“For More Diversity, Better Taste and My Own Health” Exploring Organic Consumers’ Purchasing Motives for Heirloom Vegetable Varieties
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Which attitudes do organic consumers express towards heirloom vegetable varieties?
- What are organic consumers’ driving purchasing motives and information requests for heirloom vegetable varieties?
- How do organic consumers assess existing communication approaches for heirloom vegetable varieties?
2. Literature Review
2.1. Importance of Plant Genetic Resources
2.2. Heirloom Varieties
- Lost varieties: mentioned in historic sources, but not available in seed banks anymore and without variety approval within the EU;
- Traditional varieties: mentioned in historic sources and currently with variety approval;
- ‘Red List’ varieties: mentioned in historic sources and available in seed banks, but without variety approval within the EU [24].
2.3. Consumer Attitudes towards Heirloom Varieties
2.4. Characteristics of Potential Target Groups for Heirloom Vegetable Varieties in Germany
3. Theoretical Framework to Classify Consumers’ Purchasing Motives
- Altruistic and biospheric values affect the accessibility of normative motivations. Hence, consumers focus on what ought to be done to safeguard the environment, e.g., they buy heirloom varieties because of their value to agrobiodiversity.
- Egoistic values affect the accessibility of gain motivation. Here, consumers focus on their own resources, such as money or status, e.g., they buy heirloom varieties because doing so helps them gain approval from their peers.
- Hedonic values affect the accessibility of hedonic motivations, i.e., consumers try to seek pleasure or avoid efforts. They may buy heirloom varieties because they are interested in their special taste [48].
- Reduce the conflict between gain/hedonic motivations and normative ones, e.g., by increasing the perceived personal benefits of an action.
- Strengthen the normative motivation and thereby weaken the other two, e.g., by putting a greater emphasis on the (positive) environmental outcome of an action.
4. Material and Methods
4.1. Focus Group Discussions
4.2. Discussion Topics and Procedure
- General consumer focus when purchasing vegetables;
- Knowledge of and attitudes towards heirloom vegetable varieties;
- Evaluation of existing communication approaches for heirloom vegetable varieties;
- Information requests for heirloom varieties;
- Existing concerns towards heirloom varieties.
4.3. Tested Communication Approaches
- ‘Like Old Times’ appeals to self-enhancement purchasing motives only.
- ‘Ostmost’ addresses self-enhancement as well as self-transcendent purchasing motives, such as the conservation of heirloom varieties.
- ‘Diversity Tastes Delicious’ focuses on self-enhancement purchasing motives and features the ‘Red List’ in its central claim, pointing out the possible loss of heirloom varieties.
- ‘Pro Specie Rara’ addresses self-enhancement as well as self-transcendent purchasing motives.
4.4. Analysis
5. Results
5.1. Knowledge and Attitudes towards Heirloom Vegetable Varieties
5.2. Evaluation of Communication Approaches
“Yes, ‘Red List’ […], but in my opinion it is a bit too dramatic. The consumer might just want to consume and not hear about any threats”.(P3, FGD3)
“But they somehow explain the complexity of the system and the reason why it is good to eat such heirloom varieties and thus support the cultivation”.(P5, FGD1)
5.3. Information Requests
“I would also be interested to know why this variety is being re-introduced into the system. Is that one special in taste? Is it particularly resistant to any pests against a virus or bacterium?”(P2, FGD3)
5.4. Purchasing Motivations
5.4.1. Self-Enhancement Motivation
“I would also be willing to pay more [for heirloom vegetables] if it really is a taste experience”.(P1, FGD 3)
5.4.2. Self-Transcendent Motivations
“So for me, I see diversity as the only solution for everything [..]. Also worldwide nutrition”.(P4, FGD 3)
6. Discussion
7. Conclusions and Limitations
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- UN. Convention on Biological Diversity, Rio de Janeiro. 1992. Available online: https://www.cbd.int/agro/whatis.shtml (accessed on 16 August 2018).
- Lin, B.B. Resilience in Agriculture through Crop Diversification: Adaptive Management for Environmental Change. BioScience 2011, 61, 183–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- FAO. The Second Report on the State of the World’s Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture Synthetic Account, Rome. 2010. Available online: http://www.fao.org/agriculture/seed/sow2/ (accessed on 29 May 2018).
- BMU. National Strategy on Biological Diversity; Environmental Policy Series: Bonn, Germany, 2007; Available online: https://biologischevielfalt.bfn.de/fileadmin/NBS/documents/Veroeffentlichungen/BMU_Natio_Strategie_en_bf.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2022).
- Bullock, J.M.; Pywell, R.F.; Burke, M.J.W.; Walker, K.J. Restoration of biodiversity enhances agricultural production. Ecol. Lett. 2001, 4, 185–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ozores-Hampton, M.; Coelho Frasca, A. Growing Heirloom Tomato Varieties in Southwest Florida. 2003. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272166234_Growing_Heirloom_Tomato_Varieties_in_Southwest_Florida (accessed on 1 February 2022).
- Padel, S.; Rossi, A.; D’Amico, S.; Sellars, A.; Oehen, B. Diversifood-Embedding Crop Diversity and Networking for Local High-Quality Food Systems: Case Studies of the Marketing of Products from Newly Bred Lines and Underutilized Crops Deliverable No. 5.1. 2018. Available online: https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/34456/1/Diversifood%20D5.1.pdf (accessed on 26 November 2018).
- Bairagi, S.; Custodio, M.C.; Durand-Morat, A.; Demont, M. Preserving cultural heritage through the valorization of Cordillera heirloom rice in the Philippines. Agric. Hum. Values 2021, 38, 257–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kleinhückelkotten, S.; Wippermann, C.; Behrendt, D.; Schürzer de Magalhaes, I.; Klär, K.; Wippermann, K.; Fiedrich, G. Kommunikation zur Agro-Biodiversität: Voraussetzungen für und Anforderungen an Eine Integrierte Kommunikationsstrategie zu Biologischer Vielfalt und Genetischen Ressourcen in der Land-, Forst-, Fischerei- und Ernährungswirtschaft (Einschließlich Gartenbau), Hannover/Heidelberg. 2006. Available online: https://docplayer.org/38382805-Kommunikation-zur-agro-biodiversitaet.html (accessed on 22 January 2018).
- Lehmann, C.; Lissek-Wolf, G.; Vögel, R.; Huyskens-Keil, S. Development of a network for the on-farm conservation of crop genetic resources: First results of a pilot project for the re-introduction of old Lactuca varieties to the market. J. Appl. Bot. Food Qual. 2009, 82, 170–178. [Google Scholar]
- Hamm, U.; Feindt, P.; Wätzold, F.; Wolters, V.; Backes, G.; Bahrs, E.; Brandt, H.; Dempllfe, L.; Engels, E.M.; Engels, J.; et al. Verbraucher für die Erhaltung der Biologischen Vielfalt in der Landwirtschaft Aktivieren!: Stellungnahme des Wissenschaftlichen Beirats für Biodiversität und Genetische Ressourcen Beim Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft. 2016. Available online: https://www.bmel.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/_Ministerium/Beiraete/biodiversitaet/stellungnahme-verbraucher-aktivieren.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 (accessed on 15 January 2018).
- Rehder, L.E.; Stange, K. Gemany: Organic Food Retail 2016; GAIN Report. 2016. Available online: https://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Organic%20Food%20Retail%202016_Berlin_Germany_1-6-2016.pdf (accessed on 20 January 2020).
- Mount, P. Growing local food: Scale and local food systems governance. Agric. Hum. Values 2012, 29, 107–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daugbjerg, C.; Smed, S.; Andersen, L.M.; Schvartzman, Y. Improving Eco-labelling as an Environmental Policy Instrument: Knowledge, Trust and Organic Consumption. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2013, 16, 559–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meier, C.; Oehen, B. Consumers’ Valuation of Farmers’ Varieties for Food System Diversity. Sustainability 2019, 11, 7134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- FIBL; IFOAM. The World of Organic Agriculture Statistics and Emerging Trends. 2021. Available online: https://www.fibl.org/fileadmin/documents/shop/1150-organic-world-2021.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2021).
- Timmermann, C.; Robaey, Z. Agrobiodiversität, das Gemeinschaftserbe-Prinzip und Marktanreize. In Biopatente: Saatgut als Ware und als Öffentliches Gut, 1st ed.; Brandl, B., Schleissing, S., Eds.; Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG: Baden-Baden, Germany, 2016; pp. 109–132. ISBN 978-3-8452-7524-6. [Google Scholar]
- Jackson, L.E.; Pascual, U.; Hodgkin, T. Utilizing and conserving agrobiodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2007, 121, 196–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ebert, A. Potential of Underutilized Traditional Vegetables and Legume Crops to Contribute to Food and Nutritional Security, Income and More Sustainable Production Systems. Sustainability 2014, 6, 319–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Messmer, M.; Wilbis, K.-P. Was ist uns gute Züchtung wert? Ökologie Landbau 2015, 174, 21–23. [Google Scholar]
- Pacicco, L.; Bodesmo, M.; Torricelli, R.; Negri, V. A methodological approach to identify agro-biodiversity hotspots for priority in situ conservation of plant genetic resources. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0197709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Diversifood. Underutilised Crops; Diversifood Innovation Factsheet No. 4. 2017. Available online: http://www.diversifood.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Diversifood_IF4_UPR-definition-1.pdf (accessed on 26 January 2018).
- IBV. Pflanzengenetische Ressourcen in Deutschland. 2018. Available online: https://pgrdeu.genres.de/rlist (accessed on 15 February 2019).
- IBV. Rote Liste der gefährdeten einheimischen Nutzpflanzen in Deutschland. In Pflanzengenetische Ressourcen in Deutschland; Bundesministerium für Landwirtschaft: Ernährung, Germany, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Padulosi, S.; Bala Ravi, P.; Rojas, W.; Sthapit, S.; Subedi, A.; Dulloo, E.; Hammer, K.; Voegel, R.; ANTOFIE, M.-M.; Negri, V.; et al. Red Lists for Cultivated Species: Why We Need It and Suggestions for the Way Forward. 2012. Available online: https://www.bioversityinternational.org/fileadmin/user_upload/online_library/publications/pdfs/Red_Lists_for_cultivated_species_1943.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2022).
- IBV. Red List of Endangered Local Crops in Germany. Available online: https://pgrdeu.genres.de/rlist?lang=en (accessed on 23 April 2018).
- BMELV. National Programme: For the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Plant Genetic Resources of Agricultural and Horticultural Crops. 2012. Available online: https://www.bmel.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/Publications/FachprogrammPflanzenRessourcen.pdf?__blob=publicationFile (accessed on 29 May 2018).
- Hyskens-Keil, D.S.; Lehmann, C.; Lissek-Wolf, G.; Lohner, H.; Vögel, R. Wiedereinführung alter Salatsorten zur Regionalen Vermarktung: Abschlussbericht Modell- und Demonstrationsvorhaben im Bereich der Biologischen Vielfalt. 2009. Available online: https://www.ble.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Projektfoerderung/MuD-Vorhaben/BiologischeVielfalt/AlteSalatsorten.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=4 (accessed on 5 March 2018).
- Bantle, C.; Hamm, U. Der Bezug von Verbrauchern zu Agrobiodiversität-Grundladen für eine zielgruppengerechte Kommunikation. Ber. Landwirtsch. -Z. Agrarpolit. Landwirtsch. 2014, 3, 1–24. [Google Scholar]
- Guerrero, L.; Claret, A.; Verbeke, W.; Enderli, G.; Zakowska-Biemans, S.; Vanhonacker, F.; Issanchou, S.; Sajdakowska, M.; Granli, B.S.; Scalvedi, L.; et al. Perception of traditional food products in six European regions using free word association. Food Qual. Prefer. 2010, 21, 225–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bantle, C.; Hamm, U. Vielfalt durch Nutzung erhalten: Entwicklung von Kommunikationsstrategien zur Agro-Biodiversität in der Gastronomie. 2014. Available online: www.orgprints.org/28070/ (accessed on 15 January 2018).
- Notari, M.; Ferencz, A. Scientific Assessment of the Importance of Traditional Hungarian Products. Lucr. Ştiinţifice 2013, 16, 37–40. [Google Scholar]
- Dinis, I.; Mendes-moreira, P.; Padel, S. Developing Marketing Strategies For Food Diversity: A Case-Study In Northern Portugal. In Proceedings of the 8th International Scientific Conference Rural Development, Jelgava, Latvia, 23–24 November 2017; Available online: http://conf.rd.asu.lt/index.php/rd/article/view/473 (accessed on 23 April 2018).
- Jordan, J.A. The Heirloom Tomato as Cultural Object: Investigating Taste and Space. Sociol. Rural. 2007, 47, 20–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joseph, H.; Nink, E.; McCarthy, A.; Messer, E.; Cash, S.B. The Heirloom Tomato is ‘In’. Does It Matter How It Tastes? Food Cult. Soc. 2017, 20, 257–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- BÖLN. Ökobarometer 2017; Ökobarometer, Bonn. 2017. Available online: https://www.bmel.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/Ernaehrung/Oekobarometer2017.pdf;jsessionid=4AB1EBB7E25958902F2E4CB58A2B31AE.2_cid288?__blob=publicationFile (accessed on 5 March 2018).
- Hempel, C.; Hamm, U. How important is local food to organic-minded consumers? Appetite 2016, 96, 309–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hempel, C.; Hamm, U. Local and/or organic: A study on consumer preferences for organic food and food from different origins. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2016, 40, 732–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Von Meyer-Höfer, M.; von der Wense, V.; Spiller, A. Characterising convinced sustainable food consumers. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 1082–1104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hemmerling, S.; Asioli, D.; Spiller, A. Core Organic Taste: Preferences for Naturalness-Related Sensory Attributes of Organic Food Among European Consumers. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2016, 22, 824–850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janssen, M. Determinants of organic food purchases: Evidence from household panel data. Food Qual. Prefer. 2018, 68, 19–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bryła, P. Organic food consumption in Poland: Motives and barriers. Appetite 2016, 105, 737–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kushwah, S.; Dhir, A.; Sagar, M.; Gupta, B. Determinants of organic food consumption. A systematic literature review on motives and barriers. Appetite 2019, 143, 104402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hemmerling, S.; Spiller, A. Old vegetable varieties: Attitude, consumption behaviour and knowledge of German consumers. Econ. Agro-Aliment. 2016, 18, 179–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Groening, C.; Sarkis, J.; Zhu, Q. Green marketing consumer-level theory review: A compendium of applied theories and further research directions. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 1848–1866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehrabian, A.; Russell, J.A. An Approach to Environmental Psychology; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1974; ISBN 0262130904. [Google Scholar]
- Stern, P.C. Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. J. Soc. Issues 2000, 56, 407–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steg, L.; Bolderdijk, J.W.; Keizer, K.; Perlaviciute, G. An Integrated Framework for Encouraging Pro-environmental Behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 38, 104–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Poortinga, W.; Spence, A.; Demski, C.; Pidgeon, N.F. Individual-motivational factors in the acceptability of demand-side and supply-side measures to reduce carbon emissions. Energy Policy 2012, 48, 812–819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steg, L.; Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. J. Environ. Psychol. 2009, 29, 309–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schleenbecker, R.; Hamm, U. Consumers’ perception of organic product characteristics. A review. Appetite 2013, 71, 420–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schrank, Z.; Running, K. Individualist and collectivist consumer motivations in local organic food markets. J. Consum. Cult. 2018, 18, 184–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Birch, D.; Memery, J.; de Silva Kanakaratne, M. The mindful consumer: Balancing egoistic and altruistic motivations to purchase local food. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2018, 40, 221–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernández-Ferrín, P.; Calvo-Turrientes, A.; Bande, B.; Artaraz-Miñón, M.; Galán-Ladero, M.M. The valuation and purchase of food products that combine local, regional and traditional features: The influence of consumer ethnocentrism. Food Qual. Prefer. 2018, 64, 138–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Punch, K.F. Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches, 2nd ed.; Sage Publication: London, UK, 2011; ISBN 9780761944171. [Google Scholar]
- Morgan, D.L. Basic and Advanced Focus Groups; Sage: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2019; ISBN 9781506327112. [Google Scholar]
- Doernberg, A.; Zasada, I.; Bruszewska, K.; Skoczowski, B.; Piorr, A. Potentials and Limitations of Regional Organic Food Supply: A Qualitative Analysis of Two Food Chain Types in the Berlin Metropolitan Region. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Helfferich, C. Die Qualität Qualitativer Daten: Manual für Die Durchführung Qualitativer Interviews, 3rd ed.; VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH Wiesbaden: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Lamnek, S. Qualitative Sozialforschung: Lehrbuch, 4th ed.; Beltz PVU: Weinheim, Germany, 2008; ISBN 3-621-27544-4. [Google Scholar]
- Dammer, I.; Szymkowiak, F. Die Gruppendiskussion in der Marktforschung: Grundlagen—Moderation—Auswertung Ein Praxisleitfaden; VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften: Wiesbaden, Germany, 1998; ISBN 3-531-13317-9. [Google Scholar]
- Kuckartz, U. Qualitative Text Analysis: A Guide to Methods, Practice & Using Software; Sage: Los Angeles, CA, USA; London, UK; New Delhi, India; Singapore; Washington, DC, USA, 2014; ISBN 978-1-4462-6775-2. [Google Scholar]
- Öhen, B.; De Gregorio, J.; Petrusan, J. Report on the Market Potential of Minor Cereal Crops and Consumers Perceptions about Them in Different European Regions; Deliverable: Brussels, Belgium, 2015; Available online: https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/33828/1/Del%20%208%201%20Market%20potential%20of%20MC.pdf (accessed on 23 April 2018).
- Fernqvist, F.; Ekelund, L. Credence and the effect on consumer liking of food—A review. Food Qual. Prefer. 2014, 32, 340–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Swahn, J.; Mossberg, L.; Öström, Å.; Gustafsson, I.-B. Sensory description labels for food affect consumer product choice. Eur. J. Mark. 2012, 46, 1628–1646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Esser, T. Bei Apfelallergien: Probieren Sie Alte Apfelsorten. Available online: https://www.ecowoman.de/20-essen-trinken/6125-alte-apfelsorten-sind-besser-vertraeglich-bei-apfelallergien-allergisch-gegen-aepfel (accessed on 4 July 2018).
- Kliem, L.; Wolter, H. How do consumers perceive open-source seed licenses? Exploring a new credence attribute. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2022, 140, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jacobson, S.K.; Morales, N.A.; Chen, B.; Soodeen, R.; Moulton, M.P.; Jain, E. Love or Loss: Effective message framing to promote environmental conservation. Appl. Environ. Educ. Commun. 2018, 8, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kareklas, I.; Carlson, J.R.; Muehling, D.D. “I Eat Organic for My Benefit and Yours”: Egoistic and Altruistic Considerations for Purchasing Organic Food and Their Implications for Advertising Strategists. J. Advert. 2014, 43, 18–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janssen, M.; Hamm, U. Product labelling in the market for organic food: Consumer preferences and willingness-to-pay for different organic certification logos. Food Qual. Prefer. 2012, 25, 9–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wannemacher, D.; Kuhnert, H. Extending Regional Supply Chains to Boost Retail Sales of Organically Produced Vegetables. 2009. Available online: http://orgprints.org/18089/1/18089-06OE085-bioland-vollertsen-2009-regionaleWertschoepfungsketten.pdf (accessed on 19 January 2018).
- Pole, A.; Kumar, A. Segmenting CSA members by motivation: Anything but two peas in a pod. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 1488–1505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naspetti, S.; Zanoli, R. Organic Food Quality and Safety Perception Throughout Europe. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2009, 15, 249–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Heid, A.; Hamm, U. Consumer Attitudes Towards Alternatives to Piglet Castration Without Pain Relief in Organic Farming: Qualitative Results from Germany. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics. 2012, 25, 687–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Purchase Motivation | Examples |
---|---|
Self-enhancing purchase of old varieties for one’s own benefit or to improve one’s own feelings | taste, attractive appearance, new recipes, health benefits |
Self-transcending purchase of old varieties to protect the environment for other people and for one’s own sake | diversity, regionality, the adaptability of old varieties to climate change, benefits for horticulturist |
Demographics | Description of Participants |
---|---|
Gender | Female: 13 |
Male: 2 | |
Age range | >25: 3 |
26–40: 6 | |
41–55: 4 | |
56–70: 2 | |
<70: 0 | |
Educational level * | Low: 0 |
Medium: 3 | |
Superior: 12 | |
Usual place of vegetable Purchase (Multiple answers possible) | Conventional supermarkets: 5 |
Organic supermarkets: 10 | |
Others: 12 |
Organisation | Logo and Key Messages | Self-Enhancement Motivation | Self-Transcendent Motivation |
---|---|---|---|
‘Pro Specie Rara’ Swiss foundation for the cultural and genetic diversity of plants and animals | XXX Taste, appearance | XXX Cultural heritage, adaptation capacity | |
‘Ostmost’ Berlin-based company producing juice and cider from orchard meadows | XXX Taste, hedonic product design | XX Diversity, ecosystem functions | |
Vielfalt schmeckt’ (‘Diversity Tastes Delicious‘) Project of ‘Pro Specie Rara’ Germany and a regional natural food wholesaler to promote heirloom varieties | X Taste | XXX Adaptation capacity, Diversity | |
Wie Früher (‘Like Old Times’): Own brand of the Austrian supermarket chain store ‘Spar’. The claim was adapted to the regional context. | XX Taste, quality, exclusivity | X Regionality |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. 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
Lauterbach, J.; Bantle, C. “For More Diversity, Better Taste and My Own Health” Exploring Organic Consumers’ Purchasing Motives for Heirloom Vegetable Varieties. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4068. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074068
Lauterbach J, Bantle C. “For More Diversity, Better Taste and My Own Health” Exploring Organic Consumers’ Purchasing Motives for Heirloom Vegetable Varieties. Sustainability. 2022; 14(7):4068. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074068
Chicago/Turabian StyleLauterbach, Josephine, and Christina Bantle. 2022. "“For More Diversity, Better Taste and My Own Health” Exploring Organic Consumers’ Purchasing Motives for Heirloom Vegetable Varieties" Sustainability 14, no. 7: 4068. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074068
APA StyleLauterbach, J., & Bantle, C. (2022). “For More Diversity, Better Taste and My Own Health” Exploring Organic Consumers’ Purchasing Motives for Heirloom Vegetable Varieties. Sustainability, 14(7), 4068. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074068