Factors Affecting Consumption of Different Forms of Medicinal Plants: The Case of Licorice
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Data Collection
2.3. Hypotheses
2.4. Data Analysis
2.5. Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
- Men prefer the distillate form of licorice in comparison to the fresh and dried forms of licorice, but they prefer fresh and dried herb in comparison to syrups and essences, and tablets or candies forms of licorice.
- Those with a special disease would prefer distillates and tablets or candy forms of licorice in comparison to fresh and dried herbs.
- According to the quality and effectiveness of the products, consumers prefer the syrup and essence (group 2) and tablet or candy (group 4) forms of licorice in comparison to the fresh and dried forms of licorice. Therefore, by increasing the quality and effectiveness of other forms of medicinal plants such as licorice, their use is likely to be more than the basic group.
- Having a reputable brand for other forms of licorice increases the probability of selecting those forms of licorice in comparison to the base group (fresh or dried herbs). Therefore, creating prestigious brands for medicinal plants such as licorice would increase the possibility of consumers selecting different forms of licorice. Reputable brands create confidence for consumers and about 60% of consumers buy new products from familiar brands [32].
- Good packaging increases the probability of selecting tablet and candy forms of licorice in comparison to fresh or dried herbs. Nevertheless, packaging of other forms of licorice would not affect the probability of choosing them in comparison to the base group.
- Accessibility increases the probability of selecting tablet and candy forms of licorice in comparison to fresh or dried herbs.
- Family experience in the consumption of licorice products increases the probability of selecting syrup or essence forms of licorice in collation with fresh or dried herbs.
- The cultural index increases the possibility of selecting distillate forms of licorice in comparison to fresh and dried herbs. As previously mentioned, distillates are one of the most widely used forms of medicinal plants in Iran, having historical and cultural roots. Consumer behavior is largely dependent on cultural factors and therefore the marketing message must address the cultural characteristics that correspond to the level of acculturation [33].
- The consultation index increases the probability of selecting the distillate form of licorice in comparison to fresh or dried herbs. Cultural beliefs and consultation with traditional healers often lead to self-care or home remedies, especially in rural areas [34].
- The price of the products and family income have no significant effect on the possibility of choosing a special form of licorice by consumers. According to this result, the second hypothesis is rejected and price does not have any significant effect on choosing a special form of licorice by consumers. The demand for health care is consistently price-inelastic and the demand for health is also income-inelastic [35].
- Advertising does not have any significant effect on the possibility of choosing a specific type of product in comparison to fresh or dried herb forms of licorice.
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Bulletin of the World Health Organization. Research Guidelines for Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Herbal Medicine; WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific: Geneva, Switzerland, 1993; pp. 1–86. Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/207008 (accessed on 3 September 2022).
- Sher, H. Collection and Marketing of High Value Medicinal and Aromatic Plants from District Swat; Working Paper No. 011; International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI): Mashhad, Iran, 2013; Available online: https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/fprpsspwp/11.htm (accessed on 3 September 2022).
- Lang, D. Trade in plant material for medicinal and other purposes. Traffic Bull. 2008, 17, 21–32. [Google Scholar]
- Khan, B.; Ablimit, A.; Qureshi, R.U.; Mustafa, G. Medicinal uses of plants by the inhabitants of Khunjerab National Park, Gilgit, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot. 2011, 43, 2301–2310. [Google Scholar]
- Heidarzadeh, S.; Mohammadi, H.; Shahnoushi, N.; Karbasi, A. Factors affecting level of consumption of medicinal plants. Agric. Econ. 2016, 10, 49–68. [Google Scholar]
- Stanikzai, M.T. Market Report Liquorice. Multistakeholder Programme Natural Ingredients Afghanistan. 2007. Available online: www.tloafghanistan.org/Liquorice%20Market%20Report.pdf (accessed on 3 September 2022).
- Licorice Extracts Market, Global Industry Analysis, Size, Share, Growth, Trends and Forecast 2017–2025. Transparency Market Research Group, Rep. 2017. Available online: https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/licorice-extracts-market.html (accessed on 3 September 2022).
- Agricultural Statistics, Ministry of Jihad and Agriculture, Iran. 2021. Available online: https://www.maj.ir/page-amar/FA/65/form/pId3352 (accessed on 3 September 2022).
- Meftahizadeh, H.; Naseri, A. Barriers and Strategies for Developing Medicinal Plants Economics; Medicinal Plants Specialized Service Center, Academic Jihad Branch of Ilam Provinc: Ilam, Iran, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Roulette, C.J.; Njau, E.F.; Quinlan, M.B.; Quinlan, R.J.; Call, D.R. Medicinal foods and beverages among Maasai agro-pastoralists in northern Tanzania. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2018, 216, 191–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nelvana Ramalingum, M. Fawzi Mahomoodally, The Therapeutic Potential of Medicinal Foods. Adv. Pharmacol. Pharm. Sci. 2014, 2014, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gusain, M.S.; Sultan, Z.; Singh, C.J.; Bisht, N.S. Potential of marketing medicinal plants in Uttarakhand. J. Non Tim Prod. 2009, 16, 239–244. [Google Scholar]
- Chandra, P.; Kuniyal, C.; Pramod, C.; Jitendra, S.; Butolarakesh, C.; Sundriyal, D. Trends in the marketing of some important medicinal plants in Uttarakhand, India. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 2013, 9, 324–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, L.M.; Raina, R.S. Effects of some medicinal plants. Curr. Sci. 1998, 75, 897–900. [Google Scholar]
- UNDP. Medicinal Plants and Poverty Reduction in a Changing Climate. Restoring Ecosystems and Building Climate-Resilient Communities in the Mountains of Nepal. 2015. Available online: https://stories.undp.org/medicinal-plants-and-poverty-reduction-in-a-changing-climate (accessed on 3 September 2022).
- Hamilton, A.C. Medicinal plants, conservation, and livelihoods. Biodivers. Conserv. 2004, 13, 1477–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calixto, J.B. The medicinal use of herbal drugs, Efficacy, safety, quality control, marketing and regulatory guidelines for herbal medicines. Braz. J. Med. Biol. Res. 2000, 33, 179–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupchup, G.V.; Abhyankar, U.L.; Worley, M.M. Relationships between Hispanic ethnicity and attitudes and beliefs toward herbal medicine use among older adults. Res. Soc. Adm. Pharm. 2006, 2, 266–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menendez-Baceta, G. The importance of cultural factors in the distribution of medicinal plant knowledge: A case study in four Basque regions. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2015, 161, 116–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mubarik, F.; Noreen, S.; Farooq, F.; Khan, M.; Khan, A.U.; Pane, Y.S. Medicinal Uses of Licorice (Glycyrrhiza glabra L.): A Comprehensive Review. Open Access Maced. J. Med. Sci. 2021, 27, 668–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reuter, J.; Merfort, I.; Schempp, C.M. Botanicals in dermatology: An evidence-based review. Am. J. Clin. Dermatol. 2010, 11, 247–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Callender, V.D.; Surin-Lord, S.; Davis, E.C.; Maclin, M. Post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation: Etiologic and therapeutic considerations. Am. J. Clin. Dermatol. 2011, 12, 87–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kannappan, R.; Gupta, S.C.; Kim, J.H.; Reuter, S.; Aggarwal, B.B. Neuroprotection by spice-derived nutraceuticals: You are what you eat! Mol. Neurobiol. 2011, 44, 142–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shibata, S. A drug over the millennia: Pharmacognosy, chemistry, and pharmacology of licorice. Yakugaku Zasshi 2000, 120, 849–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, K.Z.; Song, H.; Ruyu, C. Licorice Industry in China: Implications for Licorice Producers in Uzbekistan; International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Beijing Office: Beijing, China, 2014; p. 84. [Google Scholar]
- Isbrucker, R.A.; Burdock, G.A. Risk and safety assessment on the consumption of Licorice root (Glycyrrhiza sp.), its extract and powder as a food ingredient, with emphasis on the pharmacology and toxicology of glycyrrhizin. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2006, 46, 167–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kotler, P.; Armstrong, G. Principles of Marketing; Pearson Prentice Hall Publication: Toronto, Canada, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Poliakova, A. CSI Index of Customer’s Satisfaction Applied in the Area of Public Transport; Research Papers; Faculty of Materials Science and Technology, Slovak University of Technology in Trnava: Trnava, Slovak Republic, 2015; Volume 23, pp. 141–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ebrahimzadeh, A.; Saraey, M.; Eskandari Sani, M. Analysis and evaluation of urban sustainability, case study Mashhad. J. Geogr. Res. 2010, 95, 29–54, (In Persian with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
- Long, S.J.; Freese, J. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata; Stata Press: College Station, TX, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Long, S.J. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables; SAGE Publication: London, UK, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Nielsen, O. New Product Purchase Intentions Around the World. 2013. Available online: http://www.nielsen.com/content/dam/corporate/au/en/NielsenGlobalNewProductsReportFINAL.pdf (accessed on 1 January 2014).
- Rani, P. Factors influencing consumer behavior. Int. J. Curr. Res. Acad. Rev. 2014, 2, 52–61. [Google Scholar]
- Saad, B.; Azaizeh, H.; Said, O. Tradition and Perspectives of Arab Herbal Medicine: A Review. Evid. -Based Complementary Altern. Med. 2005, 2, 475–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ringel, J.S.; Hosek, S.D.; Vollaard, B.A.; Mahnovski, S. The Elasticity of Demand for Health Care. A Review of the Literature and Its Application to the Military Health System; RAND Monograph: Santa Monica, CA, USA, 2005; ISBN/EAN: 0-8330-3109-0. [Google Scholar]
Level of Dependent Variable | Frequency | Percentage Frequency | Cumulative Frequency |
---|---|---|---|
Fresh or dried herb | 215 | 56 | 56 |
Syrups or essences | 59 | 15.3 | 71.3 |
Distillates | 71 | 18.5 | 89.8 |
Tablets and candy | 36 | 9.4 | 99.2 |
Unanswered | 3 | 0.8 | 100 |
Total | 384 | 100 |
Variable | Description | Mean | SD | Min | Max |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gender | Men = 1, Women = 0 | 0.32 | 0.46 | 0 | 1 |
Age | Year | 44 | 12 | 16 | 75 |
Dis | Having specific disease(Y = 1, N = 0) | 0.23 | 0.42 | 0 | 1 |
Adv * | Advertising | 40.4 | 20.4 | 20 | 100 |
Price * | Product price | 62.4 | 21.3 | 0 | 100 |
Brand * | Product brand | 44.8 | 21.6 | 0 | 100 |
Acs * | Product availability | 56.9 | 22.6 | 0 | 100 |
QE * | Product quality and effectiveness | 61.2 | 21.9 | 20 | 100 |
Pack * | Product packaging | 53.2 | 19.5 | 20 | 100 |
FExp * | Family consumption experience | 65.8 | 22.1 | 20 | 100 |
Cons * | Consultation index | 49.3 | 23.4 | 0 | 100 |
Culture * | Culture index | 51 | 21.4 | 20 | 100 |
Income | Family income(in million Rials) | 120 | 8 | 18 | 300 |
Variable | VIF | Variable | VIF |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | 1.47 | Quality and effectiveness | 2.06 |
Age | 1.60 | Packaging | 1.94 |
Disease | 1.30 | Family experience | 1.89 |
Advertising | 2.91 | Income | 1.47 |
Price | 1.66 | Consultation index | 2.84 |
Brand | 1.97 | Cultural index | 2.21 |
Accessibility | 1.84 |
Group | Variable | Coefficient | RRR | SD | Z Statistic | Prob. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Syrups and Essence | Gender | 0.59 | 1.82 | 0.68 | 0.88 | 0.38 |
Age | −0.042 | 0.96 | 0.03 | −1.34 | 0.18 | |
Dis | −0.97 | 0.38 | 1.16 | −0.84 | 0.42 | |
Income | 0.58 | 1.81 | 0.59 | 0.99 | 0.32 | |
Adv. | −0.24 | 0.79 | 0.49 | −0.48 | 0.63 | |
Price | −0.016 | 0.98 | 0.019 | 0.85 | 0.41 | |
QE * | 0.05 | 1.01 | 0.02 | 2.45 | 0.03 | |
Brand * | 0.017 | 1.02 | 0.008 | 2.12 | 0.04 | |
Pack | 0.028 | 1.03 | 0.02 | 1.11 | 0.27 | |
Acs | 0.0004 | 0.99 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.98 | |
Con | 0.69 | 1.92 | 0.55 | 1.32 | 0.22 | |
Cul | −1.51 | 0.22 | 1.18 | −1.27 | 0.23 | |
FExp * | 0.04 | 1.04 | 0.02 | 2 | 0.04 | |
Constant | −1.53 | 1.21 | 2.92 | −0.52 | 0.64 | |
Distillates | Gender * | 1.68 | 5.31 | 0.67 | 2.58 | 0.02 |
Age | −0.005 | 0.99 | 0.023 | −0.022 | 0.82 | |
Dis ** | 1.13 | 3.22 | 0.69 | 1.67 | 0.09 | |
Income | −0.73 | 0.48 | 0.46 | −1.56 | 0.12 | |
Adv. | 0.28 | 1.31 | 0.48 | 0.69 | 0.49 | |
Price | −0.007 | 0.99 | 0.018 | −0.39 | 0.69 | |
QE | −0.002 | 0.99 | 0.02 | −0.09 | 0.94 | |
Brand ** | 0.036 | 1.03 | 0.02 | 1.84 | 0.06 | |
Pack | −0.089 | 0.91 | 0.059 | −1.52 | 0.2 | |
Acs | −0.017 | 0.98 | 0.017 | −1.13 | 0.33 | |
Con ** | 0.93 | 2.51 | 0.52 | 1.73 | 0.09 | |
Cul * | 1.01 | 2.72 | 0.45 | 2.21 | 0.03 | |
FExp | 0.03 | 0.96 | 0.019 | 1.57 | 0.12 | |
Constant ** | 5.71 | 3.10 | 2.91 | 1.96 | 0.05 | |
Tablets and Candy | Gender | −1.48 | 0.24 | 1.21 | −1.22 | 0.23 |
Age | −0.009 | 0.99 | 0.03 | −0.32 | 0.76 | |
Dis ** | 1.82 | 6.17 | 0.94 | 1.92 | 0.05 | |
Income | 0.83 | 2.35 | 0.65 | 1.34 | 0.21 | |
Adv. | −0.79 | 0.49 | 0.58 | −1.22 | 0.23 | |
Price | −0.03 | 0.97 | 0.02 | −1.43 | 0.16 | |
QE * | 0.11 | 0.89 | 0.04 | 2.85 | 0.03 | |
Brand * | 0.07 | 1.02 | 0.03 | 2.44 | 0.02 | |
Pack ** | 0.06 | 1.06 | 0.035 | 1.81 | 0.07 | |
Acs * | 0.047 | 1.05 | 0.023 | 1.99 | 0.04 | |
Con | 1.07 | 2.94 | 0.79 | 1.35 | 0.18 | |
Cul | −0.22 | 0.79 | 0.68 | −0.33 | 0.74 | |
FExp | 0.067 | 0.93 | 0.048 | 1.48 | 0.14 | |
Constant | 0.94 | 2.61 | 3.62 | 0.26 | 0.79 | |
Log-Like Intercept only | −188.8 | Log-Like Full Model | −119.6 | |||
D (125) | 239 | LR(54) | 138.7 | |||
R2 McFadden’s Maximum | 0.37 | LR significance level | 0.000 | |||
R2 Count | 0.33 | AIC | 353 | |||
R2 Cragg-Uhler | 0.61 | BIC | 535.7 |
Categories | Stat. | DF | Prob. |
---|---|---|---|
Fresh or dried herb | 23.4 | 32 | 0.61 |
Syrups and essence | 13.3 | 32 | 0.98 |
Distillate | 18.3 | 32 | 0.86 |
Tablets or candy | 10.7 | 32 | 0.99 |
Groups of Dep. Variable | LR Stat. | Prob. | WALD | Prob. |
---|---|---|---|---|
Fresh and dried herbs with syrup and essence | 28.27 | 0.005 | 23.5 | 0.024 |
Fresh and dried herbs with Distillates | 67.2 | 0.000 | 42.6 | 0.000 |
Fresh and dried herbs with tablets and candies | 24.2 | 0.019 | 20.2 | 0.06 |
Syrups and essences with Distillates | 29.3 | 0.000 | 29.8 | 0.003 |
Syrups and essences with tablets and candies | 40.8 | 0.000 | 29.9 | 0.003 |
Distillates with tablets and candies | 40.4 | 0.000 | 30.5 | 0.002 |
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
Mohammadi, H.; Saghaian, S. Factors Affecting Consumption of Different Forms of Medicinal Plants: The Case of Licorice. Agriculture 2022, 12, 1453. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12091453
Mohammadi H, Saghaian S. Factors Affecting Consumption of Different Forms of Medicinal Plants: The Case of Licorice. Agriculture. 2022; 12(9):1453. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12091453
Chicago/Turabian StyleMohammadi, Hosein, and Sayed Saghaian. 2022. "Factors Affecting Consumption of Different Forms of Medicinal Plants: The Case of Licorice" Agriculture 12, no. 9: 1453. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12091453
APA StyleMohammadi, H., & Saghaian, S. (2022). Factors Affecting Consumption of Different Forms of Medicinal Plants: The Case of Licorice. Agriculture, 12(9), 1453. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12091453