Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

The nutritional and toxicological value of organic vegetables Consumer perception versus scientific evidence

The nutritional and toxicological value of organic vegetables Consumer perception versus... Purpose – The present study aims to explore and compare consumer perception and scientific evidence related to food quality and food safety aspects of organic versus conventional vegetables. Design/methodology/approach – Primary data on consumer perception were gathered in 2006‐2007 through a consumer survey with Flemish adults ( n =529) and compared with scientific evidence from literature. Consumers of organic and conventional vegetables were selected by means of a convenience sampling procedure. Subjects were asked to complete a self‐administered questionnaire concerning the perception of the nutritional and toxicological value of organic relative to conventional vegetables. Data processing and analysis included descriptive analysis (frequency distributions), data reduction (Cronbach's alpha test, factor analysis), bivariate analysis (correlations, t ‐test, ANOVA) and multivariate analysis (stepwise multiple regression). Findings – It was found that organic vegetables are perceived as containing less contaminants and more nutrients, and as such, being healthier and safer compared to conventional vegetables. However, not enough evidence is currently available in the literature to support or refute such a perception, indicating a certain mismatch between consumer perception and scientific evidence. The gap between perception and evidence is larger among older consumers with children. The perception is stronger when the consumption frequency is higher, but is independent of gender, place of residence (rural or urban), education and income level. Also non‐users, on average, perceive that organic vegetables have a nutritional and toxicological advantage over conventional vegetables. Research limitations/implications – A non‐probability convenience sampling method was applied which limits generalisation of the findings beyond the sample characteristics. Originality/value – This paper is original in comparing consumer perception and scientific facts related to both nutritional and safety aspects of organic versus conventional vegetables. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png British Food Journal Emerald Publishing

The nutritional and toxicological value of organic vegetables Consumer perception versus scientific evidence

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/the-nutritional-and-toxicological-value-of-organic-vegetables-consumer-s1DdStdLXH
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0007-070X
DOI
10.1108/00070700920992916
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – The present study aims to explore and compare consumer perception and scientific evidence related to food quality and food safety aspects of organic versus conventional vegetables. Design/methodology/approach – Primary data on consumer perception were gathered in 2006‐2007 through a consumer survey with Flemish adults ( n =529) and compared with scientific evidence from literature. Consumers of organic and conventional vegetables were selected by means of a convenience sampling procedure. Subjects were asked to complete a self‐administered questionnaire concerning the perception of the nutritional and toxicological value of organic relative to conventional vegetables. Data processing and analysis included descriptive analysis (frequency distributions), data reduction (Cronbach's alpha test, factor analysis), bivariate analysis (correlations, t ‐test, ANOVA) and multivariate analysis (stepwise multiple regression). Findings – It was found that organic vegetables are perceived as containing less contaminants and more nutrients, and as such, being healthier and safer compared to conventional vegetables. However, not enough evidence is currently available in the literature to support or refute such a perception, indicating a certain mismatch between consumer perception and scientific evidence. The gap between perception and evidence is larger among older consumers with children. The perception is stronger when the consumption frequency is higher, but is independent of gender, place of residence (rural or urban), education and income level. Also non‐users, on average, perceive that organic vegetables have a nutritional and toxicological advantage over conventional vegetables. Research limitations/implications – A non‐probability convenience sampling method was applied which limits generalisation of the findings beyond the sample characteristics. Originality/value – This paper is original in comparing consumer perception and scientific facts related to both nutritional and safety aspects of organic versus conventional vegetables.

Journal

British Food JournalEmerald Publishing

Published: Sep 26, 2009

Keywords: Consumers; Perception; Organic foods; Vegetables; Safety; Belgium

References