See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339630927
Perceived value, trust and purchase intention of organic food: a study with
Brazilian consumers
Preprint in British Food Journal · March 2020
CITATIONS
READS
0
11,260
4 authors:
Eluiza Watanabe
Solange Alfinito
University of Brasília
University of Brasília
29 PUBLICATIONS 722 CITATIONS
66 PUBLICATIONS 942 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Isabelle Curvelo
Kavita Hamza
University of São Paulo
University of São Paulo
3 PUBLICATIONS 434 CITATIONS
55 PUBLICATIONS 438 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Solange Alfinito on 08 June 2020.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
SEE PROFILE
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/0007-070X.htm
Perceived
Perceived value, trust and
value, trust and
purchase
purchase intention of organic food:
intention
a study with Brazilian consumers
Eluiza Alberto de Morais Watanabe and Solange Alfinito
University of Brasılia, Brasılia, Brazil, and
Isabelle Cristina Galindo Curvelo and Kavita Miadaira Hamza
University of S~ao Paulo, Butant~a, Brazil
Received 24 May 2019
Revised 16 December 2019
Accepted 20 December 2019
Abstract
Purpose – The consumption of organic food grows worldwide, increasing the need of studies seeking to
understand factors influencing its consumption. To extend the understanding of organic food market, the
present research seeks to explore the effect of perceived value on consumer trust and purchase intention in
Brazil.
Design/methodology/approach – A survey with 274 Brazilian consumers of organic food was carried out.
Perceived value was measured through four dimensions: functional, economic, social and emotional. The
convergent and discriminant validities of latent variables were confirmed. The relationships among them were
tested using structural equation modeling.
Findings – The results indicate that functional and emotional values positively affect consumer trust and that
only emotional value motivates purchase intention. The trust had no direct influence on purchase intention.
Thus, the perceived value is an important aspect in the prediction of trust and purchase intention among
Brazilian consumers.
Originality/value – The identified results enlarge the understanding of Brazilian organic food market and
consumer behavior and point out some opportunities for future research involving the subject.
Keywords Organic food, Perceived value, Purchase intention, Consumer trust, Sustainable consumption
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
We live in a global environmental crisis that is the consequence of years of irresponsible
production and consumption, without concerning about its long-term impacts (Bengtsson
et al., 2018). This scenario has instigated a process of greater ecological awareness among
people and the emergence of pro-environmental movements in several countries of the world
(Bamberg and M€oser, 2007), strengthening a new perspective of consumption patterns
(Aertsens et al., 2011). This new group of consumers are aware about the consequences of
their unsustainable consumption behaviors, composing a differentiated market segment, the
so-called green consumers (Peattie, 2010).
In the food sector, from this sustainable perspective, we have the organic foods, offering an
agricultural production based on pro-environmental and pro-social characteristics. Thus,
with the growth of green consumers, there is also a significant increase in the demand for
organic food. These consumers have continuously incorporated organic food into their daily
eating habits (Lee and Yun, 2015), driven by changes in their attitude, beliefs, values and
motivations regarding food security and the consumption of certain food products (Nocella
and Kennedy, 2012; Simmonds and Spence, 2017).
As a consequence of this worldwide movement, the organic food market shows itself as one
of the fastest growing in recent years in several countries, including Brazil – a country that has
The authors would like to thank the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientıfico e Tecnologico –
CNPq (Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) for providing the
research funds for this project.
British Food Journal
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0007-070X
DOI 10.1108/BFJ-05-2019-0363
BFJ
the largest domestic organic food consumer market in Latin America, with 778 million Euros of
retail sales in 2016. It is the 12th producer of organic food in the world, with 750,000 hectares of
organic agricultural land, but still with a market share of just 0.4 percent (Willer and Lernoud,
2018), while other European markets, as a comparison, already have a market share above 5
percent, and Denmark reaching 8.4 percent, showing the potential advance of this market.
Although it is a promising market with a remarkable growth and considering the
progression of studies about organic food consumers in countries of the global north
(Hemmerling et al., 2015; Thøgersen, 2010; Thøgersen et al., 2017), in emerging countries, as
Brazil, the reality is different (Thøgersen et al., 2015), with just a few studies exploring organic
food consumers, highlighting the need of a better understanding about this consumer.
The Brazilian market has some particularities making it different from others, such as the
price difference of conventional and organic products – on average, around 40 percent in
other countries and 200 percent in Brazil (that can reach a peak of 600 percent difference)
(Consumer Reports, 2015; Santos, 2014). Some Brazilian studies point out a lack of availability
of organic products, making it more difficult for consumers to buy and consume them (Ferraz
et al., 2016; Silva et al., 2005). Others explore Brazilian consumers’ sensory difference
perception between organic and conventional food (Cunha et al., 2019). However, it’s
important to understand that Brazil is a continental country, so it’s expected to have
differences for all kind of consumption among regions – for example, studies on consumption
of organic food (consumers eating frequently) vary from the Center-West (20 percent) to the
South (53 percent) regions (Wander et al., 2007; Kohlrausch, Campos, and Selig, 2004).
Therefore, it is possible to underline the investigation of aspects such as perceived value,
trust and purchase intention, as relevant (Nuttavuthisit and Thøgersen, 2017). The latter
contributes directly to marketing strategies, as it represents the consumers’ purchase
planning or their willingness to buy a product in the future (Hemmerling et al., 2015). In this
context, the objective of the pres ent research is to evaluate the effect of perceived value of
organic food consumers on purchase intention and on trust, in order to deepen the knowledge
about this market in Brazil.
Lim et al. (2014) emphasize that comprehending the perceived value of organic food for
consumers is fundamental to recognize consumers’ expectations, which helps the formulation
of more accurate market policies for producers, traders and consumers themselves. This is
mainly possible because the perceived value is the result of a consumer’s assessment related
to the trade-off between sacrifices made and obtained benefits in the acquisition of a
particular product (Sirdeshmukh et al., 2002; Zeithaml, 1988).
Concerning the trust, Moorman et al. (1992) define it as a belief, feeling or expectation
about the loyalty on the exchange partner, resulting from their intention, integrity or
competence. Consequently, it may also affect the buying behavior of organic food
(Nuttavuthisit and Thøgersen, 2017; Pivato et al., 2008).
As pointed previously, most of the studies related to purchase and consumption of organic
foods are carried out in developed countries (Yadav and Pathak, 2016a). This reinforces the
relevance of exploring the proposed variables in the perspective of the consumer and in an
emerging market such as the Brazilian one, which may present different context
characteristics in relation to other countries already investigated.
2. Literature review
There is no general consensus among perceived value definitions and characteristics
(Sanchez-Fernandez and Iniesta-Bonillo, 2007). There are two approaches to perceived value.
The first one includes (1) unidimensional focus, where perceived value is the outcome of a
general assessment of the consumer utility concerning a particular product or service
(Zeithaml, 1988); and (2) multidimensional focus, where notions of price, quality, benefits,
sacrifices and motivations of hedonic nature are also included in the consumer evaluation.
Perceived
The second approach allows a more complex analysis based on the behavioral conception of value, trust and
value, in a broad way and through its components.
purchase
In this way, Sweeny and Soutar (2001) developed a perceived value scale, with four value
intention
dimensions: functional, emotional, economic and social. Later, Nguyen et al. (2015) analyzed
the perceived value of frozen food in Vietnam and adapted the scale developed by Sweeny
and Soutar (2001) with the addition of three items to the instrument, supporting the original
four dimensions.
The functional value is linked to the product property of achieving its functional,
utilitarian or physical goals. Within the context of organic food, the functional value is related
to the utility value the consumer perceives in making a choice that will bring practical results
and involves factors such as quality, availability, environment and health benefits and safety
(Sweeny and Soutar, 2001).
The emotional value relates to feelings and affectivity produced by the product (Sweeny
and Soutar, 2001). Complementarily, Seegebarth et al. (2016) consider the emotional value as
an individual perception of the value of that product. Thereunder, the consumer’s subjective
understanding of the concept of organic food is based on the premise that food has a direct
influence on consumer welfare and combines organic characteristics with the growing
environmental concern of consumers.
The economic value, in turn, is the financial value and the cost–benefit involved in the
product trade. For organic food, due to its functional characteristics of being healthier,
environmentally friendly, pesticide-free, the price performs a function of indicating how high
is the product quality regarding its attributes (Cicia et al., 2002). Lastly, the social value is
related to the social acceptance received by a given reference group as a consequence of the
consumer’s product choice. It refers to the congruent image to the norms of one’s social circle
or to the social image the consumer wants to reflect in his/her reference group (SanchezFernandez and Iniesta-Bonillo, 2007).
In the context of organic food, there are studies associating perceived value with purchase
intention and consumer trust. According to Singh and Verma (2017) and Persaud and Schillo
(2017), the purchase intention is a decisive predictor of the current consumer buying behavior,
consequently acting as a prerequisite for the actual buying attitude.
Rana and Paul (2017) mention the many factors that most appear in the studies about
purchase intention and attitude toward buying organic food, such as concern about health
and the environment, certification, price, willingness to pay, social awareness, lifestyle,
quality and safety. Some of these attributes belong to the perceived value of the product.
Zhao et al. (2018) also reinforce that consumers’ perception of benefits brought by the
product, connected to perceived value, is paramount for the purchase intention of
environmentally friendly products. Additionally, Loebnitz and Grunert (2018) state that
consumers have a higher purchase intention of organic food when they are informed of the
benefits of the product.
Regarding trust, the information provided by the product are the labels and certifications
that can ensure they are actually organic. Consequently, sustainability labeling assume a role
of guarantee of origin of the product (Silva et al., 2017). Grunert et al. (2014) argue that if trust
in organic labeling increases, there will also be an increase in the conviction that the product
meets the conditions to be considered organic. In addition, sustainability labels will only be
used in the purchasing decision process if consumers trust them (Thøgersen et al., 2017).
To establish trust, some factors are relevant, such as the presence of the label, the certifier’s
and producer’s reputation, the brand, the prestige of the product (Anisimova, 2016). In addition,
the consumer trust can positively influence consumers’ purchase intention, as found in the
studies of Teng and Wang (2015) and Suh et al. (2015). Therefore, a reasonable hypothesis is
that (H1) the trust positively affects the purchase intention of organic food consumers.
BFJ
Husic-Mehmedovic et al. (2017) investigated the influence of organic food attributes,
including aspects related to functional value, and the purchase intention among Europeans. The
results showed a significant and positive relationship between the functional value and the
purchase intention, proving the importance of utilitarian characteristics of this kind of product.
Under the same heading, Krischke and Tomiello (2009) emphasize the importance of attributes
related to health concern and to taste as the main motivations of organic food consumers’ choices.
Persaud and Schillo (2017) investigated how social identity, social influence and perceived
value impact the purchase intention of Canadian consumers. The perceived value, measured
by items related to quality (functional value), perceived cost and trust, positively affected
consumers’ purchase intention. Konuk (2018), in order to understand consumers’ purchase
intention of organic private label foods, confirmed the positive relationship between
perceived quality (linked to functional value) and consumer trust.
In addition, Molinillo, Vidal-Branco, and Japutra (2020) explored the drivers of organic
food purchasing of millennials in Brazil and Spain. The results demonstrated that health
consciousness, related to functional value, affects purchase frequency. Hence, a second
hypothesis is that (H2) the functional value would impact both purchase intention and trust,
in a positive way.
Singh and Verma (2017) investigated factors influencing the purchase of organic food by
Indian consumers, including subjective norms, related to social value, which positively affected
the purchase intention. Similar result was found by Teng and Wang (2015). Thus, the third
hypothesis is that (H3) the social value positively impacts the consumers’ purchase intention.
In another research, Apaolaza et al. (2018) investigated the relationship between organic
food consumption, health concern and consumer welfare. They performed two studies, one
survey and one experiment, and the results in both studies showed a positive relation
between well-being and organic consumption. Well-being refers to the vitality, emotions and
feelings of consumers. These factors are related to the emotional value defined in the present
research. Accordingly, Lee and Yun (2015) investigated consumers’ motivations to buy
organic food and confirmed that hedonic aspects, allied to the emotional value, positively
affect the consumers’ purchase intention, leading to the fourth hypothesis that (H4) the
emotional value positively impacts the purchase intention.
For the economic value, Suh et al. (2015) support that the price is the leading symbol, being
discussed several times in numerous studies involving purchase intention and trust of
organic food, as a barrier to the consumption of these foods. However, the economic value,
related to the consumer perceived cost–benefit, can positively affect the purchase intention
(Suh et al., 2015; Konuk, 2018) and the trust (Zanolli et al., 2015).
De Toni et al. (2018) proposed a model to evaluate the antecedents of the perceived value
and its influence on the purchase intention of organic food. After surveying 256 organic food
consumers in Brazil, using items related to willingness to pay and the cost–benefit of product
acquisition to measure the perceived value, they confirmed the positive relationship between
perceived value and purchase intention. In one example, price equity was placed as a factor
influencing consumer trust, considering that too high prices would become a barrier to
consumption and very low prices would generate consumer mistrust. Therefore, the fifth
hypothesis is that (H5) the economic value positively impacts the purchase intention and
the trust.
Considering the relationships identified in the aforementioned studies and the research
objective, Figure 1 presents the research model.
3. Method
To study the effect of perceived value of organic food on purchase intention and on trust, we
develop an online survey design, including the three constructs. The data collection was
Perceived
value, trust and
purchase
intention
Functional
Value
Social
Value
Emotional
Value
Trust
Purchase
Intention
Economic
Value
carried out in a Brazilian state, the Distrito Federal, using nonprobabilistic sampling to
achieve organic food consumers (N 5 382). The population of interest were consumers of
organic food. After data screening, with missing cases verification and multivariate outliers’
exclusions by Mahalanobis distance calculation, we reached a final sample of 274 valid cases.
Regarding the participants’ characteristics, 69.8 percent stated age between 18 and 35
years old; 63.5 percent of the sample were women and 49.6 percent with higher education.
Considering the organic food purchase habits, 48 percent indicated buying organic food at
least once a week (the other 52 percent in a lower frequency), 49 percent stated buying food
from supermarkets, specialized stores or directly from the producer and 41 percent indicated
they buy organic products at open markets.
The instrument was organized into three parts. The first part is to identify organic food
consumers and their purchase individualities, with questions about buying frequency and
the place of purchase. The second part included the items from the scales of perceived value,
purchase intention and consumer trust, all of them Likert-type, ranging from 1 (totally
disagree) to 7 (totally agree).
It is important to point out that the three scales were submitted to back-translation
process, according to Brislin (1970) guidelines, and next submitted to conceptual consistency
assessment procedures (Messick, 1995). Finally, the third part contained sociodemographic
questions, such as age, sex, education level and marital status.
To measure consumer trust, we applied the four-item scale adapted by Teng Wang
(2015) for organic food consumption from the scale originally proposed by Siegrist (2000)
to explore technology acceptance, seeking to quantify consumer trust related to organic
food attributes.
For perceived value, we adopted the scale proposed by Sweeney and Soutar (2001) and
adapted by Nguyen et al. (2015) overarching the multidimensional measurement of value in
food products. It is composed of 18 items divided into four dimensions: emotional value (four
items); social value (three items); the functional value related to the price, also denominated as
economic value (four items); and the functional value related to the product performance and
quality (seven items). Finally, to identify the purchase intention, we embraced the scale
adapted by Teng and Wang (2015), with three items.
Figure 1.
Research model
demonstrating the
effect of perceived
value on consumer
trust and purchase
intention
BFJ
For data collection, the instrument was administered online and developed in the platform,
Typeform, considering its user-friendly characteristics also in portable devices (smartphones
and tablets). The questionnaire followed the Brazilian Personal Data Act, which warrants the
responses and information were treated safety and anonymously and was available from
September to October 2016, during 30 consecutive days.
Using the snowball technic, respondents were recruited via broadcasting the study by
email and in social medias (Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp) (Rife et al., 2016). The survey
was published in several groups of WhatsApp and Facebook, such as groups of organic food
consumers and vegans. Those responsible for data collection were undergraduate students.
Thus, the sample was concentrated in groups close to them.
The data examination consisted of confirmatory factorial analysis (CFA), a more rigorous
procedure than the exploratory factorial analysis (EFA) (Byrne, 2010), and then, structural
equation modeling (SEM). AMOS 21.0 was adopted for the analysis. The post hoc verification
of statistical power followed Cohen’s (1992) guidelines and identified a power (1 β) of 0.99,
considering an average effect (f2 5 0.25) and a significance level of α 5 0.05. The results of the
study are presented further.
4. Results
To reach the objective of the research, a CFA was performed including the constructs of
perceived value, consumer trust and purchase Intention. The estimation method was the
maximum likelihood (ML), the most widely used in CFA (Brown, 2006). The results are shown
in Table I, including the 25 significant variables (p < 0.01), distributed in six dimensions.
Standardized residual covariance and modification indexes (MI) were analyzed in order to
verify any adjustment problem. The standardized residual covariance corresponds to the
error associated between the variance and covariance matrix observed and the one produced
by the model. Absolute values greater than 2.58 indicate poor model specification. This was
observed between the variable Vperc6 and the variables Vperc12, Vperc13, Vperc14, Vperc15
and Vperc9, with values above 4.
The modification indexes measure the Chi-square reduction by adding a link between the
variables of the model, that is, an addition of a single or double arrow between the variables.
The MI between Vperc6 and SATIS3 and INT3 was high (40.58). Because of the identified
problems, the item Vperc6, comprised by the statement “Organic foods are tasty”, was
excluded from the analysis.
Next, the measurement model adjustment indexes were computed. The recommended
ratio between the Chi-square and degrees of freedom ratio (CMIN/DF) is up to 5 (Byrne, 2010).
For the comparative fit index (CFI), which has a 0–1 range, values close to 1 indicate a good fit.
Concerning the parsimonious root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), values
lower than 0.1 suggest an adequate fit model (Mar^oco, 2010). Therefore, all of those indexes
were suitable (CMIN/DF 5 2.53, CFI 5 0.91, RMSEA 5 0.07).
The J€oreskog’s rho was computed to analyze the reliability of the dimensions of the
measurement model. This reliability index is the most recommended for SEM, considering it is
based on the factor loads and not on the correlations observed among the variables. According
to Chin (1998), values above 0.7 are satisfactory. Thus, the J€oreskog’s rho was suitable for all
model’s dimensions, reaching indexes of: functional value (0.88), economic value (0.80),
emotional value (0.88), social value (0.84), trust (0.89) and purchase intention (0.86).
Thereafter, the dimensions were submitted to the verification of convergent and
discriminant validity. In addition to the appropriate reliability indexes (J€oreskog’s rho), the
standardized regression estimates were also suitable and higher than 0.50, except for the item
Vperce1 (0.43). Aimed at the variance extracted from each dimension, the recommended value
is 0.50 (Hair et al., 2013). As shown in Table II, all values were above recommended. Thus,
Factor
Description
Functional value
VPERCE1
Organic food is good for health
VPERCE2
Organic food is well produced
VPERCE3
Organic food is reliable
VPERCE4
Organic food has acceptable standard of
safety
VPERCE5
Organic food has consistent quality
VPERCE7
Organic food has an acceptable standard of
quality
Economic value
VPERCE8
Organic food is reasonable priced
VPERCE9
Organic food offers value for money
VPERCE10 Organic food is a good product for the price
VPERCE11 Organic food is economical compared to
other products
Emotional value
VPERCE12 Consuming organic food makes me feel
well
VPERCE13 Consuming organic food makes me want to
use more
VPERCE14 Consuming organic food is something that
I enjoy
VPERCE15 Consuming organic food makes me feel
relaxed about using
Social value
VPERCE16
VPERCE17
VPERCE18
Trust
CONF1
CONF2
CONF3
CONF4
Standardized
regression weights
Estimate
S.E.
C.R.
0.31
0.75
0.99
1.00
0.04
0.05
0.05
7.24
13.7
17.6
0.42**
0.71**
0.82**
0.88**
0.93
0.87
0.05
0.05
17.1
16.3
0.81**
0.79**
0.86
0.87
1.00
0.70
0.08
0.06
10.5
13.5
0.07
9.28
0.64**
0.78**
0.85**
0.56**
0.85
0.04
19.0
0.84**
0.89
0.05
15.6
0.75**
1.00
0.89**
0.81
0.05
15.4
0.74**
Consuming organic food helps me to feel
acceptable
Consuming organic food makes good
impression on my family members
Consuming organic food fits in with food
culture and tradition of my social circle
0.90
0.06
13.3
0.76**
0.82
0.06
13.1
0.75**
I think that corporations in the field of
organic foods are aware of their
responsibilities
I trust those who sell certified organic
foods indeed sell quality organic foods
I trust a quality organic food label or logo
I trust the institutions certifying organic
food products
0.57
0.05
10.1
0.54**
0.86
0.04
19.9
0.82**
1.00
0.98
0.03
25.8
0.93**
0.92**
0.56
0.04
12.2
0.63**
0.87
0.04
21.0
0.87**
Purchase intention
INT1
If organic foods were available in the
shops, I would buy them
INT2
I am willing to buy organic foods despite
their higher prices
INT3
The probability that I would buy organic
foods is very high
Note(s): ** p < 0.01
1.00
1.00
Perceived
value, trust and
purchase
intention
0.89**
0.94**
Table I.
Confirmatory factor
analysis
BFJ
Factor
Table II.
Discriminant validity
of the measures
Functional
value
Economic
value
Functional value
0.75a
Economic value
0.51
0.71a
Emotional value
0.52
0.56
Social value
0.32
0.46
Trust
0.62
0.35
Purchase intention
0.33
0.52
Average variance
0.57
0.51
extracted
Note(s): a Root square of the variance extracted
Emotional
value
Social
value
Trust
Purchase
intention
0.81a
0.48
0.43
0.79
0.66
0.80a
0.26
0.40
0.64
0.82a
0.41
0.67
0.82a
0.68
considering the results, it is possible to affirm that the dimensions of the model have
convergent validity.
Complementarily, to verify discriminant validity, we analyzed whether the value of the
root square of average variance extracted (AVE) of each factor exceeds the square of the
correlation between them (i.e. the criterion of Fornell–Larcker). The results confirmed the
discriminant validity, as pointed in Table II.
After the CFA, the data were submitted to a path analysis in order to investigate the
relationship between perceived value, trust and purchase intention, as highlighted through
the hypotheses. Estimates of prediction ratios are shown in Table III and Figure 2.
H2 suggests that the functional value positively impacts the purchase intention and the
trust. H4 states that the emotional value positively affects purchase intention. Considering
the analyzed sample, the structural model indicates a structure with two dependent variables
(DV) and that the higher the perceived functional value, the greater the consumer trust
(β 5 0.53). Additionally, emotional value predicts both trust (β 5 0.17) and purchase intention
(β 5 0.79). Hence, H2 was partially accepted, and H4 was confirmed. Although the influence of
emotional value on trust was not addressed in the hypotheses, because of the lack of studies
on this matter, this relation was tested here and showed significance.
It can be seen in the structural model (Figure 2) that the coefficient of determination (R2) for
the DV purchase intention was 0.62 and for the DV trust was 0.41. This indicates that 62
percent of the purchase intention is explained by the perceived emotional value (β 5 0.79) and
that 41 percent of the trust is explained jointly by the perceived emotional and functional
values, the latter having a greater prediction (β 5 0.53). Thus, for the two dependent
variables, purchase intention and trust, large effects were observed, with R2 above 26 percent
(Cohen, 1992). The adjustment indexes of the model of Figure 2 were all suitable (CMIN/
DF 5 3.15, CFI 5 0.92, RMSEA 5 0.08).
H1 states the positive relationship between consumer trust and purchase intention. In the
path analysis, we tested the relationship between trust and purchase intention. However, it
was not significant (p 5 0.065) for the analyzed sample and, therefore, did not remain in the
model. Therefore, H1 was not supported.
Table III.
Structural model
estimation
Functional value → trust
Emotional value → trust
Emotional value → purchase intention
Note(s): ** p < 0.01
Estimate
S.E.
C.R.
Standardized regression weights
0.45
0.13
0.60
0.07
0.04
0.06
6.38
2.73
9.75
0.53**
0.17**
0.79**
Perceived
value, trust and
purchase
intention
0.18
e4
VPERCE1
e8
VPERCE5
0.66
0.78
e7
VPERCE4
e6
VPERCE3
0.43
0.82
0.88
0.71
0.50
e5
Functional
0.680.82
0.53
0.79
VPERCE2
VPERCE7
0.51
VPERCE12
e23
VPERCE13
0.56
0.84
e24
e25
VPERCE14
0.17
e13
CONF2
e12
0.69
0.92
0.30
e31
0.75
Emotional
0.79
e11
0.40
0.62 0.63
Purchase
Intention
e14
CONF3
CONF1
0.84
0.56 0.75
VPERCE15
0.83
Trust
0.87
0.55
0.70
e22
CONF4
0.93
0.410.93
0.63
e10
0.86
e30
0.87
0.95
INT1
0.76
e15
e16
INT2
0.89
INT3
e17
Lastly, H3 suggests that social value has a positive influence on purchase intention, and H5
suggests that economic value and consumer trust positively impact both the purchase
intention and the trust. It can be observed that the perceived economic and social values
predict neither the trust nor the purchase intention of the organic food consumers analyzed.
Hence, H3 and H5 were not supported.
5. Discussion
Initially, the CFAs conducted identified evidences of validity for perceived value, trust and
purchase intention scales in regard to organic food in Brazilian cultural context. The same
structure of Sweeney and Soutar (2001) was verified for perceived value. Likewise, trust and
purchase intention scales, both adapted by Teng and Wang (2015), provided good indexes for
Brazil and the same unifactorial structure found by the authors for both.
Regarding the structural model, the results show that the perceived functional value
directly influences the trust and the perceived emotional value influences both the trust and
the purchase intention of the consumers. However, the perceived economic and social values
did not impact the dependent variables of the model. We emphasize that the relationship
between trust and purchase intention was not confirmed, although it was identified in a
previous study, in another cultural context (Nuttavuthisit and Thøgersen, 2017).
The strength of perceived emotional value, influencing both trust and purchase intention,
shows that subjective aspects related to pleasure and well-being are important to the
consumer when buying organic food. In the study by Lee and Yun (2015), the hedonic aspect,
linked to emotional gratification and the pleasure of consuming organic food, also had a
positive relation with consumers’ purchase intention. The results corroborate several
previous studies that have identified the importance of the well-being perception related to
organic food consumption (Apaolaza et al., 2018; Loebnitz and Aschemann-Witzel, 2016;
Roitner-Schobesberger et al., 2008).
Figure 2.
Structural equation
modeling
demonstrating the
final model
BFJ
About the perceived functional value, which influences trust, Krischke and Tomiello
(2009) report that the consumer of organic food gives great importance to health and believes
that organic food provides a better quality of life and nutritional improvement. That is,
attributes such as safety, quality and inputs of these foods, which are related to perceived
functional value, become meaningful factors and generate a greater impact on consumer
trust, as identified for Brazilian consumers in the present research. The findings, however,
confront the results of Persaud and Shillo (2017) for Canada, which identified the impact of
perceived value, composed by quality (functional value), cost and trust, in the purchase
intention of consumers.
The results showed that the economic value influenced neither the purchase intention nor
the consumer trust. The studies by De Toni et al. (2018), Suh et al. (2015) and Konuk (2018)
identified a positive relationship between perceived economic value and purchase intention of
organic food. That is, the cost–benefit perceived is positively connected with the purchase
intention. Here, as the economic value did not impact the purchase intention, it can be
explained by the premium prices of organic food in Brazil.
As reported in the Introduction session, organic products may be 200 percent more
expensive than the conventional ones in Brazil (Santos, 2014; Sposito and Abreu, 2018),
depending on the retailing channel. Its result was positive, but not significant. Additionally,
the result found is contrary to the study by Zanolli et al. (2015), where perceived economic
value positively affected consumer trust.
The present research also did not identify a relationship between functional value and
purchase intention, an unexpected result considering the several organic food studies that
deal exactly with functional values such as health, environment and safety benefits, as well as
high perceived quality related to purchase intention (e.g. Loebnitz and Grunert, 2018; Zhao
et al., 2018; Molinillo et al., 2020).
The result also refutes the study by Husic-Mehmedovic et al. (2017), in which one of the
confirmed relationships was between the intrinsic attributes perceived by the consumers,
related to the functional value, and the purchase intention. One explanation may be related to
the results of studies on barriers to the consumption of sustainable products. In the study by
Gleim et al. (2013), two barriers cited may be related to functional value variables used in the
present study, such as low-quality perception (14.11 percent) and lack of trust that the
product is actually sustainable (10.46 percent). Again, another potential explanation could be
the premium prices of organic products in Brazil, in the way that consumers perceive the
functional value, which leads to trust, but not to purchase intention.
Another issue evidenced in the findings of the present research was that the social value,
related to the social acceptance received from a given reference group, did not significantly
influence the purchase intention or the trust, which contests some studies. Teng and Wang
(2015) analyzed the factors that influence Taiwan’s purchase intention. The results showed
that subjective norms positively impact the purchase intention. In other words, aspects related
to the social links of the consumer, among them with family and friends, motivate the
consumption of organic food. Furthermore, Singh and Verma (2017) analyzed the factors that
influence the purchase intention of Indian consumers and found a similar result of Teng and
Wang (2015).
The results also reveal that consumer trust does not significantly affect consumer’s
purchase intention, at least for the analyzed sample of the study and its cultural context.
Several studies show that trust is an important aspect in buying and choosing organic food.
Specifically, Teng and Wang (2015) and Suh et al. (2015) have shown the positive influence of
trust in the purchase intention of organic food. In addition, Nuttavuthisit and Thøgersen (2017)
repeat the importance of trust as a requirement for the development of the organic food market.
One reason that may explain this result is the lack of trust of Brazilians in institutions in
general, but also in companies specifically – in 2017, the trust in companies fell from 43
percent to 29 percent (ICJBrasil Report, 2017). Another explanation for the result found is the
Perceived
lack of interest of the consumers regarding labels and certifications, since the instrument value, trust and
used to measure trust in the present research is related to the trust in labels, seals and
purchase
certifying companies.
intention
Andrade and Bertoldi (2012) accomplished a survey in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, with 400
consumers. They verified that the minority of the interviewed consumers (7.5 percent) certify
that the product is actually organic by the presence of the certification seal. In addition, only
17.7 percent of respondents consider that the seal is an essential information on the food label
for the purchase. Other studies also indicate that consumers find it difficult to understand
what labels mean, which also reduces their use (Grunert et al., 2014), and that some forms of
communication about sustainable products are confusing or even misleading (Iraldo
et al., 2014).
6. Conclusions
The main objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of perceived value and its
dimensions on purchase intention and consumer trust regarding organic food in Brazil.
Surprisingly, the trust had no direct influence on purchase intention, but it was shown to be
influenced by the functional value, which involves safety and quality issues. The perceived
emotional value had a strong influence on purchase intention but weak on trust. Thus,
affective aspects seem to enhance consumer purchase intention, although they are not
determinant in consumer trust.
As a theoretical contribution, the study presents evidences of validity of the scales of
perceived value, trust and purchase intention for organic food in the Brazilian context. This
brings the possibility of further studies in the country, as well as the basis for a comparison
with other countries, especially the developing ones, which may face similar contexts.
However, the adopted measures should be tested with other samples, preferably more
heterogeneous, in order to consolidate the identified results.
Despite the care and methodological meticulousness adopted in conducting the research, it
presents limitations: firstly, its nonprobability convenience sampling technique, preventing
the generalization of the results. Concerning this limitation, the sample is concentrated in
younger consumers and from a single Brazilian metropolitan city. Therefore, future research
can be addressed with a more heterogeneous sample, allowing to identify the stability of the
observed results.
In further studies, other predictors of purchase intention and trust can also be
investigated, including health concerns, for instance. Besides, the direct relationship between
trust and purchase intention could also be deepen in other studies, since the relationship was
not confirmed in the present study.
Finally, the results contribute to the reflection to which perceived values are important for
Brazilian organic food consumers, showing the peculiarities of this market, since they do not
reply to findings reported in previous studies in other countries. Consequently, there are
indicators that the findings may pave a better understanding about organic food
consumption in Brazil, providing information to the development of public policies and the
promotion of this market, with superior precision in the communication with consumers.
References
Aertsens, J., Mondelaers, K., Verbeke, W., Buysse, J. and Van Huylenbroeck, G. (2011), “The influence
of subjective and objective knowledge on attitude, motivations and consumption of organic
food”, British Food Journal, Vol. 113 No. 11, pp. 1353-1378.
Andrade, L.M.S. and Bertoldi, M.C. (2012), “Atitudes e motivaç~oes em relaç~ao ao consumo de alimentos
org^anicos em Belo Horizonte, MG”, Brazilian Journal of Food Technology, Vol. 15, pp. 31-40.
BFJ
Anisimova, T. (2016), “Integrating multiple factors affecting consumer behavior toward organic foods:
the role of healthism, hedonism, and trust in consumer purchase intentions of organic foods”,
Journal of Food Products Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 809-823.
Apaolaza, V., Hartmann, P., D’Souza, C. and Lopez, C.M. (2018), “Eat organic-feel good? The
relationship between organic food consumption, health concern and subjective wellbeing”, Food
Quality and Preference, Vol. 63, pp. 51-62.
Bamberg, S. and M€oser, G. (2007), “Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new metaanalysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behavior”, Journal of
Environmental Psychology, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 14-25.
Bengtsson, M., Alfredsson, E., Cohen, M., Lorek, S. and Schroeder, P. (2018), “Transforming systems of
consumption and production for achieving the sustainable development goals: moving beyond
efficiency”, Sustainability Science, Vol. 1, p. 1-15.
Brislin, R.W. (1970), “Back-translation for cross-cultural research”, Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 185-216.
Brown, T.A. (2006), Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research, Guilford Press, New York, NY.
Byrne, B.M. (2010), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and
Programming, Routledge, Ontario.
Chin, W.W. (1998), “The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling”, in
Marcoulides, G.A. (Ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
London, pp. 295-336.
Cicia, G., Del Giudice, T. and Scarpa, R. (2002), “Consumers’ perception of quality in organic food”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 104 Nos 3/4/5, pp. 200-213.
Cohen, J. (1992), “A power primer”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 112 No. 1, pp. 155-159.
Consumer Reports (2015), “The cost of organic food”, available at: https://www.consumerreports.org/
cro/news/2015/03/cost-of-organic-food/index.htm. (accessed 11 November 2018).
Cunha, D.T., Antunes, A.E.C., Da Rocha, J.G., Dutra, T.G., Manfrinato, C.V., Oliveira, J.M. and
Rostagno, M.A. (2019), “Differences between organic and conventional leafy green vegetables
perceived by university students: vegetables attributes or attitudinal aspects?”, British Food
Journal, Vol. 121 No. 7, pp. 1579-1591.
De Toni, D., Eberle, L., Larentis, F. and Milan, G.S. (2018), “Antecedents of perceived value and
repurchase intention of organic food”, Journal of Food Products Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 4,
pp. 456-475.
Ferraz, S.B., Romero, C.B.A., Rebouças, S.M.D.P. and Costa, J.S. (2016), “Produtos verdes: um estudo
sobre atitude, intenç~ao e comportamento de compra de universitarios brasileiros”, Revista de
Administraç~ao da UFSM, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 605-623.
Gleim, M.R., Smith, J.S., Andrews, D. and Cronin, J.J. Jr (2013), “Against the green: a multi-method
examination of the barriers to green consumption”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 89 No. 1, pp. 44-61.
Grunert, K.G., Hieke, S. and Wills, J. (2014), “Sustainability labels on food products: consumer
motivation, understanding and use”, Food Policy, Vol. 44, pp. 177-189.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (2013), Multivariate Data Analysis,
Pearson, Essex.
Hemmerling, S., Hamm, U. and Spiller, A. (2015), “Consumption behaviour regarding organic food from
a marketing perspective—a literature review”, Organic Agriculture, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 277-313.
Husic-Mehmedovic, M., Arslanagic-Kalajdzic, M., Kadic-Maglajlic, S. and Vajnberger, Z. (2017), “Live,
Eat, Love: life equilibrium as a driver of organic food purchase”, British Food Journal, Vol. 119
No. 7, pp. 1410-1422.
ICJBrasil Report (2017), “Relatorio ICJBrasil 18 semestre/2017”, FGV Direito SP – Escola de Direito de
S~ao Paulo, available at:https://direitosp.fgv.br/sites/direitosp.fgv.br/files/arquivos/relatorio_icj_
1sem2017.pdf, (accessed 21 04 2019).
Iraldo, F., Testa, F. and Bartolozzi, I. (2014), “An application of life cycle assessment (LCA) as a green
Perceived
marketing tool for agricultural products: the case of extra-virgin olive oil in Val di Cornia,
value,
trust and
Italy”, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 78-103.
Kohlrausch, A.K., Campos, L.M.De S. and Selig, P.M. (2004), “O comportamento do consumidor de
produtos org^anicos em Florianopolis: uma abordagem estrategica”, [Consumer behavior of
organic products in Florianopolis: a strategic approach], Revista Alcance, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 157-177.
Konuk, F.A. (2018), “The role of store image, perceived quality, trust and perceived value in predicting
consumers’purchase intention towards organic private label food”, Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, Vol. 43, pp. 304-310.
Krischke, P.J. and Tomiello, N. (2009), “O comportamento de compra dos consumidores de alimentos
org^anicos: um estudo exploratorio”, Cadernos de Pesquisa Interdisciplinar em Ci^encias
Humanas, Vol. 10 No. 96, pp. 27-43.
Lee, H. and Yun, Z. (2015), “Consumers’ perceptions of organic food attributes and cognitive and
affective attitudes as determinants of their purchase intentions toward organic food”, Food
Quality and Preference, Vol. 39, pp. 259-267.
Lim, W.M., Yong, J.L.S. and Suryadi, K. (2014), “Consumers’ perceived value and willingness to
purchase organic food”, Journal of Global Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 298-307.
Loebnitz, N. and Aschemann-Witzel, J. (2016), “Communicating organic food quality in China:
consumer perceptions of organic products and the effect of environmental value priming”, Food
Quality and Preference, Vol. 50, pp. 102-108.
Loebnitz, N. and Grunert, K.G. (2018), “The impact of abnormally shaped vegetables on consumers’
risk perception”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 63, pp. 80-87.
Mar^oco, J. (2010), “Analise de equaç~oes estruturais: fundamentos teoricos, software and aplicaç~oes”,
Report Number, P^ero Pinheiro, Portugal.
Messick, S. (1995), “Validity of psychological assessment: validation of inferences from persons’
responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning”, American Psychologist,
Vol. 50 No. 9, p. 741.
Moorman, C., Zaltman, G. and Deshpande, R. (1992), “Relationships between providers and users of
market research: the dynamics of trust”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 29 No. 3,
pp. 314-328.
Molinillo, S., Vidal-Branco, M. and Japutra, A. (2020), “Understanding the drivers of organic foods
purchasing of millennials: evidence from Brazil and Spain”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, Vol. 52, pp. 101926.
Nguyen, T.N., Vu, P.A., Phan, T.T.H. and Cao, T.K. (2015), “An exploratory investigation into
customer perceived value of food products in Vietnam”, International Business Research, Vol. 8
No. 12, pp. 1-8.
Nocella, G. and Kennedy, O. (2012), “Food health claims–What consumers understand”, Food Policy,
Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 571-580.
Nuttavuthisit, K. and Thogersen, J. (2017), “The importance of consumer trust for the emergence of a
market for green products: the case of organic food”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 140 No. 2,
pp. 323-337.
Peattie, K. (2010), “Green consumption: behavior and norms”, Annual Review of Environment and
Resources, Vol. 35, pp. 195-228.
Persaud, A. and Schillo, S.R. (2017), “Purchasing organic products: role of social context and consumer
innovativeness”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 130-146.
Pivato, S., Misani, N. and Tencati, A. (2008), “The impact of corporate social responsibility on consumer
trust: the case of organic food”, Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 3-12.
Rana, J. and Paul, J. (2017), “Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food: a review and
research agenda”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 38, pp. 157-165.
purchase
intention
BFJ
Rife, S.C., Cate, K.L., Kosinski, M. and Stillwell, D. (2016), “Participant recruitment and data collection
through Facebook: the role of personality factors”, International Journal of Social Research
Methodology, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 69-83.
Roitner-Schobesberger, B., Darnhofer, I., Somsook, S. and Vogl, C.R. (2008), “Consumer perceptions of
organic foods in Bangkok, Thailand”, Food Policy, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 112-121.
(2007), “The concept of perceived value: a systematic
Sanchez-Fernandez, R. and Iniesta-Bonillo, M.A.
review of the research”, Marketing Theory, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 427-451.
Santos, E.P. (2014), “Produç~ao org^anica e estrategia de comercializaç~ao e marketing verde em
supermercados” [Organic production and marketing strategy and green marketing in
supermarkets], Master thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, available at: http://
repositorio.unicamp.br/handle/REPOSIP/257125 (accessed 15 January 2019).
Seegebarth, B., Behrens, S.H., Klarmann, C., Hennings, N. and Scribner, L.L. (2016), “Customer value
perception of organic food: cultural differences and cross-national segments”, British Food
Journal, Vol. 118 No. 2, pp. 396-411.
Siegrist, M. (2000), “The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of
gene technology”, Risk Analysis, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 195-204.
Silva, A.R.de A., Bioto, A.S., Efraim, P. and Queiroz, G.de C. (2017), “Impact of sustainability labeling
in the perception of sensory quality and purchase intention of chocolate consumers”, Journal of
Cleaner Production, Vol. 141, pp. 11-21.
Silva, D.M., Camara, M.R.G. and Dalmas, J.C. (2005), “Produtos org^anicos: barreiras para a
disseminaç~ao do consumo de produtos org^anicos no varejo de supermercados em LondrinaPR”, Semina: Ci^encias Sociais e Humanas, Vol. 26, pp. 95-104.
Simmonds, G. and Spence, C. (2017), “Thinking inside the box: how seeing products on, or through, the
packaging influences consumer perceptions and purchase behavior”, Food Quality and
Preference, Vol. 62, pp. 340-351.
Singh, A. and Verma, P. (2017), “Factors influencing Indian consumers’ actual buying behaviour
towards organic food products”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 167, pp. 473-483.
Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J. and Sabol, B. (2002), “Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational
exchanges”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 15-37.
Sposito, E.C. and Abreu, L.S. (2018), “Os produtos org^anicos s~ao acessıveis?”, Embrapa Meio
Ambiente-Artigo em anais de congresso (ALICE). Cadernos de Agroecologia, Porto Alegre,
Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 1-7, Jul. 2018. Ediç~ao dos anais do VI Congresso Latino-Americano (CLAA), X
Congresso Brasileiro (CBA), V Seminario do DF e Entorno (SEMDF), 12-15 setembro de 2017,
Brasılia, DF, Brasil.
Suh, B.W., Eves, A. and Lumbers, M. (2015), “Developing a model of organic food choice
behavior”, Social Behavior and Personality: an International Journal, Vol. 43 No. 2,
pp. 217-230.
Sweeny, J.C. and Soutar, G.N. (2001), “Customer perceived value: the development of a multiple
item scale in hospitals”, Problems and Perspectives in Management, Vol. 5 No. 3,
pp. 252-268.
Teng, C.-C. and Wang, Y.-M. (2015), “Decisional factors driving organic food consumption”, British
Food Journal, Vol. 117 No. 3, pp. 1066-1081.
Thøgersen, J. (2010), “Country differences in sustainable consumption: the case of organic food”,
Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 171-185.
Thøgersen, J., Barcellos, M.D., Perin, M.G. and Zhou, Y. (2015), “Consumer buying motives and
attitudes towards organic food in two emerging markets: China and Brazil”, International
Marketing Review, Vol. 32 Nos 3/4, pp. 389-413.
Thøgersen, J., Pedersen, S., Paternoga, M., Schwendel, E. and Aschemann-Witzel, J. (2017), “How
important is country-of-origin for organic food consumers? A review of the literature and
suggestions for future research”, British Food Journal, Vol. 119 No. 3, pp. 542-557.
Wander, A.E., Lacerda, A.C.V., De Freitas, F.C., Didonet, A.D. and Didonet, C.C.G.M. (2007),
Perceived
“Alimentos org^anicos - oportunidades de mercado e desafios”, [Organic Foods — Market
value,
trust and
Opportunities and Challenges], Revista de Polıtica Agrıcola, No. 2, pp. 44-55.
Willer, H. and Lernoud, J. (2018), The World of Organic Agriculture: Statistics and Emerging Trends
2018, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, and IFOAM – Organics
International, Boon.
Yadav, R. and Pathak, G.S. (2016a), “Young consumers’ intention towards buying green products in a
developing nation: extending the theory of planned behavior”, Journal of Cleaner Production,
Vol. 135, pp. 732-739.
Zanoli, R., Naspetti, S., Janssen, M. and Hamm, U. (2015), “Mediation and moderation in food choice
models: a study on the effects of consumer trust in logo on choice”, Wageningen Journal of Life
Sciences, Vol. 72-73, pp. 41-48.
Zeithaml, V.A. (1988), “Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and
synthesis of evidence”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 2-22.
Zhao, R., Geng, Y., Liu, Y., Tao, X. and Xue, B. (2018), “Consumers’ perception, purchase intention, and
willingness to pay for carbon-labeled products: a case study of Chengdu in China”, Journal of
Cleaner Production, Vol. 171, pp. 1664-1671.
Corresponding author
Eluiza Alberto de Morais Watanabe can be contacted at: eluizawatanabe@unb.br
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
View publication stats
purchase
intention