Generational Differences toward Organic Food Behavior: Insights from Five Generational Cohorts - MDPI
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
sustainability
Article
Generational Differences toward Organic Food
Behavior: Insights from Five Generational Cohorts
Irene (Eirini) Kamenidou 1, *, Aikaterini Stavrianea 2 and Evangelia-Zoi Bara 1
1 Department of Management Science and Technology, International Hellenic University, Kavala Campus,
65404 Agios Loukas Kavala, Greece; evaeva13@hotmail.gr
2 Department of Communication and Media Studies, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens,
105 62 Athens, Greece; aikstavria@media.uoa.gr
* Correspondence: rkam@mst.ihu.gr; Tel.: +30-2510-462157
Received: 29 December 2019; Accepted: 12 March 2020; Published: 15 March 2020
Abstract: One of the pathways to sustainable food consumption behaviour is the purchase and
consumption of organic food products. This paper offers insights into the behaviour exercised by
five generational cohorts toward organic products, i.e., Generation Z, Generation Y, Generation X,
Baby Boomers, and the Silent Generation. A qualitative and quantitative research methodology is
implemented, with the field research providing 1562 valid questionnaires over a nine-month period.
Generational differences are explored in terms of purchasing behaviour, attitudes, and the effect of
the economic crisis on the purchasing of organic food. Results unveil that all generational cohorts
demonstrate a favourable attitude toward organic food, and they identify the economic crisis as an
effect of low purchase behaviour. Additionally, findings reveal that in all cases, generational cohort
differences do exist. Government policy through marketing communications can be adapted to
determine the advantages of organic food compared to conventional ones, persuade consumers about
the benefits, and, thus, reinforce favourable attitudes in association with economic crisis conditions.
Keywords: sustainable food consumption; organic food; multigenerational cohorts; consumer
behavior; Generation Z; Generation Y; Generation X; Baby Boomers; Silent Generation; marketing
communications
1. Introduction
For preserving natural resources, consumer’s sustainable food behaviour deems to be imperative,
since consumers’ food consumption choices have both an indirect and direct impact on the
environment [1–3] and, as such, they carry immense importance from an environmental prism [4].
Sustainable food consumption (SFC) is a subset of sustainable consumer behaviour. Trudel [5]
(p. 85) considers sustainable consumer behaviour as “a behaviour that attempts to satisfy present
needs while simultaneously benefiting or limiting environmental impact”. Moreover, sustainable
consumer behaviour falls under the umbrella of consumer behaviour, which as Kotler and Keller [6]
define, is the study of how individuals, groups, and organizations select, buy, use, and dispose of
goods, services, and ideas to satisfy their needs and wants. Thus, sustainable consumer behaviour
includes both actions and the attitudes, preferences, and motives that lead to actions.
The significance of food consumption in a sustainable manner has triggered academics’ interest
globally, yielding ample research articles that have been compiled from very diverse points of view.
One focal point of interest relates to the environmental benefits associated with the adoption of
sustainable food behaviour (SFB), which originate from three axons, i.e., from consumers (directly
or indirectly through derivative demand), agriculture, and industry [7]. Some of the environmental
benefits recorded in academia refer to the reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions, i.e., greenhouse gas
Sustainability 2020, 12, 2299; doi:10.3390/su12062299 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainabilitySustainability 2020, 12, 2299 2 of 25
(GHG) emissions [8], reduction of the ecological footprint of agricultural or food products [9], less
household waste, avoidance of soil degradation [7], and the general protection of the ecosystem [10].
As regards the dimensions of SFB that produce environmental benefits, these as recorded by previous
researchers are decrease in meat consumption, increase of fruit and vegetable consumption, substitution
of meat protein by other type of proteins or insects, purchase and consumption of local products,
avoidance of imported food, avoidance of excess packages, and consumption of organic food [11–14].
Especially for the latter (i.e., consumption of organic food as a dimension of SFC), a rich literature is
found [15]. In this specific domain, vast scholarly work has emphasized building consumer profiles [16],
developing typologies [17], predicting consumers behaviour [18], as well as describing extensively a
varied spectrum of motives and barriers related to purchasing and consumption of organic food [19].
Specifically, previous research has demonstrated that attitudes and income [20,21] are associated with
organic food purchasing behaviour. Among the prevailing barriers of organic food consumption (OFC)
identified, one can find the individual or family income constraints, with only a limited number of
studies referring directly to consumers’ behavioural change due to economic crisis conditions [22–24],
which can directly influence consumers’ income. Specifically, Schaack et al. [25] stated that in 2013
the organic market in Greece (where this research took place) had “declined substantially” due to
the fiscal crisis, though no further evidence was made publicly available. Research also has shown
that in the time of the Greek fiscal crisis, households do not trust the quality controls implemented
by government authorities, considering them as being incomplete or defective [26]. Therefore, the
economic barrier affecting behaviour toward organic food may be overcome by health perceptions
derived from food safety issues. Specifically, Kamenidou et al. [26] when researching food security
issues of 1305 households found that in Greece during the fiscal crisis, households believed that the
control structures of the government associated with food safety and hygiene were inefficient. Hence,
the issue of economic crisis and its impact on Greek consumers behaviour is considered of interest for
investigation due to contradictory effects on organic food behaviour.
Therefore, this research paper draws data from Greece, a European country which, for
11 consecutive years, has experienced an economic crisis. In the 11 years (2010–2020) of the continuous
crisis in the Greek economy and the country’s failure to bail out, four different governments have
signed four subsequent Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with TROIKA (group formed by
the European Commission, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund) in
the years 2010, 2012, 2015, and 2017, implementing continuous cut-offs as austerity measures, and
structural reforms. Compared to 2009, the year before the first MOU was signed, (some of) the effects
reported in economy and society could be summarized as follows: Greece’s GDP in terms of current
prices (billion €) decreased from 237.4 in 2009 to 184.7 in 2018 [27]. Poverty rose from 27.7% (2009)
to 34.8% in 2016, being the third in line poverty country of the EU-28 countries [28]. Additionally,
from the 7 May 2010 (the day after the first Memorandum was voted) up to 1 February 2020, about
one third of a million (331,279) businesses terminated their function according to General Commercial
Registry [29]. The unemployment rate rose from 9.4% (2009) to 23.6% (2016), being the highest in
the European Union [30]. Extreme brain waste [31] and brain drain [32] were also recorded, while
excessive cut-offs and pension adjustments were experienced in the Greek public sector, resulting in
more than 180,000 public servants resigning from 2010 to 2015 [33].
Additionally, although a plethora of studies focus on OFC under the umbrella of sustainability,
studies on consumer organic food behaviour (OFB) that adopt the generational cohort theory are
still limited in number and spectrum as they examine merely one cohort [34], while, no studies have
been retrieved that focus simultaneously on organic food purchase, attitude, economic crisis, and
generational cohorts (to our knowledge).
Generational cohorts are composed of people who are born within a certain time period and at
a specific place, and have experienced identical life-changing events at their “coming of age”, i.e.,
when they are 17–23 years old [35]. Generational cohorts differ from generations, which exclusively
rely upon time periods and are 20–25 years apart [36]. Even though scholars principally agree on theSustainability 2020, 12, 2299 3 of 25
presence of generational cohorts and provide in-depth analysis of cohort characteristics [37–39], there is
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 26
considerable disagreement about the period and name of each generational cohort, especially following
the Baby
presence Boomer generation
of generational cohorts and provide [38–41].in-depth Generationalanalysiscohorts
of cohortare used today[37–39],
characteristics in consumerthere marketing,
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 26
and it is considered as a new way of market
is considerable disagreement about the period and name of each generational cohort, especially segmentation, since “cohort effects are lifelong effects”,
Sustainability
as Schewe 2020, 12,and x FOR PEER REVIEW
Meredith [42] identify. Additionally, Pitta et al. [43] ascertain that the 3use
of 26of generational
following
presence ofthe Baby Boomer
generational cohorts generation
and provide [38–41].in-depthGenerational
analysis of cohorts
cohortare used today [37–39],
characteristics in consumer there
cohorts
marketing,
is considerable as
and aitsegmentation
is considered
disagreement variable
aboutas a new
the periodis more
way ofeffective
market
and name than gender,
segmentation,
of of
each income,
since
generational and
“cohort
cohort, education,
effects
especially are while Schewe
presence of generational cohorts and provide in-depth analysis cohort characteristics [37–39], there
lifelong
and
following effects”,
Sustainability 2020, 12,asx Schewe
Meredith
the Baby FOR
[42] PEER and
REVIEW
pinpoint
Boomer generation Meredith
that [42] identify.
generational Additionally,
cohorts are Pitta
useful et al.
for [43] ascertain
communication that
3 of the26
campaigns.
is considerable disagreement about the[38–41]. period and Generational
name of cohorts are used today
each generational cohort, in consumer
especially
use of
marketing,generational
Overall,
and it is cohorts
generational
considered as a segmentation
cohort
as a new marketing
way of variable is
has been
market more effective
recognized
segmentation, than gender,
as atoday
since income,
very effective
“cohort and
approach due to
following
presence ofthe Baby
generational Boomer cohorts generation
and provide [38–41].in-depthGenerational
analysis cohorts
cohortare used in effects
consumer are
education,
lifelong while asxSchewe and Meredith [42] pinpoint that ofgenerational characteristics
cohorts [37–39],
are useful therefor
the effects”,
consistent
Sustainability
marketing, 2020,
and 12,it Schewe
FOR
is PEERand
behaviour
considered REVIEWMeredith
of as cohorts
a new [42]way identify.
attested of Additionally,
[44]
market and
segmentation,Pitta etsince
is strongly al. [43]
documented ascertain
“cohort inthat 3 ofthe
the
effects work
are26 of various
is considerable disagreement
communication campaigns. about the period and name of each generational cohort, especially
use of
lifelong generational
scholars 2020,[45].
effects”,
Sustainability cohorts
Academics
12,asx Schewe
FOR PEERand as aMeredith
REVIEW segmentation
ascertain that
[42] variable
each
identify. is more effective
generational
Additionally, cohort
Pitta than
et al. gender,
differs
[43] from income,
ascertain the and
others
that
3 of the26 in behaviour,
following
Overall,
presence ofthe Baby Boomer
generational
generational cohorts generation
cohort marketing
and provide[38–41].
has
in-depthGenerational
been recognized
analysis cohorts
of as a very
cohort are used today
effective
characteristics in consumer
approach
[37–39], due
there to
education,
use while while
of generational
at the Schewe
same cohorts
time and
astheyaMeredith
segmentation
identify [42]
common pinpoint
variable isthat
more
behavioural generational
effective
patterns than cohorts
gender,
between are useful
income,
people for
and
who
marketing,
the
is consistent
considerable and it is
behaviour considered
disagreement of cohorts
aboutas a new
attested
the way
[44]
period of
and
and market
is
name segmentation,
strongly
of documented
each since
generational in “cohort
the work
cohort, effects
of various
especially are belong to the
communication whilecampaigns.
presence of generational cohorts and provide in-depth analysis
that of cohort characteristics [37–39],
education,
same
lifelong
scholars
following [45].cohort
effects”, Academics
thegenerational
Baby
Schewe
as[46].
Schewe
Boomer
and Meredith
Therefore,
and
ascertain
Meredith
generation
given
that each
[42]
that
[42] pinpoint
the
generational
[38–41].
corresponding
identify. Additionally,
Generational cohort
generational
literature
differs
cohorts Pitta cohorts
areeteffective
from al.
the
used
on
[43]the
others
are
subject
ascertain
today in
useful isthere
that
inbehaviour,
consumer
for
extremely
the limited,
is Overall,
considerable
communication disagreement
campaigns. cohort aboutmarketing
the has
period been
and recognized
name of as
each a very
generational approach
cohort, due
especially to
use
while it
of becomes
generational
at the same critical
it time to
cohorts
they investigate
as a
identify the
segmentation
acommon various generational
variable is more cohorts
effective as
than this has
gender, developed
income, into
and an emerging
marketing,
the consistent
following
Overall, theand Baby isBoomer
behaviour
generational
considered
ofcohort
cohorts as attested
generation
marketing
new [44]behavioural
way
[38–41].
has
of
and
been
market
is patterns
segmentation,
strongly
Generational
recognized
between
documented
cohorts
as a very
since
are effective
used people
in “cohort
the
today who
work
approach
belong
in effects
of various
consumer
duefor
areto
to
education,
the and
same
lifelong while
controversial
cohort
effects”, Schewe
[46].
as topic
Therefore,
Schewe and
and in Meredith
the
given
Meredith Marketing
that [42]
[42]the pinpoint
domain.
corresponding
identify. that
Additionally, generational
Consequently,
literature
Pitta on
et cohorts
while
the
al. subject
[43] areis useful
generational
ascertain extremely
that cohort
the theory was
scholars
marketing, [45].
the consistent Academics
and behaviour ascertain
it is consideredof cohorts asthat each way
a new
attested generational
[44] and of market cohort
is strongly differs
segmentation,
documented fromsince thein others
“cohort
the work in behaviour,
effects
of various are
communication
limited,
use of it
utilized becomes
generationalat campaigns.
first critical
only
cohorts into asinvestigate
four a countries
segmentation the various
(the US,
variablegenerational
Canada,
is more cohorts
England,
effective as this
Australia),
than has
gender, developed
it has
income, been into
andrapidly adopted
while
lifelong
scholars ateffects”,
the same
[45]. astime
Academics Schewe they identify
and
ascertain thatcommon
Meredith each [42] behavioural
identify.
generational patterns
Additionally,
cohort differs between
Pitta
fromet al.thepeople
[43]
others who
ascertain belong
that the
in behaviour, to
an Overall,
emerging
education, generational
and
while
byatgenerational
other controversial
countriesSchewe cohort
tooasandmainly marketing
topic
Meredith in
due the has been
Marketing recognized
domain. as a very
Consequently, effective whileapproach due
generational to
the
use
whilesame
of cohort
the same [46]. Therefore,
cohorts
time they a given
identify segmentation
common
[42]
thattothe pinpoint
itsbehavioural
high importance
corresponding
variable that
is more generational
inbetween
literature
effective
patterns consumer
onthan cohorts
the subject
gender,
people
are
marketing
who
useful
is extremely
income,
belong
for
[11,47–51].
and to
the consistent
cohort theory
communication behaviour
was utilized
campaigns. ofatcohorts
first onlyattested
inthefour [44] and is strongly
countries (the US, documented
Canada, England,in theAustralia),
work of various
itinto
has
limited,
education,
the same it With
becomes
while
cohort respectcritical
Schewe
[46]. to
Therefore,the
to
and study
investigate
Meredith
given population,
that various
[42]
the the
pinpoint
corresponding targeted
generational
that sample
cohorts
generational
literature onas group
this
cohorts
the has of
subject the
developed
are is present
useful
extremely forstudy consists
scholars
been [45]. generational
rapidly
Overall, Academics
adopted byascertain
othertopic
cohort that each generational
countries
marketing too
has mainly
been cohort
due todiffers
recognized its
as ahighfrom
very the others
importance
effective in
in
approach behaviour,
consumer
due toGeneration X,
an emerging
communication
of
limited, five
itthe and
Greek
becomes controversial
campaigns.
generational
critical to identify cohorts,
investigate in the
thenamely
Marketing
various the domain. Consequently,
Silent Generation,
generational cohorts as this while
thehas Baby generational
Boomers,
developed into
while
marketing
the at
consistent same
[11,47–51]. time
behaviour they
ofcohort
cohorts common
attested [44] behavioural
and is patterns
strongly between
documented people who
in theAustralia),
work of belong
various to
cohort
an theory
Overall,
Generation
emerging was
and Y, utilized
generationaland the
controversial at first
Generation only
marketing
topic in
in four
Z
the has countries
cohort.been
Marketing (the
recognized US,
domain. Canada,
as a very
Consequently, England,
effective whileapproach it has
due
generational to
the same
With
scholars cohort
respect
[45]. Academics [46].
to Therefore,
the study
ascertain given
population,
that that the
the corresponding
targeted
each generational sample
cohort literature
group of on
the the
presentsubject
study is extremely
consists of
been
the
cohort rapidly
consistent
theory adopted
behaviour
was
Tangermann utilizedby ofat
[52] other
cohorts
first
points countries
onlyattested
inthe
out four toocountries
[44]
that mainly
and
today dueUS,
isconsumers
strongly
(the todiffers
its are
high
documented
Canada,
from the
England,
interested in others
importance in
in
theAustralia),
work behaviour,
consumer
of various
itinto
has food choices,
limited,
five at it[45].
whileGreek thebecomes
generational
same critical
time they to identify
cohorts, investigate
namelycommon the various
Silent generational
Generation,
behavioural patterns cohorts
the Baby
between asBoomers,
this hasin
people
sustainable
developed
Generation
who belong X,
to
marketing
scholars
been rapidly [11,47–51].
Academics
adopted byascertain
other that
countrieseach generational
too mainly cohort
due to differs
its highfrom the
importanceothers in
in behaviour,
consumer
an but
emerging
Generation
the same
much Y,
cohort andmust
and the
[46].
be achieved
controversial
Generation
Therefore, topic
Z fromin
cohort.
givencommon
the
the
thatthe
governments’
Marketing
thetargeted
corresponding domain. side, as they
Consequently,
literature
cannot
onpresent
the while
subject
pass on
generational
is consists
their
extremely
responsibility
while With
marketingat therespect
same
[11,47–51]. to the
time study
they population,
identify behavioural sample group
patterns of the
between people study
who belong of
to
cohortto consumers.
theory
Tangermann
limited, itcohort was
becomes [52] Sedlacko
utilized
points
critical at first
out etonly
that
to investigate al. [53]
in
today four
the point
consumers
various out
countries that
(the
are issues
US, Canada,
interested
generational which
in
cohorts lead
England,
sustainable
asBoomers, to
thissubject unsustainable
Australia),
food
has developedchoices, it has
but
into global food
five
the Greek
same
With generational
respect [46].
to the cohorts,
Therefore,
study namely
given
population, that the
the
the Silent Generation,
corresponding
targeted sample the
literature
group Baby
of on
the the
present Generation
study is consists
extremely X,
of
been
much rapidly
consumption
must
an emerging be adopted
achievedwill by
get
from other
worsethe countries
in the
governments’ too
future, mainly
while
side, as due
they to
policymakers its
cannot high take
pass importance
onactions
their forin SFCconsumer
responsibility due to
to the “growing
Generation
limited,
five Greek Y,and
it becomes and controversial
generational the Generation
critical topic
to investigate
cohorts, namely
in the
Z cohort. the various
Marketing domain. Consequently,
the Silent generational
Generation, the cohorts
BabyasBoomers,
while
this has generational
developed
Generationinto X,
marketing
consumers.
scientific [11,47–51].
Sedlacko
understanding” et al. [53] of point
these out
inproblems.that issues which
Consequently, lead to unsustainable
itinissustainable
ofEngland,
extreme value global food
to examine
cohort
an theory and
Tangermann
emerging
Generation
was
Y, andto
utilized
[52] points
controversial
the
at out
Generation
first only
that
topic today
in
Z cohort.
four
the countries
consumers
Marketing (the
are US, Canada,
interested
domain. Consequently, Australia),
food
while choices,
generational but through the
it has
been With
consumption
rapidly
prism respect
of will
adopted
organic the
get study
worse
by
food other population,
in
choices, the future,
countries
the OFB thetoo targeted
while mainly
expressed sample
policymakers
due
by group
to itstake
multiple of
high the
actionspresent
importance
generational study
for Australia),
SFCindue
cohorts, consists
to
consumer
as the
these of may provide
much
cohort must
theory
Tangermann be achieved
was utilized
[52] pointsfromat the
first
out that governments’
only in
todaythefour side,
countries
consumers as they
(the cannot
US,
are interested Canada, pass
in on
England,
sustainable their responsibility
food it
choices, but hasto
five Greek
“growing
marketing generational
scientific
[11,47–51]. cohorts,
understanding” namely of outthese Silent Generation,
problems. the
Consequently, Baby Boomers,
itimportance
isInof Generation
extreme value X,
to
been
much further
consumers.
rapidly
must Y, understanding
Sedlacko
adopted
beandachieved etby al. of
[53]
other
from the Z the country’s
point
countries
governments’ too total
that sustainable
issues
mainly which
due to behaviour.
lead
its to
high unsustainableaddition,
side, as they cannot pass on their responsibility to in these
global
consumer insights
food may lead
Generation
examineWith through
respect tothe
the Generation
prism
the study ofpopulation,
organic cohort. foodthe choices,
targeted the
sampleOFBgroup
expressedof the by multiple
present study generational
consists of
consumption
marketing
to
consumers.appropriate will
[11,47–51].
Sedlacko get worse
sustainable
et al. [53] in the
policies
point future,
out while
established policymakers
that issuesare bywhich
governments take
lead in actions
in order to
tosustainable
unsustainablefor SFCensuredue
global to the
a sustainable future.
Tangermann
cohorts, asrespect
these [52]provide
may points out that
further today consumers
understanding ofsample interested
theConsequently,
country’s total food choices,food but
five Greek
“growing
With
The
consumption five generational
scientific toget
generational
will
cohorts,
understanding”
the study
worse cohorts
in
namely
population,
the of
examined
future,
the
these Silent
thewhile in Generation,
problems.
targetedthis research
policymakers groupthe of
cover
take
Babytheitsustainable
the
actions
Boomers,
is of
present
age for extreme
study
spectrum
SFC
behaviour.
Generation value
consists
due ofto
In
X,
to
of
approximately
the the
much
addition,
Generationmust beand
these
Y, achieved
insights
the prism from
mayoflead
Generation the Z governments’
tocohort.
appropriate side, as theypolicies
sustainable cannot established
pass on their byresponsibility
governments to
in
examine
five Greek
“growing
total through
generational
scientific
adult the cohorts,
understanding”
population organic
namely of foodthe
these choices,
Silent
problems. the
Generation,OFB expressed
the
Consequently, Baby itby multiple
Boomers,
is of generational
Generation
extreme value X,
to
consumers.
order to as
ensure
Tangermann Sedlacko
amay et al. of
sustainable
[52] points [53] thepoint
future.
out that
country
The
today out
five
since
that it provides
issues
generational
consumers arewhich insight
cohorts lead
interested tofor
examined
in
people
unsustainable
sustainable
aged
in thisfood
between
global
research
choices, food
cover
but
18 and 95 years
cohorts,
Generation
examine these
Y, and
through theprovide
the Generation
prism further
ofin understanding
Z cohort.
organic food choices, ofthetheOFB
country’s
expressed total sustainable
by multiple behaviour.
generational In
the old,
consumption
age also
spectrum revealing
will of get the
worse
approximately tendency the of
future, the country’s
while sustainable
policymakers take future.
actions Policymakers
for SFC due having
to the information
much
addition, must
asthese
Tangermann
cohorts,
be achieved
thesethe insights
[52]
may
from
pointsmayout
provide
thethat
lead
further tothe totalconsumers
governments’
appropriate
today adult
understanding
population
side, as
sustainable
of arethey of the country
cannot
policies
interested
theConsequently,
country’s
pass onsince
established
in sustainable
total
their
sustainable
itfood
by provides
responsibility
governments
choices,
behaviour.
insightbutto
in
In
for regarding
“growingpeople scientific
aged behaviour
understanding”
between 18 of these
of cohorts
these at
problems. their disposal, may it implement
is of extreme specific
value campaigns
to and
consumers.
order
much
addition,to ensure
must Sedlacko
be
these ainsights
achieved et from
sustainable al. [53]
mayof theand
future.
lead
point 95 out
to The
governments’years
fivethat
appropriate
old, also
issues
generational
side,
sustainable
revealing
as whichcohorts
they lead
cannot
policies
the
to tendency
examined
pass unsustainable
onintheir
established this ofresearch
the
byresponsibility
governments
country’s
global food
cover to
in
examine
actions
sustainable
consumption through
targeting
future. the prism
certain
willofPolicymakers
get worse organic
ingenerational
having
the food
information
future, choices,
cohorts.
while the
regarding
policymakersOFB expressed
the behaviour
take by multiple
of these generational
cohortsdue at totheir
the
orderage tospectrum
consumers. ensure Sedlacko
amay approximately
et
sustainable al. [53]future. pointthe
The total
out adult
fivethat population
issues
generational which of
cohorts the
lead toactions
country
examined since
unsustainableforit provides
in this
SFC global
research insightthe
food
cover
cohorts,
disposal,
“growing as maythese implement
Therefore,
scientific provide
in specific
this
understanding” further
context understanding
campaigns
the
of and
following
these problems. of the
actions
research country’s
targeting
questions
Consequently, totalit
certain sustainable
generational
(RQs)is of have
extreme behaviour.
cohorts.
arisen: value In
to
for
the people aged
consumption
age spectrum will get between
worse18in and
of approximately 95 yearswhile
the future,
the old, policymakers
total adultsustainable also revealingtake
populationpoliciesof the country the actions
sincebytendency
it providesfor of SFC
insightthedue country’s
to the
addition, these ininsights
Therefore, this mayoflead
context the to appropriate
following research questions (RQs) established
have governments in
examine
sustainable
“growing
for people
through
future.
scientific
aged
the prism
Policymakers
understanding”
between 18
organic
having
and 95
food
these
years
choices,
of informationproblems.
old,
the
regarding
also
OFBthe expressed
Consequently,
revealing behaviour
the itbyarisen:
isofmultiple
tendency these
of extreme
of
generational
cohorts
the at their
value
country’s to
order to
RQ1: RQ1:
ensure Do a Do the
sustainable
the different
different future. generational
The
generational five cohorts
generational purchase
cohorts examinedorganic in food,
this and
research how Inoften do they
cover
cohorts,
disposal,
examine
sustainable
as these
may
through
future.
may
implement
the provide
prism
Policymakers offurther
specificorganic
having foodcohorts
understanding
campaigns and
choices,
information
purchase
ofthe
actions the organic
country’s
targeting
regardingOFB the
food,
total
certain
expressed
behaviour
and how often
sustainable
generational
by ofmultiple
these
do they
behaviour.
cohorts.
generational
cohorts at their
the age spectrum
addition, purchase
purchase
these of
it? approximately
it? the total adultsustainable
populationpoliciesof the country sinceby it provides insight
cohorts,
disposal, Therefore,
as these
may ininsights
this
may
implement
may lead
context
provide to
further
specific
appropriate
thecampaigns
following research
understanding
and ofquestions
actions the (RQs)
country’s
targeting
established
have
total
certain arisen:
sustainable
generational
governments
behaviour.
cohorts.
in
In
for
order people
to RQ2:
RQ2:
ensureaged
WhatWhat
a between
kind of
kind
sustainable 18
of and
attitudes
attitudes
future. 95
does
The years
each
does
five old,
each also
generation revealing
hold
generation
generational cohorts toward
holdthe tendency
organic
toward
examined in food? of
organic
this the country’s
food?
research cover
addition, Therefore,
RQ1:
theseDo the
ininsights
this different
may lead
context generational
the to appropriate
following cohorts purchase
sustainable
research questions organic
policies
(RQs) food, and how
established
have arisen: often do they
by governments in
sustainable
the age future.
tospectrum
RQ3: Does ofPolicymakers
the economic
approximately having
crisisthe information
affect
total each
adult regarding
generation’s
population the behaviour
purchasing
of the country of these
behaviour
since cohortsorganic
toward
it provides at their
insight
order RQ1: RQ3:
purchase
ensure Do aDoes
it? the
sustainable
the different economic
future. The
generationalcrisis
five affect each
generational
cohorts purchasegeneration’s
cohorts
organic examinedpurchasing
food, in this behaviour
research
and how often cover
do they toward organic
disposal,
for mayproducts?
food implement specific campaigns and actions
also targeting certain generational cohorts.
the age people
RQ2:
spectrum
foodaged
What
purchase of between
kind of
approximately
products? 18 and
attitudes 95 total
does
the years
each old,
generation
adult population revealing
hold oftoward
the theorganic
tendency
country sincefood?
itof the
provides country’s
insight
Therefore, in it?
this context the following research questions (RQs) have arisen:
for people
sustainable RQ4:
RQ3:
RQ2:
Are
future.
Does
aged
What
any generational
Policymakers
the economic
between
kind of 18 and
attitudes
differences
having
crisis information
affect
95
does yearseach
each
observed
generation’s
old, also
generation
in
regarding OFB the (attitudes,
behaviour
purchasing
revealing
hold toward
economic
of these
behaviour
theorganic
tendency crisis
cohorts
oftoward
the impact,
at their
organic
country’s
disposal, RQ1:andRQ4:
may Do Are
purchasing
implement
any
the differentgenerational
behaviourgenerational
specific of differences
organic
campaigns cohorts
food)?
and
observed
purchase
actions targeting
in
organic OFB food,
certain andfood?
(attitudes, howeconomic
generational often crisis impact, and
do they
cohorts.
sustainable foodRQ3: products?
future.
Does
purchasing
purchase
Policymakers
the economic
behaviour
having
crisis
of
information
affect
organic each regardingpurchasing
generation’s
food)?
the behaviour of thesetoward
behaviour cohortsorganic
at their
Therefore,
disposal, RQ5:
RQ4: If so,it?
in
Are
mayproducts? which
this
any
implement generational
context
generational
specific cohortsand
thecampaigns
following
differences differ
research inquestions
observed
actions OFB?
in OFB(RQs)
targeting have
(attitudes,
certain arisen:
economic crisis
generational impact,
cohorts.
food
Therefore,RQ2:
RQ5:
RQ6:
RQ1:
and
What
Do If
Whatthe
purchasing
in
kind
so,
this
of
which
actions attitudes
different
behaviour
context
does
generational
could
generational
the of organic
following
each
government generation
cohorts
cohorts
food)?
research differ
policymakers
purchase hold
questionsin toward
OFB?
organic
(RQs)
organic
implement,
food,
have and food?
and
arisen:how whatoftenmarketing
do they
RQ4: RQ3: Are any
Does the generational
economic differences
crisis affectto each observed
generation’s in OFB (attitudes,
purchasing economic
behaviour crisis organic
toward impact,
techniques
RQ6:
purchase
RQ5:
RQ1:
and If What
Doso,the
purchasing
can
it?which they
actionsutilize
could
generational
different
behaviour
in order
government
generational
of cohorts
organic
try to policymakers
differ
cohorts
food)?
change
in OFB?consumers’
purchase organic OFB
implement,
food, in aand
and positive
how what
oftenmanner?
marketing
do they techniques
food products?
Against RQ2:
can
RQ6: this
What
purchasethey
What background,
it? kind
utilize
actions in the present
of attitudes
order
could does
to try
government paper
each
to change aimsconsumers’
generation tohold
policymakers exploretoward organic
OFB organic
implement, in food
a behaviour
food?
positive
and what among
manner?
marketing
multiple RQ5: RQ4:
RQ3:
If so,any
Are
generational
Does
which
the
generational
generational
cohorts
economic (≥2crisis
cohorts differ
differences
simultaneously),
affect each
in OFB?
observed in OFB
specifically
generation’s (attitudes,
looking
purchasing for economic
differences
behaviour crisis impact,
in behaviour
toward organic
techniques
RQ2:
RQ6:
and
What
What
purchasing
can
kind they
actions utilize
of attitudes
could
behaviour
ingovernment
of
order
does
organic
to
each try to change
generation
food)? policymakers consumers’
hold toward OFB
organic
implement, inand
a positive
food? manner?
what marketing
among Against
these cohorts.
food products?
Against this thisMore
Doesbackground, background,
precisely,
the itsthe
present present
objectives
paper arepaper
to aims
investigate to explore
the following organic
issues: food behaviour among
RQ3:
techniques
multiple
RQ5: If so,
the
caneconomic
which they crisis
utilize
generational in affectto
order
cohorts
each
try toaims
differ change
in
to explore
generation’s
OFB?
purchasing
consumers’ organic
OFB food
behaviour behaviour
toward
in a positive among
organic
manner?
1.
multiple The
RQ4: self-reported
generational
Are
generationalany cohorts Greek
generational
(≥2generational
cohorts differences cohorts’
(≥2 simultaneously),
observed purchasing
in OFB behaviour
specifically of
for looking
(attitudes, organic
economic food.
forcrisis
indifferences
impact, in behaviour
Against
food
RQ6:
products?
this
What background,
actions thesimultaneously),
could present
government
specifically
paper policymakers
aims to explore looking organic
implement,
differences
foodand behaviour
behaviour
among
what marketing
2.
among amongThe
and attitudes
these
RQ4: purchasing
these
cohorts.
Are any that
cohorts.
More each
behaviour
Moregeneration
precisely,
generational ofdifferences
organic
precisely,
its holds
objectives toward
food)?
its objectives
are
observed to organicare
investigate
in OFB food.
to investigate
the following
(attitudes, the
economic following
issues:
crisis issues:
impact,
multipletechniques generational can cohorts (≥2 simultaneously), specifically looking for differences in behaviour
3.
1. The RQ5:
The
and effect
If so,of thethey
which
self-reported
purchasing
utilize crisis
economic
generational
Greek
behaviour
in order
of on to
cohorts
generational
organic eachtry to change
differ
cohorts’
food)? OFB?consumers’
generation’s
inpurchasing purchasing OFB
behaviour
in a positive
behaviour
of organic toward manner?
food. organic
among these cohorts.
Against this More precisely,
background, its objectives
the present are toto
paper policymakers
aims investigate
explore the following
organic food issues:
1.
2. TheThe
food
RQ6:
RQ5: self-reported
products.
IfWhat
attitudes
so, whichactions Greek
could
that generational
each generational
government
generation holds
cohorts cohorts’
toward
differ organic
inpurchasing
OFB? purchasing
implement,
food. and behaviour
behaviour what among
of organic
marketing food.
1. The
multipletechniques self-reported
generational Greek
cohorts (≥2generational
simultaneously), cohorts’ specifically behaviour
looking for of organic
differences food.
in behaviour
2.
3. 2. The The
RQ6: effect
What can
attitudes
of the they
thatutilize
each
economic
actions could in order
generation
crisis on
government to
eachtryholds
to change
toward
generation’s
policymakers consumers’
organic
purchasing
implement,OFB
food. inand
behavioura positive
toward
what manner?
organic
marketing
among The attitudes
these cohorts. that each
More generation
precisely, holds toward
its objectives are totoorganic
investigate food. the following issues:
Against
food this background,
products.
techniques can they the in
utilize present
order paper
to toaims
changeexplore
trygeneration’s consumers’ organic
OFB food behaviour
in a positive among
manner?
3.
1. The
The effect of
self-reportedthe economic
Greek crisis
generational on each
cohorts’ purchasing purchasing
behaviour behaviour
of organic toward
food. organic
multiple Againstgenerational
this cohorts (≥2
background, thesimultaneously),
present paper specifically
aims to explorelooking for differences
organic food in
behaviour behaviour
among
2. these foodattitudes
The products.that each generation holds toward organic food.
among cohorts. More precisely, its objectives are to investigate
multiple generational cohorts (≥2 simultaneously), specifically looking for differences in behaviour the following issues:
3.
1. these The effect of the economic
The self-reported Greek crisis on each
generational generation’s
cohorts’ purchasing behaviour toward
food.organic
among cohorts. More precisely, its objectives arepurchasing
to investigate behaviour of organic
the following issues:
2. food products.
1. The The attitudes
self-reported that Greek
each generation
generational holds toward
cohorts’ organic food.
purchasing behaviour of organic food.
3. The effect of the economic crisis
2. The attitudes that each generation holds toward organic on each generation’s purchasing
food. behaviour toward organicSustainability 2020, 12, 2299 4 of 25
3. The effect of the economic crisis on each generation’s purchasing behaviour toward organic
food products.
4. Generational differences observed in OFB (attitudes, economic crisis impact, and purchasing
behaviour of organic food).
5. The specific generational cohort differences in OFB.
6. Based on the results of data analysis, to suggest actions and marketing communication techniques
for policymakers in order to produce as an outcome favourable OFB.
Prior researches have extensively addressed SFC and organic food topics; yet, the additional
contribution the present scholarly work makes is that it aims to raise and address the following
neglected areas attested in the relevant literature:
1. It focuses simultaneously on multiple generational cohort consumers, covering (i) Generation Z
(Gen Z), (ii) Generation Y (Gen Y), (iii) Generation X (Gen X), (iv) Baby Boomers (BB), and (v) the
Silent Generation (SG).
2. Studying consumers’ patterns based on their generational cohort is an emerging topic in the
marketing field [11,54,55] and—compared to other consumer characteristics—it is an understudied
topic. As Chaney et al. [55] state, generational cohorts, while used widely in social sciences, in the
marketing area, this concept has been studied “marginally”.
3. It focuses on multigenerational OFB (≥2 generational cohorts), which is a rather neglected
subject (as to the authors’ knowledge, no prior study has been found), inflicting the need for
more research.
4. It provides insights from self-reported purchasing behaviour as stated by different generational
cohorts. While several studies have been retrieved that refer to organic food behaviour and
generational cohort, these focus only on a single cohort (mainly generation Y), and in their vast
majority, these predict future behaviour (mainly through the TPB model) and not the present and
the actual one e.g., [56,57].
5. It provides an in-depth understanding of research associated with consumers’ food purchasing
behaviour within the Greek fiscal crisis, which had not been thoroughly studied previously, and
for so, that aspect also necessitates further investigation [58].
6. It raises topics strongly related to different generational cohorts’ attitudes toward organic
food and the impact of the economic crisis on them for which no prior studies exist to the
authors’ knowledge.
In order to challenge the abovementioned aim and objectives of the current study, research on
multiple levels was implemented (i.e., desk, qualitative, and field research), while in terms of structure,
the present paper has the following layout: the next section briefly presents the generational cohort
theory as well as a critical literature review regarding the subject under analysis, followed by the
implemented materials and methods. Then, the results of the study combined with the thorough
discussion are presented, finishing with the authors’ conclusions and recommendations to policymakers.
The authors also present the limitations and directions for further research that this work could lead to.
2. Literature Review
While multigenerational cohort studies or cross-generational studies have been detected in different
areas of academic research, most of the studies focus on generational differences in the workplace [59–61].
Yet, other academic fields also encompass cross-generational differences, such as the travel and tourism
industry [62–65]; the health, mental, cognition, or psychology sector examining related issues [66–68];
the service sector [69–71]; and studies in education [72,73]. Moreover, cross-generational differences
were studied in retailing regarding products in the non-food sector [74–77], in technology adoption or
purchase [78,79], as well as politics [80]. Finally, several academic papers were detected in the food
and beverage sector (non-organic) and multigenerational differences [81–83].Sustainability 2020, 12, 2299 5 of 25
On the other hand, multiple academic papers [14–16,84–86] have dealt extensively with organic
food and consumer behaviour. All these studies focus on different aspects, diverse issues, and specific
organic food. Examples consist of studies centred on organic meat, fruits and vegetables, fish, as well
as organic dairy products [87–90]. In this domain, different aspects of consumer behaviour, such
as predicting behaviour or providing motives and barriers, have been also addressed [19,91,92].
Additionally, another significant part of existing research provides readers with consumer segments
based on different variables, ranging from attitudes to consumer characteristics, profiling consumers of
organic food, and/or developing typologies [17,93–95]. Moreover, previous authors have provided an
extensive review of the literature in association with SFC and/or organic food behaviour [96–100], and
a few studies have focused exclusively on OFB in connection with an economic downturn, crisis, or
recession [22–24,101].
Studies that have focused on or include generational cohorts and SFC, and/or organic food products
in general or specifically, are limited (to our knowledge), and they emphasize on one generation, with
a particular tendency to Gen Y/Millennials [11,34,57,102–114]. Table 1 presents the studies that—to the
author’s knowledge—focus on SFC or OFB combined with generational cohorts.
Table 1. Studies on sustainable food consumption (SFC) or organic food behaviour (OFB) and
generational cohorts.
Generational
Authors Issue/Variables Country/Data Findings
Cohort
Characteristics of the product and
Brazil vs. Spain consumer’s concern influence social
Molinillo et al. Antecedents of organic food
Y/Millennials 267 Brazilians and and health consciousness, which
[102] purchasing
263 Spanish affect the frequency and willingness
to pay more for organic food.
Four groups of Millennials: The first
pay attention to the social, economic,
Perception of the
Bollani et al. Italy, N = 268 and sustainable production of food,
Y/Millennials connotation of sustainability
[103] University students the second on labelling systems, the
in the food domain
third on innovation, and the fourth is
not interested in the issue.
Green consumption
behaviour, willingness to
pay (WTP) price premium, Gen Y is concerned with green
Leerattanakorn
Y and factors influencing WTP Thailand, N = 1200 consumption, and 78% is willing to
et al. [104]
premium for organic food pay more for green products
(among other green
products)
Four variables, i.e., environmentalism,
Průša & Perception of green
Y Prague, N = 520 preference, payment and tolerance
Sadílek [34] marketing
affect green consumer behaviour.
Environmental concerns, accessibility,
Vidal-Branco Drivers of purchase of fashion, and price fairness are found
Y/Millennials Brazil, N = 267
et al. [105] organic food to be drivers of purchasing frequency
of organic food.
Price, quality, convenience,
Attributes of organic
Muposhi & South Africa, availability, performance, and trust
Y products leading to
Dhurup [106] N = 16 (qualitative) affect choices of generation Y
purchase decisions
members
Purchasing intention toward Concern for the environment, health
Hassan et al.
Y organic food Malaysia, N = 226 factors and value affect purchase
[107]
(perception-motivation) intention toward organic food
South Africa,
Efficacy, trust, cost image, and
Influence of the Social N = 16
Muposhi et al. influence from peers are drivers of the
Y Dilemma Theory (SDT) on College and
[108] Social Dilemma Theory that affect
organic food behaviour university students
green purchase.
(qualitative)Sustainability 2020, 12, 2299 6 of 25
Table 1. Cont.
Generational
Authors Issue/Variables Country/Data Findings
Cohort
The majority of the generation Y
Malaysian consumers are familiar
Thambiah Organic food consumption Malaysia, N = 380 with organic food. Knowledge,
Y
et al. [109] intention University students familiarity, and price consciousness
affect the intention to buy organic
food.
Wine label associated with support of
Preferences and purchase social issues has a higher patronage
Pomarici &
Y/Millennials decisions of sustainable Italy, N = 500 percentage. Also, older females living
Vecchio [110]
wines in cities are more probable to buy
sustainable wine.
Demographic differences related to
Relationship between the gender, major of study, income, age,
USA, N = 220
Regine [111] Y preference for organic foods ethnicity, and environmental
university students
and demographics knowledge for some of the
hypotheses of the study.
There are many ways in which
consumers understand the term
Australia N = 30 sustainable diet. Additionally,
Pearson et al. Perception of sustainable
Y university students respondents offered a variety of
[112] diet
(Qualitative) suggestions on how to improve
sustainable food purchase choices,
production and consumption of food.
Perceived quality, trust, and concern
Influence of various factors
Sa’ari et al. Malaysia, N = 235 for the environment positively
Y/Millennials on intention to consume
[57] university students influence the intention to consume
organic food
organic food.
Greek Millennials are generally
Ntanos et al. Perceptions on the organic favourable for organic products.
Y/Millennials Greece, N = 163
[113] products Quality, certification, taste, variety,
and firm name are criteria to buy.
Sustainable behaviour focuses on
SFC behaviour of the
Kamenidou Greece, N = 252 eating seasonal fruits and vegetables
Z Generation Z cohort;
et al. [11] university students and purchasing regional products.
segmentation of cohort Z
Two consumer segments were found.
High, moderate, and low
environmentally conscious groups
Segmentation based on were found. The first two groups
environmental considered health and environmental
Su et al. [114] Z USA, N = 812
consciousness and elements when purchasing
sustainable food attributes sustainable food, and the third group
considered elements such as price and
convenience
The table above demonstrates that only 16 studies have been found regarding generational cohorts
and SFC behaviour, or on generational cohorts and OFB. These studies refer to one generational cohort,
mainly the Gen Y cohort, while generation cohort differences have not been examined since no study
(to our knowledge) deals with multiple generational cohorts and cohort behaviour toward organic
food. Thus, it justifies the necessity for a more profound investigation centred on SFC, OFB, and
generational cohorts.
3. Materials and Methods
Within the above theoretical framework, this study examines five Greek generational cohorts,
i.e., the Silent Generation born between 1925–1945 [37]; the Baby Boomers born between 1946 and
1964 [40]; Generation X, consisting of people born between 1965–1977 [40]; Generation Y (or millennials
according to many scholars) who were born between 1978–1994 [37]; and Generation Z, i.e., people
born from 1995–2009 [39]. These periods were adopted due to life-changing events that affected Greece
and those entering adulthood.Sustainability 2020, 12, 2299 7 of 25
The research was materialized through a questionnaire developed explicitly for this purpose,
based on previous studies and qualitative research with in-depth interviews. The literature review
resulted in encompassing in the questionnaire attitudes as well as the economic crisis issue since
previous studies had shown that organic food purchasing behaviour is affected by attitudes [20,21,115]
and income constrains, either directly or indirectly [116]. The latter is significantly influenced under
conditions of fiscal crisis, and it consequently impacts directly on consumers’ purchasing power,
which decreases substantially in turbulent economies. The qualitative research results of this study
confirmed the items encompassed in the questionnaire that referred to consumers’ attitude toward
organic food and provided the items referring to the economic crisis. This qualitative research was
realized through personal interviews, implementing non-probability sampling (i.e., participants were
recruited by convenience sample) since probability sampling in qualitative research is not considered to
be a necessity [117]. As for data collection in the qualitative research phase, an open-end questionnaire
(identical for all subjects) was used, with the participation of five subjects per cohort (i.e., 25 participants).
After receiving the subjects’ consent, all discussions were recorded digitally [54,118], then transcribed,
and results were cross-checked with the items in the questionnaire. Phrases and lexical items employed
by subjects’ multiple times further developed the items of the economic crisis. For the purpose of
the study, researchers created a Facebook account. More precisely, through this account, individuals
who participated in the study had access to the results and were asked to review the data analysed
and confirm their authenticity [11]. This was feasible for the participants who had access and ease
with new technologies. Though, the older participants were presented with a printed hand-out with
the results and were asked to confirm the findings. Through this process, member validity was
ensured [119]. Next, in order to ensure that the final questionnaire is functional, a small-scale pilot test
(N = 150; 30 persons per cohort, excluded from the final research) was undertaken for face validity
matters [120]. A non-probability sampling method was used (convenience sampling) via an aided
self-administrated questionnaire (in the presence of the researchers in order to pinpoint at first-hand
problems encountered). The pilot test led to modifications regarding syntax and grammar, finalizing
the questionnaire for the field (i.e., quantitative) research. The quantitative research took place by
implementing an online and printed questionnaire and utilizing a non-probability mixed sampling
method (convenience and snowball sampling). The data collection method varied based on cohort,
access to the internet, and ease with new technologies. Specifically, information from the Gen Z, Y, X
cohort as well as the younger subjects of the BB generational cohort was gathered electronically, via the
internet (i.e., e-mail and Facebook). Furthermore, a printed questionnaire was used for those without
access to the internet, applying a self-administrated or aided self-administrated questionnaire, while
for the very elderly (>70) or illiterate, personal interviews were utilized. The link for the online data
gathering remained active from April to December 2018. This procedure led to a sample of 1562 usable
questionnaires, which were considered appropriate for the statistical analysis since they met the pre-set
criteria. It should be pointed out that given the existing economic and time barriers, this method was
considered as the most realistic.
The survey was officially approved by the members of the Department of Business Administration
of the International Hellenic University with reference number 3/EH∆–31.1.2018.
Measures
Three issues were introduced and thoroughly examined in this research: frequency of purchasing
organic food, attitudes toward organic food, and the impact of the economic crisis on purchasing
behaviour. As concerns the frequency of purchase, it refers to purchase behaviour (PB) and is
the control question, stated as “How often do you purchase organic food?”. PB is presented on a
seven-point Likert-type scale (1 = Never, 2 = Very rarely, 3 = Rarely, 4 = Neither rarely/nor frequently
(sometimes/occasionally), 5 = Frequently, 6 = Very frequently, and 7 = Always). Regarding the question
referring to the attitudes toward organic food (ATT), six items were adopted from Gil [115], which were
the ones confirmed by the qualitative research. These items were organic products are healthier (ATT1);You can also read
