Effects of Food Cooperative Membership on What Consumers Buy and Where They Buy: Evidence from Korean Household Panel Data 2015–2019
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Reviews
2.1. Alternative Food Networks
2.2. Effects of Alternative Food Networks on Consumers Purchase Behavior
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Food Cooperatives in Korea
3.2. Regression Models
- M1: ;
- M2: .
- Yi: Expenditure on food category i
- Yj: Visit frequency ratio of grocery store format j
- ME: Food cooperative membership (Yes or No)
- AG: Age
- FM: Family size
- EX: Annual grocery expenditure
- IC: Monthly income for household
3.3. Data
3.3.1. Dependent Variable: Expenditure Per Food Category (M1)
3.3.2. Dependent Variable: Visit Frequency Ratio Per Store Format (M2)
3.3.3. Explanatory Variable: Food Cooperative Membership
3.3.4. Explanatory Variable: Sociodemographic Variables
4. Results
4.1. Food Cooperative Membership and Expenditure Per Food Category
4.2. Food Cooperative Membership and Grocery Store Format
5. Discussion
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Neulinger, A.; Bársony, F.; Gjorevska, N.; Lazányi, O.; Pataki, G.; Takács, S.; Török, A. Engagement and subjective well-being in alternative food networks: The case of Hungary. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2020, 44, 306–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, H.; Campbell, B.; Rabinowitz, A.N. Factors impacting producer marketing through community supported agriculture. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0219498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Atalan-Helicke, N.; Abiral, B. Alternative food distribution networks, resilience, and urban food security in Turkey during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Agric. Food Syst. Commun. Dev. 2021, 10, 89–104. [Google Scholar]
- Migliore, G.; Romeo, P.; Testa, R.; Schifani, G. Beyond alternative food networks: Understanding motivations to participate in Orti Urbani in Palermo. Cult. Agric. Food Environ. 2019, 41, 129–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zepeda, L.; Leviten-Reid, C. Consumers’ views on local food. J. Food Distrib. Res. 2004, 35, 6. [Google Scholar]
- Uribe, A.L.M.; Winham, D.M.; Wharton, C.M. Community supported agriculture membership in Arizona. An exploratory study of food and sustainability behaviours. Appetite 2012, 59, 431–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Perez, J.; Allen, P.; Brown, M. Community Supported Agriculture on the Central Coast: The CSA Member Experience; Research Brief; The Center of Agroecology and Sustainable Food System: Santa Cruz, CA, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Allen IV, J.E.; Rossi, J.; Woods, T.A.; Davis, A.F. Do community supported agriculture programmes encourage change to food lifestyle behaviours and health outcomes? New evidence from shareholders. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 2017, 15, 70–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.-H.; Song, G.-H. The Preference Analysis on Environmentally Friendly Agricultural Products in Consumers’ Cooperatives. J. Korean Reg. Econ. 2011, 20, 101–115. [Google Scholar]
- Mihrshahi, S.; Partridge, S.R.; Zheng, X.; Ramachandran, D.; Chia, D.; Boylan, S.; Chau, J.Y. Food co-operatives: A potential community-based strategy to improve fruit and vegetable intake in Australia. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 4154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wilkins, J.L. Seasonality, food origin, and food preference: A comparison between food cooperative members and nonmembers. J. Nutr. Educ. 1996, 28, 329–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zikmund, W.G.; Babin, B.J.; Carr, J.C.; Griffin, M. Business Research Methods, 9th ed.; South-Western Cengage Learning: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Zoll, F.; Specht, K.; Opitz, I.; Siebert, R.; Piorr, A.; Zasada, I. Individual choice or collective action? Exploring consumer motives for participating in alternative food networks. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2018, 42, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, J. Hansalim Organic Cooperative—A Best Practice Model of Direct Sales Between Farmers and Consumers. In Proceedings of the IFOAM Organic World Congress 2014, Istanbul, Turkey, 13–15 October 2014. [Google Scholar]
- International Cooperative Alliance. Available online: https://www.ica.coop/en (accessed on 21 August 2022).
- Venn, L.; Kneafsey, M.; Holloway, L.; Cox, R.; Dowler, E.; Tuomainen, H. Researching European ‘alternative’ food networks: Some methodological considerations. Area 2006, 38, 248–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodman, D.; Goodman, M.K. Food network, Alternative. In International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, 2nd ed.; Kobayashi, A., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 175–185. [Google Scholar]
- Curtis, K.R.; Allen, K.; Ward, R.A. Food consumption, attitude, and behavioral change among CSA members: A northern Utah case study. J. Food Distrib. Res. 2015, 46, 3–16. [Google Scholar]
- Russell, W.S.; Zepeda, L. The adaptive consumer: Shifting attitudes, behavior change and CSA membership renewal. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2008, 23, 136–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zepeda, L.; Reznickova, A.; Russell, W.S. CSA membership and psychological needs fulfillment: An application of self-determination theory. Agric. Hum. Values 2013, 30, 605–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, S.V.; Markham, C.; Chow, J.; Ranjit, N.; Pomeroy, M.; Raber, M. Evaluating a school-based fruit and vegetable co-op in low-income children: A quasi-experimental study. Prev. Med. 2016, 91, 8–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vasquez, A.; Sherwood, N.E.; Larson, N.; Story, M. Community-supported agriculture as a dietary and health improvement strategy: A narrative review. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 2017, 117, 83–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nilsson, E.; Gärling, T.; Marell, A.; Nordvall, A.C. Who shops groceries where and how? The relationship between choice of store format and type of grocery shopping. Int. Rev. Retail Distrib. Consum. Res. 2015, 25, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jang, S. The Management of Consumer Co-Operatives in Korea: Identity, Participation and Sustainability; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2020; pp. 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Hansalim 2021 Annual Report. Available online: http://www.hansalim.or.kr/?p=56558 (accessed on 21 August 2022).
- iCOOP 2021 Annual Report. Available online: http://sapenet.net/reports_ko (accessed on 21 August 2022).
- Dure 2021 Annual Report. Available online: http://dure-coop.or.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=B04 (accessed on 21 August 2022).
- Black, C.; Ntani, G.; Inskip, H.; Cooper, C.; Cummins, S.; Moon, G.; Baird, J. Measuring the healthfulness of food retail stores: Variations by store type and neighbourhood deprivation. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2014, 11, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, Y.; Keogh, J.B.; Clifton, P.M. Differential Effects of Red Meat/Refined Grain Diet and Dairy/Chicken/Nuts/Whole Grain Diet on Glucose, Insulin and Triglyceride in a Randomized Crossover Study. Nutrients 2016, 8, 687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mediterranean Diet for Heart Health. Available online: https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/mediterranean-diet/art-20047801 (accessed on 15 September 2022).
- FAO. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2020; Available online: https://www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/ca9229en/ (accessed on 16 September 2022).
Authors | Participants | Effect on Consumers | Data Collection Methods | Statistical Methods |
---|---|---|---|---|
Allen et al. [8] | 151 shareholders from CSAs | Consumer increased in fruit and vegetable consumption (4.55 to 7.22), and organic foods (4.49 to 7.50) while decreased in eating processed foods for meals (3.81 to 2.16) and snacks (5.07 to 3.39) after joining CSA (p < 0.001) | Self-administered survey | Paired t-tests |
Curtis et al. [18] | 14 participant families of CSA | Consumers purchase more fresh produce (21% vs. 39%) and fewer grain products (8% vs. 6%) during CSA participation (p < 0.05) | Food purchase receipts | Paired t-tests |
Lee and Song [9] | 121 food purchasers (includes 29 food cooperative members) | Members of food cooperative are 12.58% more likely to evaluate the price of organic food product as appropriate (p < 0.001) | Self-administered survey | Ordered logit model |
Mihrshahi et al. [10] | 317 food purchasers (includes 51 food cooperative members) | Member of food cooperative had a higher vegetable intake rather than nonmembers (3.13 vs. 2.59 serves daily) (p < 0.01) | Self-administered survey | t-test |
Perez et al. [7] | 274 CSA members | 63.5% of respondents increased in the amount and variety of vegetables | Self-administered survey | Descriptive statistics |
Russell and Zepeda [19] | 23 CSA members | Increase in vegetable consumption, exploring new foods, storing excess vegetables, and reduced meat consumption | Focused group interview (FGI) | Descriptive statistics |
Uribe et al. [6] | 115 CSA members | Majority of respondents self-reported an increase in the amount (67.5%) and variety (92.1%) of fruits and vegetables | Self-administered survey | Descriptive statistics |
Wilkins [11] | 309 food purchasers (includes 193 food cooperative members) | Food cooperative members has less processed and convenience food pattern than nonmembers (8.7 vs. 10.6) (p < 0.01), but no significant difference on whole food pattern between the two groups (21.3 vs. 18.6) | Self-administered survey | t-tests |
Name | Number of Members | Revenue (1,000,000 KRW) | Website | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|
Hansalim | 795,315 | 493,630 | www.hansalim.or.kr (accessed on 21 August 2022) | Hansalim [25] |
iCOOP | 293,812 | 650,300 | www.icoop.or.kr (accessed on 21 August 2022) | iCOOP [26] |
Dure | 236,429 | 149,825 | dure-coop.or.kr (accessed on 21 August 2022) | Dure [27] |
Variables | Mean | Min. | Max. | |
---|---|---|---|---|
M1 Dependent variables (Unit: KRW) | Processed food expenditure | 9,061,626 | 1,244,350 | 33,919,727 |
Fresh food expenditure | 10,567,463 | 82,940 | 39,959,585 | |
Grain expenditure | 794,621 | 0 | 3,976,960 | |
Vegetables expenditure | 2,308,738 | 1780 | 12,800,560 | |
Fruits expenditure | 2,380,864 | 8870 | 13,747,048 | |
Seafood expenditure | 1,426,278 | 0 | 14,559,977 | |
Meat expenditure | 3,540,222 | 19,000 | 20,467,206 | |
M2 Dependent variables (Unit:%) | Smaller supermarket visit frequency ratio | 45.94 | 0.56 | 97.09 |
Bigger supermarket visit frequency ratio | 15.53 | 0 | 99.16 | |
Traditional market visit frequency ratio | 16.83 | 0 | 86.26 | |
Convenience store visit frequency ratio | 4.04 | 0 | 83.12 | |
Online grocery shop visit frequency ratio | 2.35 | 0 | 55.93 | |
M1, M2 Explanatory variables | Food cooperative membership | Yes = 216, No = 820 | ||
Age | 54.4 | 26 | 81 | |
Family size | 2.9 | 1 | 7 | |
Annual grocery expenditure (1000 KRW) | 19,629 | 1901 | 63,752 | |
Monthly income for household (1000 KRW) | 4783 | 100 | 29,700 |
M1-1 Processed Food | M1-2 Fresh Food | M1-3 Grain | M1-4 Vegetables | M1-5 Fruits | M1-6 Seafood | M1-7 Meat | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Food Coop. Membership | −0.031 * | 0.026 * | 0.027 | 0.045 * | 0.069 ** | 0.007 | −0.024 |
Age | −0.308 *** | 0.258 *** | 0.337 *** | 0.387 *** | 0.113 *** | 0.268 *** | 0.042 + |
Family size | 0.115 *** | −0.096 *** | −0.002 | −0.091 *** | −0.106 *** | −0.171 *** | 0.000 |
Annual food expenditure | 0.830 ** | 0.855 *** | 0.447 *** | 0.645 *** | 0.693 *** | 0.642 *** | 0.725 *** |
Monthly income for household | −0.036 * | 0.030 * | −0.035 | −0.060 * | 0.050 + | 0.000 | 0.097 *** |
Adjusted R squared | 0.7724 | 0.8406 | 0.3624 | 0.6221 | 0.5030 | 0.4942 | 0.5850 |
M2-1 Small Supermarket | M2-2 Large Supermarket | M2-3 Traditional Market | M2-4 Convenience Store | M2-5 Online Grocery Shop | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Food Coop. Membership | −0.055 + | 0.014 | −0.056 * | 0.035 | −0.031 |
Age | −0.010 | −0.150 *** | 0.472 *** | −0.389 *** | −0.229 *** |
Family size | 0.267 *** | −0.074 + | −0.031 | −0.235 *** | −0.079 * |
Annual food expenditure | −0.202 *** | 0.160 *** | −0.005 | −0.095 ** | 0.146 *** |
Monthly income for household | −0.071 * | 0.081 * | −0.070 * | 0.027 | 0.032 |
Adjusted R squared | 0.0618 | 0.0386 | 0.2471 | 0.2037 | 0.0493 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lee, D. Effects of Food Cooperative Membership on What Consumers Buy and Where They Buy: Evidence from Korean Household Panel Data 2015–2019. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12197. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912197
Lee D. Effects of Food Cooperative Membership on What Consumers Buy and Where They Buy: Evidence from Korean Household Panel Data 2015–2019. Sustainability. 2022; 14(19):12197. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912197
Chicago/Turabian StyleLee, Dongmin. 2022. "Effects of Food Cooperative Membership on What Consumers Buy and Where They Buy: Evidence from Korean Household Panel Data 2015–2019" Sustainability 14, no. 19: 12197. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912197
APA StyleLee, D. (2022). Effects of Food Cooperative Membership on What Consumers Buy and Where They Buy: Evidence from Korean Household Panel Data 2015–2019. Sustainability, 14(19), 12197. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912197