider range of
people of different ages, income levels, and geographic locations. This would allow
for a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the organic food and conventional
food preferences of various groups in the UK. For a more complete picture of the
modern consumer and their preferences, it would be helpful to delve into the precise
variables that shape the tastes of generations prior to and including Generation Z.

Second, a direct evaluation of the respondents' environmental knowledge and

attitudes should be included in future study if we're to have a more complete picture
of the environmental and sustainability factors impacting consumers' decisions. This
might entail incorporating questions pertaining to environmental issues, such as the
effect of agriculture on global warming, food miles, or packaging supplies. This study
can get insight into a pressing issue in today's food sector by diving further into these
factors: the degree to which British customers place a premium on sustainability and
sustainability when making food purchases. Ways to promote environmentally
friendly food options may be discovered by researching the effect of consumers'
environmental knowledge and awareness on their purchase decisions.

Finally, as the study concentrated mostly on preferences, it would be useful to

supplement it with an in-depth examination of the supply side of the UK's organic
and non-organic food industry. A more complete understanding of why organic food
products are more expensive than their non-organic counterparts may be gained by
looking at manufacturing costs, the supply-chain dynamics, and the regulatory
environment. This would help such research to understand how the economic and
commercial variables influencing the price discrepancies interact with individual
customer choices. To better promote sustainable and inexpensive food options and

26
to eliminate the divide between consumer wishes and market realities, such a two-
pronged approach might be very helpful.

27
Bibliography
Amrhein, V., Trafimow, D. and Greenland, S. (2019) ‘Inferential statistics as
descriptive statistics: There is no replication crisis if we don’t expect replication’ In:
The American Statistician, 73(sup1), pp.262-270. At:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00031305.(2018)1543137 (Accessed
14/08/23).

Basha, M.B. and Lal, D. (2019) ‘Indian consumers' attitudes towards purchasing
organically produced foods: An empirical study’ In: Journal of cleaner production,
215, pp.99-111. At:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095965261833806X (Accessed
13/08/23).

Bedford. (2023) ‘Organic food market in the UK - statistics & facts’. At:
https://www.statista.com/topics/9070/organic-food-market-in-the-uk/#topicOverview
(Accessed 13/08/23).

Bogueva, D. and Marinova, D. (2020) ‘Cultured meat and Australia's generation Z’

In: Frontiers in Nutrition, 7, p.148. At:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.(2020)00148/full (Accessed
13/08/23).

Dabija, D.C., Bejan, B.M. and Tipi, N. (2018) ‘Generation X versus millennials
communication behaviour on social media when purchasing food versus tourist
services’ In: E+ M Ekonomie a Management, 21(1), pp.191-205. At:
https://oro.open.ac.uk/73194/1/73194.pdf (Accessed 15/08/23).

Das, S., Chatterjee, A. and Pal, T.K. (2020) ‘Organic farming in India: a vision
towards a healthy nation’ In: Food Quality and Safety, 4(2), pp.69-76.
https://academic.oup.com/fqs/article-pdf/doi/10.1093/fqsafe/fyaa018/33506844/
fyaa018.pdf.

De Roest, K., Ferrari, P. and Knickel, K. (2018) ‘Specialisation and economies of

scale or diversification and economies of scope? Assessing different agricultural
development pathways’ In: Journal of Rural Studies, 59, pp.222-231. At:

28
https://www.crpa.it/media/documents/crpa_www/Settori/Economia/Download/
Archivio_2018/De_Roest_et.al._(2018)pdf (Accessed 15/08/23).

Gazzola, P., Pavione, E., Pezzetti, R. and Grechi, D. (2020) ‘Trends in the fashion
industry. The perception of sustainability and circular economy: A gender/generation
quantitative approach’ In: Sustainability, 12(7), p.2809. At:
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2809/pdf (Accessed 15/08/23).

Ghazali, E., Soon, P.C., Mutum, D.S. and Nguyen, B. (2017) ‘Health and cosmetics:
Investigating consumers’ values for buying organic personal care products’ In:
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 39, pp.154-163. At:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096969891730173X (Accessed
14/08/23).

Goh, E. and Jie, F. (2019) ‘To waste or not to waste: Exploring motivational factors
of Generation Z hospitality employees towards food wastage in the hospitality
industry” In: International Journal of Hospitality Management, 80, pp.126-135. At:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278431918304602 (Accessed
15/08/23).

Govt. UK. (2021) ‘United Kingdom Food Security Report 2021: Theme 2: UK Food
Supply Sources’ At: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/united-kingdom-food-
security-report-2021/united-kingdom-food-security-report-2021-theme-2-uk-food-
supply-sources (Accessed 13/08/23).

Kapferer, J.N. and Valette-Florence, P. (2021) ‘Which consumers believe luxury

must be expensive and why? A cross-cultural comparison of motivations’ In: Journal
of Business Research, 132, pp.301-313. AT:
https://thehometrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Kapferer-Cross-cultural-
comparison-consumers-believe-luxury-must-be-expensive-and-why.pdf (Accessed
15/08/23).

Lee, Y.Y., Gan, C.L. and Liew, T.W. (2023) ‘Do E-wallets trigger impulse purchases?
An analysis of Malaysian Gen-Y and Gen-Z consumers’ In: Journal of Marketing
Analytics, 11(2), pp.244-261. At: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41270-
022-00164-9 (Accessed 15/08/23).

29
Meemken, E.M. and Qaim, M. (2018) ‘Organic agriculture, food security, and the
environment’ In: Annual Review of Resource Economics, 10, pp.39-63. At:
https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-resource-100517-023252?
trk=public_post_comment-text (Accessed 15/08/23).

Meesala, A. and Paul, J. (2018) ‘Service quality, consumer satisfaction and loyalty in
hospitals: Thinking for the future’ In: Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 40,
pp.261-269. At: http://drjustinpaul.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/JRCS-Hospital-
published.pdf (Accessed 15/08/23).

Milford, A.B., Lien, G. and Reed, M. (2021) ‘Different sales channels for different
farmers: Local and mainstream marketing of organic fruits and vegetables in Norway’
In: Journal of Rural Studies, 88, pp.279-288. At:
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/315058/files/0-
0_Paper_18589_handout_630_0.pdf (Accessed 15/08/23).

Organic Agriculture. (2023) ‘Why is organic food more expensive than conventional
food?’ In: Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nation. At:
https://www.fao.org/organicag/oa-faq/oa-faq5/en/ (Accessed 14/08/23).

Organic Trade Association. (2023) ‘Organic Industry Survey’ At:

https://www.ota.com/market-analysis/organic-industry-survey/organic-industry-
survey (Accessed 15/08/23).

Ottman, J., (2017) ‘The new rules of green marketing: Strategies, tools, and
inspiration for sustainable branding’ In: Routledge. At:
https://bkconnection.com/static/The_New_Rules_of_Green_Marketing_EXCERPT.p
df (Accessed 15/08/23).

Park, Y.S., Konge, L. and Artino, A.R. (2020) The Positivism Paradigm of Research.
Academic Medicine, [online] 95(5), pp.690–694. Available at:
https://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/fulltext/2020/05000/the_positivism_para
digm_of_research.16.aspx.

Ponto, J. (2015) Understanding and Evaluating Survey Research. Journal of the

Advanced Practitioner in Oncology, 6(2), pp.168–171.

30
Rana, J. and Paul, J. (2017) ‘Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic
food: A review and research agenda’ In: Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 38, pp.157-165. At:
https://tarjomefa.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/F1627-TarjomeFa-English.pdf
(Accessed 15/08/23).

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2016). Research Methods for Business
Students. 7th ed. Harlow: Pearson.

Savela, T. (2018) The Advantages and Disadvantages of Quantitative Methods in

Schoolscape Research. Linguistics and Education, [online] 44(1), pp.31–44.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.09.004.

Schahczenski. (2019) ‘Understanding Organic Pricing and Costs of Production’ IN:

NCAT ATTRA Sustainable Agriculture. At:
https://attra.ncat.org/publication/understanding-organic-pricing-and-costs-of-
production/ (Accessed 15/08/23).

Singh, A. and Verma, P. (2017) ‘Factors influencing Indian consumers' actual buying
behaviour towards organic food products’ In: Journal of cleaner production, 167,
pp.473-483. At:
https://www.academia.edu/download/54882392/Journal_of_Cleaner_Production.pdf
(Accessed 15/08/23).

Singh, M. (2021) ‘Organic farming for sustainable agriculture’ In: Indian Journal of
Organic Farming, 1(1), p. 7. At:
https://www.cpublishingmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Organic-Farming-
for-Sustainable-Agriculture.pdf (Accessed 13/08/23).

Social Samosa. (2022) ‘70% GenZ more willing to buy brands that stand up for
environmental & social causes: Havas report’ At:
https://www.socialsamosa.com/2022/10/genz-buying-brand-stands-up-
environmental-social-causes-report-havas/ (Accessed 15/08/23).

Szymkowiak, A., Melović, B., Dabić, M., Jeganathan, K. and Kundi, G.S. (2021)
‘Information technology and Gen Z: The role of teachers, the internet, and
technology in the education of young people’ In: Technology in Society, 65,

31
p.101565. AT:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X21000403 (Accessed
15/08/23).

Taher, G. (2021) ‘E-commerce: advantages and limitations’ In: International Journal

of Academic Research in Accounting Finance and Management Sciences, 11(1),
pp.153-165. AT:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3697/8cd1a3043a5ef1a916f78781412e8758cf7a.pd
f (Accessed 15/08/23).

Varanasi. (2019) ‘Is Organic Food Really Better for the Environment?’ In: State of
the planet. At: https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/10/22/organic-food-better-
environment/ (Accessed 13/08/23).

Waltower. (2023) ‘Organic Food Sales Growth Outpaces Rest of Grocery Industry’
At: https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/2404-organic-industry-healthy-growth.html
(Accessed 13/08/23).

Wang, Y., Zhu, Z. and Chu, F. (2017) ‘Organic vs. non-organic food products:
Credence and price competition’ In: Sustainability, 9(4), p.545. At:
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/4/545/pdf (Accessed 15/08/23).

Woiceshyn, J. and Daellenbach, U. (2018) Evaluating Inductive Vs Deductive

Research in Management Studies. Qualitative Research in Organizations and
Management: an International Journal, [online] 13(2), pp.183–195.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-06-2017-1538.

Yip, C., Han, N.-L. and Sng, B. (2016) Legal and Ethical Issues in Research. Indian
Journal of Anaesthesia, [online] 60(9), pp.684–688. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-
5049.190627.

Zhang, L., Tan, P.Y. and Richards, D. (2021) ‘Relative importance of quantitative
and qualitative aspects of urban green spaces in promoting health’ In: Landscape
and urban planning, 213, p.104131. At:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204621000943 (Accessed
14/08/23).

32
33
Appendix
Project Timeline

Research 1st July- 11th 1st Aug- 11th 1st Sep- 1st 1st
Oct-
Activity 10th July- 10th Aug- 30th Nov-
30th
July, 20th Aug, 25th Sep, Oct, 30th
2023
2023 July, 2023 Aug, 2023 Dec,
2023 2023 2023
Topic
Settlement
PRQ
Research
Proposal
Introduction
Literature review
analysis
Methodology
analysis
Collection of
primary data
Findings and
interpretation
Conclusion and
recommendation
Research
submission

34
Research Risk Assessment

To be completed and inserted in Appendices in your work.

Student name:

Student course:

Will your research involve offsite travel i.e., fieldwork or travel to another Yes No
country?

If yes, you need to complete the rest of this form (Parts A, B, C and D).

If no, you only need to sign and date the boxes below and include this form in the appendices of
your work.

My research does not involve offsite fieldwork or travel

Signature: Date:

35
UCA Ethical Approval form

Name of researcher

Title of proposed project:

Student identification number

Email

Line Manager/Supervisor/Tutor

A brief outline of the project (250 words maximum):

The research proposal works together to systematically achieve the research's objectives. By stressing the
significance of grasping Gen Z's buying behaviour in an environment of price changes. Through this process,
it sets the groundwork for the study and defines its overall aims. The literature review section investigates
past studies to comprehend the intricate factors affecting the price surges of organic and non-organic foods.
Investigating the interplay of Gen Z's health-conscious mindset, social cues, cost sensitivity, and limited
access to products, we can better understand their consumer behaviour. The section details the approach
used to conduct the study. The Research Onion framework guides the research design. Quantitative
research, guided by positivism and a logical sequence, is examined. A 5-point Likert scale Google Form will
facilitate data collection, followed by a comprehensive analysis of descriptive statistics and correlations. To
ensure ethical treatment, considerations are made for ethical standards. Privacy and confidentiality
measures take centre stage, underscoring their critical importance. The section on limitations and timeline
acknowledges potential constraints that could impact the research's range and detail. The proposed project
schedule highlights critical deadlines and obstacles to overcome.

Issues that may indicate mitigation measures and/or ethical approval by Research Committee
are necessary
1 Does the study involve participants who are unable to give informed Yes No
consent? (see 17.2a below)
2 Does the research involve sensitive topics? (see 17.2b) Yes No

3 Does the research involve groups where the permission of a gatekeeper is Yes No
normally required for initial access? (see 17.2c)
4 Is the research to be conducted without the full and informed consent of the Yes No
participant? (17.2d)
5 Does the research involve access to records of personal or confidential Yes No
information concerning identifiable individuals? (17.2e)
6 Does the research induce, or have the potential to induce, psychological Yes No
stress, anxiety or humiliation or to cause more than minimal pain? (17.2f)
7 Does the research involve, or have the potential to involve, intrusive Yes No
interventions that participants would not normally encounter, or which may
cause them to reveal information that could cause concern in the course of
their everyday life? (17.2g)
8 Will the research take place outside the UK? Yes No

36
9 Will the research involve respondents to the internet or other visual/vocal Yes No
methods where respondents may be identified?
10 Will financial inducements (other than reasonable expenses and Yes No
compensation for time) be offered to participants?
11 Will the study involve NHS patients or staff? (17.8) Yes No

Further issues that require consideration in research good practice

12 Have the topic and any ethical implications been addressed with your Yes No
supervisor/line manager?
13 Does the topic merit further research of the kind being proposed and is it Yes No
appropriate to the level of study?
14 Do you, as the researcher, have the skills to carry out this research? Yes No

15 Are the participant information sheet or leaflet and consent forms Yes NA No
appropriate?

16 Are the procedures for recruitment of participants and obtaining Yes NA No

informed consent appropriate?
17 Are the procedures for ensuring confidentiality/anonymity of respondent Yes NA No
data appropriate?
18 Has a risk assessment been carried out and the form completed, where Yes NA No
necessary?
19 If your work involves more than one participant, or a public facing Yes NA NO
research practice (eg., a participant performance in a public place, work
with vulnerable groups) have you included a detailed work and
contingency plan, according to regional and national variations on health
conditions as advised by the UK Govt.

I have read the UCA Research Ethics Code of This project complies with the UCA Research
Practice Ethics Code of Practice
Signature Supervisor/Tutor:
Signature Applicant:

Date: Date:

37
Supervision log 1

EBSC7545 Masters Project 22-23

Record of Supervision

This Record of Supervision must be completed by the student after each

supervision meeting

WHAT YOU NEED TO DO:

 A digital copy must be sent to the supervisor as an e-mail attachment

within 2 working days after the meeting.
 A copy must also be uploaded by the student to the Record of
Supervision submission box on myUCA.

NB: All fully completed and signed supervision logs must be included in the
Appendices of the Proposal and the Final Project. Any student work submitted
without regular and documented engagement with support sessions and
supervisors will be subject to a formal viva i.e., a formal oral examination.

Student name: Shakil Ahmed

Student ID number: 2216797
Programme of study: Global Master of Business & Management (GMBM)

Supervisor name: Edwin Agwu

Date of Supervision: 03/10/2023
Supervision Session 1
No.

Student’s comments on progress since last supervision meeting:

38
The topic has been improvised and research overall structure.

Matters discussed in the supervision meeting:

Research topic.

Citation.

Conceptual framework.

Literature review structure.

Research aim, objectives and questions.

Research and specific actions to be undertaken by the student before next

supervision meeting:

39
Research topic improvement.

Citation improvement.

Conceptual framework deletion.

Literature review structure improvement.

Research aim, objectives and questions improvement.

What did your supervisor tell you during the meeting? Make notes here:

Enhancing research topic.

Corrections to cited sources.

Conceptual framework deletion.

Enhanced framework for literature reviews.

40
Strengthening study goals, objectives, and questions.

Date and time of next meeting (must be agreed with the supervisor):

Student signature: Shakil Ahmed Date: 05/10/2023

NO SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE REQUIRED.

41
Supervision Log 2

EBSC7545 Masters Project 22-23

Record of Supervision

This Record of Supervision must be completed by the student after each

supervision meeting

WHAT YOU NEED TO DO:

 A digital copy must be sent to the supervisor as an e-mail attachment

within 2 working days after the meeting.
 A copy must also be uploaded by the student to the Record of
Supervision submission box on myUCA.

NB: All fully completed and signed supervision logs must be included in the
Appendices of the Proposal and the Final Project. Any student work submitted
without regular and documented engagement with support sessions and
supervisors will be subject to a formal viva i.e., a formal oral examination.

Student name: Shakil Ahmed

Student ID number: 2216797
Programme of study: Global Master of Business & Management (GMBM)

Supervisor name: EDWIN AGWU

Date of Supervision: 06.11.2023
Supervision Session 2
No.

Student’s comments on progress since last supervision meeting:

42
The data analysis section has been revised.

Matters discussed in the supervision meeting:

There should have a discussion chapter separately.

There should have a conclusion on the survey findings.

Research and specific actions to be undertaken by the student before next

supervision meeting:

There should have a discussion chapter separately.

43
There should have a conclusion on the survey findings.

What did your supervisor tell you during the meeting? Make notes here:

There should have a discussion chapter separately.

There should have a conclusion on the survey findings.

44
Date and time of next meeting (must be agreed with the supervisor):

12.11.2023

Student signature: Date: 9.11.2023

Shakil Ahmed

NO SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE REQUIRED.

45
Reassessment Form:

EBSC7545 Masters Project 22-23

Record of Supervision

This Record of Supervision must be completed by the student after each

supervision meeting

WHAT YOU NEED TO DO:

 A digital copy must be sent to the supervisor as an e-mail attachment

within 2 working days after the meeting.
 A copy must also be uploaded by the student to the Record of
Supervision submission box on myUCA.

NB: All fully completed and signed supervision logs must be included in the
Appendices of the Proposal and the Final Project. Any student work submitted
without regular and documented engagement with support sessions and
supervisors will be subject to a formal viva i.e., a formal oral examination.

Student name: Shakil Ahmed

Student ID number: 2216797
Global Master of Business and Management
Programme of study:
(GMBM)

Supervisor name: EDWIN AGWU

Date of Supervision: 6.11.2023
Supervision Session 2
No.

Student’s comments on progress since the last supervision meeting:

46
I have corrected the structure of my dissertation according to the teacher’s
direction. I also made changes in the research methodology chapter of my project
after the meeting with the supervisor.

Matters discussed in the supervision meeting:

1. The introduction framework is discussed and proposed by the supervisor to

change the structure.
2. The literature review chapter’s alignment and classification are standardized.
3. Methodology chapters are discussed heavily.
4. The standard structure and ways of presenting analysed data with
appropriate interpretation are discussed.
5. The conclusion is discussed lastly.
6. How to add relevant evidence in the appendices are also shown in the
meeting.

Research and specific actions to be undertaken by the student before the next
supervision meeting:

I have to finalize the work and submit it.

What did your supervisor tell you during the meeting? Make notes here:

The supervisor told me that I was doing good and some corrections could make the
study better.

Date and time of next meeting (must be agreed with the supervisor):

47
Student signature: Shakil Ahmed Date: 8/11/2023

NO SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE REQUIRED.

48
Survey Questionnaire:

49
50
51
52
53
54
Interview Transcripts:

Here,

Gender: 1-Male, 2-Female

Age: 1= 18-24, 2=25-34, 3=35-44, 4=45-54 and 5=55-64

Also, 1= Strongly Agree 2= Disagree 3= Neutral 4= Agree 5= Strongly Agree

Interview transcript 1:

Interview transcript 2:

Interview transcript 3:

55
Interview transcript 4:

Interview transcript 5:

56
All other interview transcript results can be found in the excel tab first sheet and here
is the screenshot of that Statistical Output:

57
58