Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
3 scepticism about the credibility of product claims;
4 poor appearance;
5 non-awareness of organic; and
6 contentment with existing products.
According to Sahota (2004), the typical organic consumer is urban, well-educated, from a
middle to high income household, and discerning in their food choices. Market researchers in
the USA (Hartman and Wright 1999) posit a more differentiated mix of organic consumers
that includes: a small group of passionate environmentalists; an older, wealthier group con-
cerned mostly about their own health; a young group who profess environmental concern but
who tend to act on that concern only when convenient; and a growing mainstream who care
about the environment and are willing to engage in 'green consumption' as products become
more accessible. Italian researchers Chinnici
et
al
. (2002), however, differentiate organic con-
sumers into the health conscious (the largest group), the curious (and open to more sales), the
pragmatic (who are very concerned about higher prices) and the nostalgic (who associate
organics with the tastes and authenticity of the past). Each of these claims seem to make sense
in light of the high retail premiums paid for organic foods. But it is important not to dismiss
organic consumption as the domain only of the rich and passionate. According to Hartman
and Wright (1999), most people who have no immediate interest in green consumption are
those who struggle for economic survival, an underclass of the unemployed, underemployed
and underpaid. If this group of very poor are taken out of consideration for a moment, some
75% of consumers in the USA emerge as genuinely interested in purchasing organic foods.
The belief that food should be safe, nutritious, tasty and environmentally responsible is not
radical or marginal, so it should come as no surprise that many food consumers in Western
countries profess to consume at least some organic food, 40% in Australia (Lockie
et
al
. 2002).
Consequently, several studies from around the world have found that beyond the exclusion of
the very poor there are few meaningful demographic differences in Western countries between
those people who consume organic foods and those who do not (Davies
et
al
. 1997, Cunning-
ham 2001, Lockie
et
al
. 2002). The most important dimension of demographic difference is
not education or income, as suggested by Sahota (2004), but gender, with significantly more
women than men claiming to purchase organic foods (Davies
et
al
. 1997, Cunningham 2001,
Lockie
et
al
. 2002). According to Cunningham (2001), this may stem from the higher levels of
responsibility taken by women for feeding children and other family members although, as
noted by Lockie
et
al
. (2004), such responsibility can also place pressure on women to priori-
tise convenience and price.
Although many Western consumers claim to consume organic foods, and many more
profess the values that underpin organic agriculture, overall levels of organic food consump-
tion remain only 1% to 2% of total food sales. This raises questions as to just how many people
purchase a substantial proportion of their food as organic and what it is that differentiates
these committed organic consumers from more occasional organic consumers? For Australia,
Lockie
et
al
. (2004) estimated that committed organic consumers, those who claimed to
consume half or more of their diet as organic, accounted for about half of all certified organic
food sales. This group were more motivated than were occasional organic consumers to source
foods they believed were natural (i.e. free from artificial additives, unnecessary processing,
genetic engineering, irradiation, pesticides, preservatives, animal growth hormones, antibiot-
ics), environmentally friendly, supportive of animal welfare, and likely to make them feel good
emotionally. These groups did not express fundamentally different food values. Even those
who did not consume any organic foods claimed to be motivated in their food choices by
health, environmental and animal welfare concerns. The difference among the groups was
how strongly these motivations were expressed relative to price and convenience.
