Habits, Health and Environment in the Purchase of Bakery Products: Consumption Preferences and Sustainable Inclinations before and during COVID-19
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Bakery Products
3. Survey Method
3.1. Work Plan, Data Collection
- Socio-demographic characteristics of the interviewees;
- Information on the consumption and type of bakery product purchased (artisanal/local or industrial)
- Information on the place of purchase of the products;
- Frequency and quantity purchased;
- Description of buying behavior.
3.2. Methodological Approach
3.3. Research Hypothesis
3.3.1. Consumption Experience (CE): Health Awareness and Environmental Awareness
3.3.2. Informed Consumers 4.0 (IC) and Choice of Points of Sale (St)
4. Results
4.1. The Sample Data before and during COVID-19
4.2. The Results of the Multicriterial Analysis Applied to the Data Collected before COVID-19
4.2.1. Factorial Analysis
4.2.2. The PLS-SEM Model
4.3. Consumption and Choices of Agri-Food Products during the Lockdown: Changes and Trends for Bakery Products
5. Discussion and Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Gliessman, S. Transforming Our Food Systems. Agroecol. Sustain. Food Syst. 2018, 42, 475–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gliessman, S. Changing the Food System Narrative. Agroecol. Sustain. Food Syst. 2022, 46, 789–790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- di Santo, N.; Russo, I.; Sisto, R. Climate Change and Natural Resource Scarcity: A Literature Review on Dry Farming. Land 2022, 11, 2102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skalkos, D.; Kalyva, Z.C. Exploring the Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Food Choice Motives: A Systematic Review. Sustainability 2023, 15, 1606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haleem, A.; Javaid, M.; Vaishya, R. Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic in Daily Life. Curr. Med. Res. Pract. 2020, 10, 78–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alaimo, L.S.; Fiore, M.; Galati, A. Measuring Consumers’ Level of Satisfaction for Online Food Shopping during COVID-19 in Italy Using POSETs. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2022, 82, 101064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romeo-Arroyo, E.; Mora, M.; Vázquez-Araújo, L. Consumer Behavior in Confinement Times: Food Choice and Cooking Attitudes in Spain. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2020, 21, 100226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fava, N.; Laganà, V.R.; Nicolosi, A. The Impact of COVID-19 on Municipal Food Markets: Resilience or Innovative Attitude? JOItmC 2022, 8, 87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karantonis, H.C.; Nasopoulou, C.; Skalkos, D. Functional Bakery Snacks for the Post-COVID-19 Market, Fortified with Omega-3 Fatty Acids. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galanakis, C.M. The Food Systems in the Era of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic Crisis. Foods 2020, 9, 523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ceniti, C.; Tilocca, B.; Britti, D.; Santoro, A.; Costanzo, N. Food Safety Concerns in “COVID-19 Era”. Microbiol. Res. 2021, 12, 53–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nicolosi, A.; Laganà, V.R.; Cortese, L.; Privitera, D. Using the Network and MCA on Tourist Attractions. The Case of Aeolian Islands, Italy. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingrassia, M.; Bellia, C.; Giurdanella, C.; Columba, P.; Chironi, S. Digital Influencers, Food and Tourism—A New Model of Open Innovation for Businesses in the Ho.Re.Ca. Sector. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Briliana, V.; Ruswidiono, W.; Deitiana, T. How Social Media Are Successfully Transforming the Marketing of Local Street Food to Better Serve the Constantly-Connected Digital Consumer. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Entrepreneurship and Business Management (ICEBM 2020) (Vol. 174); Atlantis Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeb, S.; Hussain, S.S.; Javed, A. COVID-19 and a Way Forward for Restaurants and Street Food Vendors. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2021, 8, 1923359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nicolosi, A.; Cortese, L.; Petullà, M.; Laganà, V.R.; Di Gregorio, D.; Privitera, D. Sustainable Attitudes of Local People on the Purchase of Local Food. An Empirical Investigation on Italian Products. In New Metropolitan Perspectives; Bevilacqua, C., Calabrò, F., Della Spina, L., Eds.; Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; Volume 178, pp. 45–55. ISBN 978-3-030-48278-7. [Google Scholar]
- Rivza, B.; Foris, D.; Foris, T.; Privitera, D.; Uljanova, E.; Rivza, P. GASTRONOMIC HERITAGE: A CONTRIBUTOR TO SUSTAINABLE LOCAL TOURISM DEVELOPMENT. GTG 2022, 44, 1326–1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gellynck, X.; Kühne, B.; Van Bockstaele, F.; Van de Walle, D.; Dewettinck, K. Consumer Perception of Bread Quality. Appetite 2009, 53, 16–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mitelut, A.C.; Popa, E.E.; Popescu, P.A.; Popa, M.E. Chapter 7—Trends of Innovation in Bread and Bakery Production. In Trends in Wheat and Bread Making; Galanakis, C.M., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2021; pp. 199–226. ISBN 978-0-12-821048-2. [Google Scholar]
- Civero, G.; Rusciano, V.; Scarpato, D.; Simeone, M. Food: Not Only Safety, but Also Sustainability. The Emerging Trend of New Social Consumers. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lang, T. Food Industrialisation and Food Power: Implications for Food Governance: Food Industrialisation and Food Power: Implications for Food Governance. Dev. Policy Rev. 2003, 21, 555–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Augustin, M.A.; Riley, M.; Stockmann, R.; Bennett, L.; Kahl, A.; Lockett, T.; Osmond, M.; Sanguansri, P.; Stonehouse, W.; Zajac, I.; et al. Role of Food Processing in Food and Nutrition Security. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 56, 115–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laganà, V.; Giuffrè, A.M.; De Bruno, A.; Poiana, M. Formulation of Biscuits Fortified with a Flour Obtained from Bergamot By-Products (Citrus Bergamia, Risso). Foods 2022, 11, 1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lang, T.; Barling, D. Food Security and Food Sustainability: Reformulating the Debate: Food Security and Food Sustainability: Reformulating the Debate. Geogr. J. 2012, 178, 313–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maurice, B.; Saint-Eve, A.; Pernin, A.; Leroy, P.; Souchon, I. How Different Are Industrial, Artisanal and Homemade Soft Breads? Foods 2022, 11, 1484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Imeneo, V.; Romeo, R.; Gattuso, A.; De Bruno, A.; Piscopo, A. Functionalized Biscuits with Bioactive Ingredients Obtained by Citrus Lemon Pomace. Foods 2021, 10, 2460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Briamonte, L.; Pergamo, R.; Arru, B.; Furesi, R.; Pulina, P.; Madau, F.A. Sustainability Goals and Firm Behaviours: A Multi-Criteria Approach on Italian Agro-Food Sector. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rana, J.; Paul, J. Consumer Behavior and Purchase Intention for Organic Food: A Review and Research Agenda. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 38, 157–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oroian, C.; Safirescu, C.; Harun, R.; Chiciudean, G.; Arion, F.; Muresan, I.; Bordeanu, B. Consumers’ Attitudes towards Organic Products and Sustainable Development: A Case Study of Romania. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lendvai, M.B.; Kovács, I.; Balázs, B.F.; Beke, J. Health and Environment Conscious Consumer Attitudes: Generation Z Segment Personas According to the LOHAS Model. Soc. Sci. 2022, 11, 269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chu, K. Mediating Influences of Attitude on Internal and External Factors Influencing Consumers’ Intention to Purchase Organic Foods in China. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dragolea, L.-L.; Butnaru, G.I.; Kot, S.; Zamfir, C.G.; Nuţă, A.-C.; Nuţă, F.-M.; Cristea, D.S.; Ştefănică, M. Determining Factors in Shaping the Sustainable Behavior of the Generation Z Consumer. Front. Environ. Sci. 2023, 11, 1096183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mustapa, M.A.C.; Amin, L.; Frewer, L.J. Predictors of Stakeholders’ Intention to Adopt Nutrigenomics. Genes Nutr. 2020, 15, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bassi, I.; Carzedda, M.; Grassetti, L.; Iseppi, L.; Nassivera, F. Consumer Attitudes towards the Mountain Product Label: Implications for Mountain Development. J. Mt. Sci. 2021, 18, 2255–2272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chinnici, G.; Pecorino, B. L’applicazione dell’analisi statistica multivariata al consumo dei prodotti da forno in Sicilia. Econ. Agro-Aliment. 2001, VI, 38–78. [Google Scholar]
- Rev, N. NACE Rev. 2 Structure and Correspondences with NACE Rev. 1.1 and ISIC Rev.4. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-manuals-and-guidelines/-/ks-ra-07-015 (accessed on 13 January 2023).
- International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC); United Nations (Ed.) Statistical papers. Series M.; Rev. 4.; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2008; ISBN 978-92-1-161518-0.
- Chiaraluce, G.; Bentivoglio, D.; Finco, A. Circular Economy for a Sustainable Agri-Food Supply Chain: A Review for Current Trends and Future Pathways. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- dos Santos, J.I.A.S.; da Silveira, D.S.; da Costa, M.F.; Duarte, R.B. Consumer Behaviour in Relation to Food Waste: A Systematic Literature Review. BFJ 2022, 124, 4420–4439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guiné, R.P.F. Textural Properties of Bakery Products: A Review of Instrumental and Sensory Evaluation Studies. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foschia, M.; Horstmann, S.W.; Arendt, E.K.; Zannini, E. Legumes as Functional Ingredients in Gluten-Free Bakery and Pasta Products. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 8, 75–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siddiqui, S.A.; Mahmud, M.M.C.; Abdi, G.; Wanich, U.; Farooqi, M.Q.U.; Settapramote, N.; Khan, S.; Wani, S.A. New Alternatives from Sustainable Sources to Wheat in Bakery Foods: Science, Technology, and Challenges. J. Food Biochem. 2022, 46, e14185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skořepa, L.; Pícha, K. Factors of Purchase of Bread—Prospect to Regain the Market Share? Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun. 2016, 64, 1067–1072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bruschi, V.; Teuber, R.; Dolgopolova, I. Acceptance and Willingness to Pay for Health-Enhancing Bakery Products—Empirical Evidence for Young Urban Russian Consumers. Food Qual. Prefer. 2015, 46, 79–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Irigoytia, M.B.; Irigoytia, K.; Sosa, N.; de Escalada Pla, M.; Genevois, C. Blueberry By-product as a Novel Food Ingredient: Physicochemical Characterization and Study of Its Application in a Bakery Product. J Sci Food Agric 2022, 102, 4551–4560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, M.K.; Kwak, H.S. Influence of Functional Information on Consumer Liking and Consumer Perception Related to Health Claims for Blueberry Functional Beverages. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 50, 70–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lukinac, J.; Jukić, M. Barley in the Production of Cereal-Based Products. Plants 2022, 11, 3519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, N.; Mohammad Shah, K.A. The Impact of Ecological Innovation on the Food Production Quality: Mediating Role of Environmental Awareness. Econ. Res. Ekon. Istraživanja 2023, 36, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petrescu, A.; Oncioiu, I.; Petrescu, M. Perception of Organic Food Consumption in Romania. Foods 2017, 6, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdi, H.; Williams, L.J. Principal Component Analysis: Principal Component Analysis. WIREs Comp. Stat. 2010, 2, 433–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heckathorn, D.D.; Cameron, C.J. Network Sampling: From Snowball and Multiplicity to Respondent-Driven Sampling. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2017, 43, 101–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gewers, F.L.; Ferreira, G.R.; Arruda, H.F.D.; Silva, F.N.; Comin, C.H.; Amancio, D.R.; Costa, L.D.F. Principal Component Analysis: A Natural Approach to Data Exploration. ACM Comput. Surv. 2022, 54, 1–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Samantha Kumara, P.A.P.; Canhua, K. Perceptions of Country of Origin: An Approach to Identifying Expectations of Foreign Products. J. Brand Manag. 2010, 17, 343–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaiser, H.F.; Rice, J. Little Jiffy, Mark Iv. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1974, 34, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, M.-F.; Li, H.-L. The Consumer’s Attitude toward Genetically Modified Foods in Taiwan. Food Qual. Prefer. 2007, 18, 662–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lei, P.-W.; Wu, Q. Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling: Issues and Practical Considerations. Educ. Meas. Issues Pract. 2007, 26, 33–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dash, G.; Paul, J. CB-SEM vs PLS-SEM Methods for Research in Social Sciences and Technology Forecasting. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 173, 121092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parashar, S.; Singh, S.; Sood, G. Examining the Role of Health Consciousness, Environmental Awareness and Intention on Purchase of Organic Food: A Moderated Model of Attitude. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 386, 135553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McEachan, R.; Taylor, N.; Harrison, R.; Lawton, R.; Gardner, P.; Conner, M. Meta-Analysis of the Reasoned Action Approach (RAA) to Understanding Health Behaviors. Ann. Behav. Med. 2016, 50, 592–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Scalco, A.; Noventa, S.; Sartori, R.; Ceschi, A. Predicting Organic Food Consumption: A Meta-Analytic Structural Equation Model Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior. Appetite 2017, 112, 235–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Canova, L.; Bobbio, A.; Manganelli, A.M. Buying Organic Food Products: The Role of Trust in the Theory of Planned Behavior. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 575820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hooper, D. Exploratory Factor Analysis. In Books/Book Chapters; Part of the Management Sciences and Quantitative Methods Commons; Chen, H., Ed.; ’Approaches to Quantitative Research—Theory and its Practical Application: A Guide to Dissertation Students’; Oak Tree Press: Cork, Ireland, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Ralph, M.; Gregory, H. Structural Equation Modeling; Routledge: London, UK, 2018; pp. 445–456. ISBN 978-1-315-75564-9. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.F.; Babin, B.J.; Krey, N. Covariance-Based Structural Equation Modeling in the Journal of Advertising: Review and Recommendations. J. Advert. 2017, 46, 163–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayes, A.F.; Montoya, A.K.; Rockwood, N.J. The Analysis of Mechanisms and Their Contingencies: PROCESS versus Structural Equation Modeling. Australas. Mark. J. 2017, 25, 76–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ringle, C.M.; Becker, J.M.; Cheah, J.-H.; Sarstedt, M. PLS-SEMs Most Wanted Guidance 2022. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2022. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4205561 (accessed on 31 August 2022).
- Martínez Ávila, M.; Fierro Moreno, E. Aplicación de La Técnica PLS-SEM En La Gestión Del Conocimiento: Un Enfoque Técnico Práctico/Application of the PLS-SEM Technique in Knowledge Management: A Practical Technical Approach. RIDE 2018, 8, 130–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- You, J.-J.; Jong, D.; Wiangin, U. Consumers’ Purchase Intention of Organic Food via Social Media: The Perspectives of Task-Technology Fit and Post-Acceptance Model. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 579274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Urbach, N.; Ahlemann, F. Structural Equation Modeling in Information Systems Research Using Partial Least Squares. J. Inf. Technol. Theory Appl. (JITTA) 2010, 11, 2. [Google Scholar]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A New Criterion for Assessing Discriminant Validity in Variance-Based Structural Equation Modeling. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lazzarini, G.A.; Visschers, V.H.M.; Siegrist, M. How to Improve Consumers’ Environmental Sustainability Judgements of Foods. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 198, 564–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tarkiainen, A.; Sundqvist, S. Subjective Norms, Attitudes and Intentions of Finnish Consumers in Buying Organic Food. Br. Food J. 2005, 107, 808–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saura, J.R.; Debasa, F.; Reyes-Menendez, A. Does User Generated Content Characterize Millennials’ Generation Behavior? Discussing the Relation between SNS and Open Innovation. JOItmC 2019, 5, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Konuk, F.A. The Role of Store Image, Perceived Quality, Trust and Perceived Value in Predicting Consumers’ Purchase Intentions towards Organic Private Label Food. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2018, 43, 304–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morales, L.E.; Ehmke, M.D.; Sheridan, A. Consumer Trust and Purchase of Perishable Fresh Food Online Versus In-Store: The Case of Beef. J. Int. Food Agribus. Mark. 2022, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sakaya, A.J. Fear of COVID-19 and Green Bank Service Purchase Intention: The Mediating Effect of Customer Empowerment and Cus-tomers’ Perceived Value of Digital Service Transactions. Arab. Gulf J. Sci. Res. 2023; ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.F.; Risher, J.J.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M. When to Use and How to Report the Results of PLS-SEM. EBR 2019, 31, 2–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chin, W.W. How to Write Up and Report PLS Analyses. In Handbook of Partial Least Squares; Esposito Vinzi, V., Chin, W.W., Henseler, J., Wang, H., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010; pp. 655–690. ISBN 978-3-540-32825-4. [Google Scholar]
- Hamid, M.R.A.; Sami, W.; Sidek, M.H.M. Discriminant Validity Assessment: Use of Fornell & Larcker Criterion versus HTMT Criterion. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2017, 890, 012163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Russo, D.; Stol, K.-J. PLS-SEM for Software Engineering Research: An Introduction and Survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 2022, 54, 1–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benitez, J.; Henseler, J.; Castillo, A.; Schuberth, F. How to Perform and Report an Impactful Analysis Using Partial Least Squares: Guidelines for Confirmatory and Explanatory IS Research. Inf. Manag. 2020, 57, 103168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franke, G.; Sarstedt, M. Heuristics versus Statistics in Discriminant Validity Testing: A Comparison of Four Procedures. INTR 2019, 29, 430–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moorman, C.; Diehl, K.; Brinberg, D.; Kidwell, B. Subjective Knowledge, Search Locations, and Consumer Choice. J. Consum. Res. 2004, 31, 673–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aertsens, J.; Mondelaers, K.; Verbeke, W.; Buysse, J.; Van Huylenbroeck, G. The Influence of Subjective and Objective Knowledge on Attitude, Motivations and Consumption of Organic Food. Br. Food J. 2011, 113, 1353–1378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Altindag, G.; Certel, M.; Erem, F.; Ilknur Konak, U. Quality Characteristics of Gluten-Free Cookies Made of Buckwheat, Corn, and Rice Flour with/without Transglutaminase. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 2015, 21, 213–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bustamante, M.; Fernández-Gil, M.; Churruca, I.; Miranda, J.; Lasa, A.; Navarro, V.; Simón, E. Evolution of Gluten Content in Cereal-Based Gluten-Free Products: An Overview from 1998 to 2016. Nutrients 2017, 9, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohd Suki, N.; Majeed, A.; Mohd Suki, N. Impact of Consumption Values on Consumers’ Purchase of Organic Food and Green Environmental Concerns. SRJ 2022, 18, 1128–1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skalkos, D.; Kosma, I.S.; Vasiliou, A.; Guine, R.P.F. Consumers’ Trust in Greek Traditional Foods in the Post COVID-19 Era. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Šmídová, Z.; Rysová, J. Gluten-Free Bread and Bakery Products Technology. Foods 2022, 11, 480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lădaru, G.-R.; Siminică, M.; Diaconeasa, M.C.; Ilie, D.M.; Dobrotă, C.-E.; Motofeanu, M. Influencing Factors and Social Media Reflections of Bakery Products Consumption in Romania. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biró, B.; Gere, A. Purchasing Bakery Goods during COVID-19: A Mind Genomics Cartography of Hungarian Consumers. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
File Number | Name | Status | Date * |
---|---|---|---|
PDO-IT-01016-AM01 | Pane Toscano | Published | 29 September 2022 |
PGI-IT-02467 | Pampepato di Terni/Panpepato di Terni | Registered | 23 October 2020 |
PGI-IT-02392 | Südtiroler Schüttelbrot/Schüttelbrot Alto Adige | Registered | 24 July 2020 |
PDO-IT-01016 | Pane Toscano | Registered | 4 March 2016 |
PGI-IT-01290 | Cantuccini Toscani/Cantucci Toscani | Registered | 26 January 2016 |
PGI-IT-01323 | Pampapato di Ferrara/Pampepato di Ferrara | Registered | 8 December 2015 |
PGI-IT-0944 | Focaccia di Recco col formaggio | Registered | 14 January 2015 |
PGI-IT-1067 | Piadina Romagnola/Piada Romagnola | Registered | 4 November 2014 |
PGI-IT-1101 | Torrone di Bagnara | Registered | 14 August 2014 |
PGI-IT-0795 | Panforte di Siena | Registered | 22 May 2013 |
PGI-IT-0666 | Ricciarelli di Siena | Registered | 19 March 2010 |
PDO-IT-0577 | Pagnotta del Dittaino | Registered | 18 June 2009 |
PGI-IT-0372 | Pane di Matera | Registered | 22 February 2008 |
PDO-IT-0136 | Pane di Altamura | Registered | 19 July 2003 |
PGI-IT-0120 | Coppia Ferrarese | Registered | 18 October 2001 |
PGI-IT-1553 | Pane casareccio di Genzano | Registered | 25 November 1997 |
Variable | Before COVID N° 720 Interviewed Face to Face | During COVID N° 474 Inteviewed Online through Social Media |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
Male | 50.3% | 74.7% |
Female | 49.7% | 25.3% |
Age: average; SD Min; Max | Average 43.86 years; SD = 16.83 Min 18 years; Max 89 years | Average 39 years; SD = 17.4 Min 18 years; Max 76 years |
Age class | ||
18–29 years | 27.2% | 32.7% |
30–49 years | 34.3% | 35.4% |
50–69 years | 31.3% | 30.2% |
>69 years | 7.2% | 1.7% |
Level of education | ||
Elementary and Medium school | 18.7% | 7.8% |
High school | 47.4% | 50.2% |
Degree | 30.1% | 35.2% |
Post degree | 3.9% | 6.8% |
Income | ||
High > 48,000 EUR/year | 6.0% | 2.3% |
Medium High 30,001–48,000 EUR/year | 38.3% | 35.6% |
Medium Low 15,001–30,000 EUR/year | 43.3% | 51.1% |
Low < 15,000 EUR/year | 12.4% | 11.0% |
Number of family members | ||
1 member | 8.8% | 3.8% |
2 members | 19.7% | 13.7% |
3 members | 24.0% | 26.2% |
4 members | 30.7% | 37.6% |
5 members | 12.1% | 15.6% |
More than 5 members | 4.5% | 3.2% |
Latent Factors Group | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sustainable Inclination (SI) | Consumption Experience (CE) | Stores (St) | Informed Consumers_4.0 (IC) | ||
I believe that the shelf-life of bakery products can help reduce food waste and improve sustainability | Si1 | 0.782 | 0.002 | −0.002 | 0.101 |
I believe that the label and green labels are important for understanding the bakery supply chains that support circular economy models and environmentally friendly production systems | Si2 | 0.738 | 0.299 | −0.009 | −0.129 |
For me, the reputation of companies and their social, ethical and sustainable responsibility are important | Si3 | 0.679 | 0.16 | −0.031 | 0.238 |
The use of eco-sustainable and differentiable food packaging is one of the main ways to reduce pollution | Si4 | 0.624 | 0.174 | −0.005 | 0.376 |
We need to protect biodiversity and safeguard local varieties | Si5 | 0.590 | 0.324 | 0.054 | 0.05 |
I use 0 km products for my experience and to support small local businesses | Ce1 | 0.195 | 0.640 | 0.05 | 0.027 |
It is important to support farmers with a fair price for quality and food safety guarantees | Ce2 | 0.171 | 0.593 | −0.071 | 0.35 |
Clarity and transparency in the production technique and in the processing and marketing phase of food products are important for quality and safety | Ce3 | 0.286 | 0.517 | −0.121 | 0.28 |
Eco-sustainable products with quality certification mark (PDO, PGI, Organic, etc.) affects on my food choices | Ce4 | 0.36 | 0.482 | −0.047 | 0.043 |
When buying bakery products I try to pay attention to Food Safety and Quality (control of toxins, pathogens, pesticides, etc.) | Ce5 | 0.285 | 0.632 | −0.04 | −0.286 |
The price influences my choice and propensity to purchase bakery products | Ce6 | −0.135 | 0.622 | 0.025 | 0.365 |
I choose to buy cookies from my favorite retailer | St1 | −0.015 | −0.031 | 0.899 | 0.05 |
I like the idea of buying salted snacks and other bakery products from different stores | St2 | 0.095 | −0.083 | 0.883 | −0.102 |
When I buy bread from my favorite retailer, if necessary, I can receive information and suggestions | St3 | −0.08 | 0.038 | 0.788 | 0.125 |
The availability and possibility of buying online influence my food choices | Ic1 | 0.144 | 0.004 | 0.025 | 0.767 |
I follow social, advertising, food blogs and media that may influence me to buy sustainable food (including bakery products) | Ic2 | 0.186 | 0.338 | 0.098 | 0.620 |
Factor and Item | Standardized Factor Loading | Composite Reliability (CR) | Average Variance Extracted (AVE) | Cronbach’s Alpha | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sustainable Inclination (SI) | 0.848 | 0.528 | 0.779 | ||
Si1 | I believe that the shelf-life of baked goods can help reduce food waste and improve sustainability | 0.702 | |||
Si2 | I believe that the label and green labels are important for understanding the bakery supply chains that support circular economy models and environmentally friendly production systems | 0.729 | |||
Si3 | For me, the reputation of companies and their social, ethical and sustainable responsibility are important | 0.756 | |||
Si4 | The use of eco-sustainable and differentiable food packaging is one of the main ways to reduce pollution. | 0.742 | |||
Si5 | We need to protect biodiversity and safeguard local varieties | 0.703 | |||
Consumption Experience (CE) | 0.792 | 0.491 | 0.650 | ||
Ce1 | I use 0 km products for my life and to support small local businesses | 0.622 | |||
Ce2 | It is important to support farmers with a fair price for quality and food safety guarantees | 0.763 | |||
Ce3 | Clarity and transparency in the production technique and in the processing and marketing phase of food products are important for quality and safety | 0.759 | |||
Ce4 | Eco-sustainable products with quality certification mark (PDO, PGI, Organic, etc.) affects on my food choices | 0.646 | |||
Informed Consumers 4.0 (IC) | 0.806 | 0.678 | 0.546 | ||
Ic1 | The availability and possibility of buying online influence my food choices | 0.726 | |||
Ic2 | I follow social, advertising, food blogs and media that may influence me to buy sustainable food (including bakery products) | 0.910 | |||
Stores (St) | 0.881 | 0.717 | 0.824 | ||
St1 | I choose to buy cookies from my favorite retailer | 0.950 | |||
St2 | I like the idea of buying salted snacks and other bakery products from different stores | 0.894 | |||
St3 | When I buy bread from my favorite retailer, if necessary, I can receive information and suggestions | 0.669 |
(CE) | (IC) | (St) | (SI) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Consumption Experience (CE) | 0.700 | |||
Informed Consumers 4.0 (IC) | 0.394 | 0.823 | ||
Stores (St) | −0.093 | 0.081 | 0.847 | |
Sustainable_Inclination (SI) | 0.576 | 0.369 | 0.004 | 0.727 |
(CE) | (IC) | (St) | (SI) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Consumption Experience (CE) | - | |||
Informed Consumers 4.0 (IC) | 0.621 | - | ||
Stores (St) | 0.132 | 0.106 | - | |
Sustainable_Inclination (SI) | 0.794 | 0.535 | 0.068 | - |
Hypothesis | Estimate (β) | t. Value | p-Value | Hypothesis | Conclusion |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Consumption_Experience->Sustainable_Inclination | 0.515 | 15.292 | 0.000 *** | H1 | Supported |
Informed Consumers->Consumption_Experience | 0.404 | 12.796 | 0.000 *** | H5 | Supported |
Informed Consumers->Stores | 0.081 | 1.620 | 0.105 | H4 | Rejected |
Informed Consumers->Sustainable_Inclination | 0.163 | 5.096 | 0.000 *** | H2 | Supported |
Stores->Consumption Experience | −0.126 | 2.540 | 0.011 ** | H6 | Supported |
Stores->Sustainable_Inclination | 0.039 | 0.849 | 0.396 | H3 | Rejected |
(CE) | (St) | (SI) | |
---|---|---|---|
Consumption Experience (CE) | 1.206 | ||
Informed Consumers 4.0 (IC) | 1.007 | 1.000 | 1.204 |
Stores (St) | 1.007 | 1.026 |
Q2 | |
---|---|
Consumption Experience (CE) | 0.167 |
Informed Consumers 4.0 (IC) | 0.120 |
Stores (St) | 0.454 |
Sustainable_Inclination (SI) | 0.293 |
Favorite Points of Sale by Consumers | % Change | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Before COVID-19 | During COVID-19 | ||||
MMR | 306 | 64.6 | 238 | 50.2 | −22.2 |
Local market | 28 | 5.9 | 0 | 0.0 | −100.0 |
Discount | 66 | 13.9 | 65 | 13.7 | −1.5 |
Proximity retail | 40 | 8.4 | 129 | 27.2 | 222.5 |
Market online | 15 | 3.2 | 21 | 4.4 | 40.0 |
Direct sale | 19 | 4.0 | 21 | 4.4 | 10.5 |
Spending frequency during the week | |||||
Once a week | 121 | 25.5 | 377 | 79.5 | 211.6 |
Two-three times a week | 268 | 56.5 | 87 | 18.4 | −67.5 |
Four or more times a week | 85 | 17.9 | 10 | 2.1 | −88.2 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 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
Nicolosi, A.; Laganà, V.R.; Di Gregorio, D. Habits, Health and Environment in the Purchase of Bakery Products: Consumption Preferences and Sustainable Inclinations before and during COVID-19. Foods 2023, 12, 1661. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12081661
Nicolosi A, Laganà VR, Di Gregorio D. Habits, Health and Environment in the Purchase of Bakery Products: Consumption Preferences and Sustainable Inclinations before and during COVID-19. Foods. 2023; 12(8):1661. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12081661
Chicago/Turabian StyleNicolosi, Agata, Valentina Rosa Laganà, and Donatella Di Gregorio. 2023. "Habits, Health and Environment in the Purchase of Bakery Products: Consumption Preferences and Sustainable Inclinations before and during COVID-19" Foods 12, no. 8: 1661. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12081661
APA StyleNicolosi, A., Laganà, V. R., & Di Gregorio, D. (2023). Habits, Health and Environment in the Purchase of Bakery Products: Consumption Preferences and Sustainable Inclinations before and during COVID-19. Foods, 12(8), 1661. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12081661