20 pages., This research paper explores the role of environmental labelling in shaping the purchasing and consumption behaviours of Generation Z. The study aims to provide insights into the comprehension, perception, and attitude of this generation towards environmental labelling and to investigate how these factors impact their purchasing decisions. The results of this study provide valuable insights into the role of environmental labelling in shaping the behaviours of young consumers and suggest that it still matters to this generation. The study also highlights the importance of trust in environmental labelling for influencing purchasing decisions. Our research paper provides new insights into the role of environmental labelling in shaping the behaviours of Generation Z, which is a critical demographic group for sustainable consumption. We found that this generation is highly aware of environmental issues and is motivated to make eco-friendly purchasing decisions. However, our study also highlights that the lack of trust in environmental labelling can be a significant barrier to sustainable consumption. This study contributes to the literature on environmental labelling and consumer behaviour among Generation Z.
4pgs, The U.S. Department of Agriculture has reinforced oversight on organic certification and enforcement to prevent mislabeled products, in what advocates are calling the biggest update in decades.
20 pages, Knowledge of agricultural practices has declined in recent years, resulting in consumers becoming uncertain of where and how their food has been produced and the marketing tactics used to promote the product. Historically, the U.S. population’s rich agricultural heritage coincided with higher levels of agricultural literacy. Some scholars, however, have maintained that U.S. culture has begun to lose touch with its agricultural foundations. More recent evidence has demonstrated that consumers acquire knowledge about their food from various media, most notably the Internet and social media. Often these sources use incorrect information and promote food and agricultural marketing trends that may not be grounded in scientific data. In response, this historical narrative analyzed a reform effort that occurred in U.S. food labeling policy and practice in the 1900s, which contributed to food labeling issues and consumer distrust in the agricultural industry. Based on the findings of this investigation, we concluded that food labels were initially intended to provide consumers with more profound knowledge of the food they purchased. However, key legislative acts such as the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act and the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act shifted the food labeling movement into a branding device to differentiate products and brands. We recommend that agricultural practitioners explore new ways to communicate their message more effectively. We also call for producers to incorporate more personal and emotional appeals when marketing agricultural products to better compete with third-party branding efforts.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 207 Document Number: D13037
Notes:
6 pages, Kefirs are fermented beverages containing yeast and bacteria produced by the fermentation of water or milk with kefir grains. Because microorganism density may influence a product's health benefits, label accuracy regarding viable bacterial density and taxonomy of fermented foods is important. In this study, the microbiota of 5 commercial kefir products were measured quantitatively using standard plating techniques and characterized using high-resolution, long-read 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing. To enumerate viable lactic acid bacteria, 2 lots of each product were plated on de Man, Rogosa and Sharpe agar upon opening and following 14 d and incubated under anaerobic and aerobic conditions. Results revealed that 66% of products with a guaranteed count of colony-forming units per gram overstated microorganism density by at least 1 log, with only product E exceeding 1 × 109 cfu/g. Sequencing results demonstrated moderate product label accuracy in regard to taxonomy, yet several products contained bacterial species above the minimum detectable threshold (0.001% relative abundance) that were not included on the labels (e.g., Streptococcus salivarius, Lactobacillus paracasei). Our results demonstrate a moderate level of labeling accuracy for commercial kefir products intended for human consumption. Regulatory agencies and consumers must continue to scrutinize these products and demand a higher level of accuracy and quality.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 202 Document Number: D11945
Notes:
From Agri-Pulse via online from AgriMarketing Weekly. 1 page., "Key voices from new and innovative meat technology industries are calling for mandatory labeling of cell-based meat and for more sector feedback before those labels are developed."
Online from publisher. 1 page., Consultant author identifies four trends he expects in retailing - in general and in food produce departments in particular.
18 pages., via online journal, As the public has expressed increasing concerns regarding the humane raising and handling of farm animals, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and industry organizations have developed a series of standards enforcing animal welfare in the poultry industry. Labels and value-added claims were created and defined to differentiate products and to inform consumers’ purchasing decisions. This study identified five labels related to animal welfare that are frequently found on food packages in the U.S. grocery stores, including both the mandatory labels and third-party, voluntary labels. Using a controlled online experiment (N=249), we examined the labels’ effects on consumers’ perception of humane treatment and purchasing tendencies toward egg products. Results showed that while most consumers lack knowledge regarding the labels’ meaning and certification standards, they rely on the labels with simplistic terms (e.g., "certified humane," "cage free") as heuristic cues to judge the ethical treatment of hens on the farm. However, the selected labels did not lead consumers to pay a higher premium for the labeled products. We discussed the implications for regulators, food marketers, and agricultural communicators.
18 pages., via online journal, As food products marketed as “gluten-free” become increasingly popular, many consumers start to exclude sources of gluten (e.g., wheat, barley, and rye) from their diets for both medical and non-medical purposes. The grain industry is facing a growing challenge to (re)boost consumers’ confidence in the healthiness and safety of its commodities. Using 561 participants recruited from the Amazon Mechanical Turk workers’ panel, this study implemented a 2 (pretzels vs. potato chips) * 2 (positive- vs. negative- frame) * 2 (wheat image vs. no wheat image) experiment to examine the effects of gluten-free labels on consumers’ perceived healthiness and safety of wheat, perceived benefits of labeled products, and their evaluation of the shown labels. Results showed that consumers evaluate the gluten-free labels most positively when they appear on products that could have contained gluten. For products that are naturally gluten-free, adding a gluten-free label only decreased consumers’ confidence in such labels. The presence of gluten-free labels increased consumers’ perceived benefits of the labeled products when they do not contain any misleading information (e.g., image of a wheat head). However, some gluten-free labels could have negative impacts on consumers’ perceptions of the healthiness and safety of wheat. Overall, food producers and marketers might have undervalued consumers’ literacy and overestimated their susceptibility to marketing strategies. We discussed the implications for food marketers, regulators, and communicators.
Online via https://newprairiepress.org/jac, Authors identified five labels related to animal welfare that are frequently found on food packages in USA grocery stores Results of a controlled online experiment among consumers showed that while most consumers lacked knowledge regarding meaning of the labels and certification standards, they relied on the labels with simplistic terms as heuristic cues to judge the ethical treatment of hens on the farm. The selected labels did not lead consumers to pay a higher premium for the labeled products.
1 page., Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Communication Association. Special issue article., Authors meta-analyzed 57 studies, conducted in 13 countries with a cumulative N of 42,854. Findings suggested that while pictorial warnings increased affective and some cognitive risk appraisals, they did not increase beliefs about disease risk.
19 pages., Via online., In a comparative case study, researchers analyzed two social media conflicts between farmers and animal right advocates to understand how conflicts establish, escalate, and return dormant through issue and identity framing and the discursive use of emotions. "The binary opposition is initially established through issue framing but escalates into an identity conflict that involves group labeling and blaming."
Online via Drovers News Source. 3 pages., Announces a petition from the United States Cattlemen's Association to the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service to address "Product of the U.S.A. and "Made in the U.S.A. claims on U.S beef. Includes a link to full petition (199 pages). The petition ends: "To eliminate the likelihood of confusion and to better inform consumers, USDA contends that voluntary labels indication 'Made in USA' and 'Product of USA' or similar content should be limited to beef from cattle born, raise, and harvested in the United States."
28 pages, via online journal, While uncertainty is central to science, many fear negative effects of communicating scientific uncertainties to the public, though research results about such effects are inconsistent. Therefore, we test the effects of four distinct uncertainty frame types (deficient, technical, scientific, consensus) on three outcomes (belief, credibility, behavioral intentions) across three science issues (climate change, GMO food labeling, machinery hazards) with an experiment using a national sample (N = 2,247) approximating U.S. census levels of age, education, and gender. We find portraying scientific findings using uncertainty frames usually does not have significant effects, with an occasional exception being small negative effects of consensus uncertainty.
USA: International Food Information Council Foundation, Washington, D.C.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 30 Document Number: D10555
Notes:
3 pages., via website, International Food Information Council Foundation., Topics like sustainability, plant-based diets and clean eating seem to permeate news about food, but it turns out they’re not just buzzwords or “flavors of the week.” IFIC Foundation’s 2019 Food and Health Survey shows genuine and growing interest in these and other trends.
Chakrabarti, Anwesha (author), Campbell, Benjamin L. (author), Shonkwiler, Vanessa (author), and Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut
Center for Agribusiness and Economic Development, University of Georgia
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2019-03
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 16 Document Number: D10441
16 pages., As consumer demand for food labeling becomes increasingly important, producers and retailers
can include various labeling to attract new customers. This study investigates Connecticut
consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for mushrooms marketed with various labels using
a latent class approach to identify classes within the market. Results reveal three market segments
(price/GMO-label, locally/organically grown, and traditional mushroom varieties). Overall, only
a third of consumers valued the “locally grown” or “organic” labels, so charging a premium for
these labels might alienate a majority of consumers. Finally, GMO labeled mushrooms are
discounted, but the non-GMO label receives little value.
Available online at www.centmapress.org, Results showed that the producers had seen a positive improvement in sales following acquisition of the regional food quality label, although they had not noticed greater interest in their products during campaigns to support awareness of the label.
Van Loo, Ellen J. (author / Wageningen University), Caputo, Vincenzina (author / Michigan State University), and Lusk, Jayson L. (author / Purdue University)
Format:
Research report
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 85 Document Number: D10851
Via live link within an online article, "Consumers prefer real beef over other alternatives" by Greg Henderson. 37 pages., Results of a nationwide survey of more than 1,800 consumers who completed a choice experiment in which they selected among conventional beef and three alternative meat products at different prices. "Overall, this study shows most consumers strongly prefer conventional beef to the alternatives."
14 pages., Online via Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)., Authors tested label effectiveness involving "supermarket shoppers on a rural American Indian reservation." Results showed added value and willingness to pay through tailoring the label to the local community.
7 pages., Online via UI e-subscription, Through experiment methodology, authors investigated the relative influence of nutritional warnings and two marketing strategies commonly used in food labels, nutrition claims, and fruit images on consumers' healthfulness judgments. Findings documented the impact of nutritional warnings on perceived healthfulness.
12 pages., via online journal, Animal welfare and environmental impacts have been emphasized in the sustainable production of livestock. Labels are useful tools for clearly providing such attribute information to consumers. The aim of this study was to evaluate how human values influence consumer segments for beef with information on animal welfare and environmentally friendly production. Using a choice experiment, we examined whether animal welfare and environmentally friendly labels, country of origin and price impact consumer choice. As results, five heterogeneous consumer classes were identified using a latent class model: label conscious, domestic beef preferring, price conscious, animal welfare preferring and not interested in production method. Almost 90% of consumers were interested in and willing to pay for beef with animal welfare or environmentally friendly label. The classes with significant preferences for such labeled beef were affected by “openness to change”, “self-enhancement” and “security”. Improving consumer attitudes and strengthening consumer perception towards labeled beef by marketers and policy makers will be required.
9 pages., Via online journal., Food labels legislated by the U.S. government have been designed to provide information to consumers. It has been asserted that the simple disclosures “produced using genetic engineering” on newly legislated U.S. food labels will send a signal that influences individual preferences rather than providing information. Vermont is the only US state to have experienced mandatory labeling of foods produced using genetic engineering (GE) via simple disclosures. Using a representative sample of adults who experienced Vermont’s mandatory GE labeling policy, we examined whether GE labels were seen by consumers and whether the labels provided information or influenced preferences. Nearly one-third of respondents reported seeing a label. Higher income, younger consumers who search for information about GE were more likely to report seeing a label. We also estimated whether labels served as information cues that helped reveal consumer preferences through purchases, or whether labels served as a signal that influenced preferences and purchases. For 50.5% of consumers who saw a label, the label served as an information cue that revealed their preferences. For 13% of those who saw the label, the label influenced preferences and behavior. Overall, for 4% of the total sample, simple GE disclosures influenced preferences. For a slight majority of consumers who used a GE label, simple disclosures were an information signal and not a preference signal. Searching for GE information, classifying as female, older age and opposing GE in food production significantly increased the probability that GE labels served as an information source. Providing such disclosures to consumers may be the least complex and most transparent option for mandatory GE labeling.
