Innovation as a Factor Increasing Fruit Consumption: The Case of Poland.

Dagmara Stangierska, Iwona Kowalczuk, Katarzyna Widera, Dawid Olewnicki, Piotr Latocha
Author Information
  1. Dagmara Stangierska: Department of Pomology and Horticulture Economics, Institute of Horticulture Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, Nowoursynowska 166, 02-787 Warszawa, Poland. ORCID
  2. Iwona Kowalczuk: Department of Food Market and Consumer Research, Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, Nowoursynowska 159C, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland. ORCID
  3. Katarzyna Widera: Department of Economics, Finance, Regional and International Research, Faculty of Economics and Management, Opole University of Technology, Prószkowska 76, 45-758 Opole, Poland. ORCID
  4. Dawid Olewnicki: Department of Pomology and Horticulture Economics, Institute of Horticulture Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, Nowoursynowska 166, 02-787 Warszawa, Poland.
  5. Piotr Latocha: Department of Environmental Protection and Dendrology, Institute of Horticulture Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, Nowoursynowska 166, 02-787 Warsaw, Poland. ORCID

Abstract

Due to the low level of fruit consumption in relation to dietary recommendations in many European countries, including Poland, multidirectional actions should be taken to increase the consumption of these products. One of the ideas could be the introduction of innovative products. The main goal of the study is to determine the relationship between consumer propensity to purchase innovative products and the frequency of consumption of fruits and their preserves of consumers. The research sample consisted of 600 respondents who declared to consume fruit and were responsible for food shopping in their households. The results obtained indicate that consumers with a higher propensity to purchase innovative products consumed fruit and fruit preserves more. In addition, statistically significant differences were found between innovators and non-innovators in terms of income, expenditures on fruit purchases, places where fruit and fruit preserves were purchased and product characteristics that determined the purchase decision. The logistic regression results indicate that a higher frequency of supermarket/hypermarket and online shopping, a higher weekly spending on fruit and a greater importance attributed to the biodegradability of the packaging increased the favorability of innovation relatively to fruit products (by 23.8%, 31.4%, 32.7% and 21.6%, respectively). The relationships found may have important implications for both private and public stakeholders in the fruit and vegetable sector.

Keywords

References

  1. Nutr Rev. 2019 Jun 1;77(6):376-387 [PMID: 30995309]
  2. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2016 May;18(5):468-76 [PMID: 26826021]
  3. PLoS One. 2015 Oct 16;10(10):e0140846 [PMID: 26474158]
  4. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2017 Jan;71(1):83-91 [PMID: 27530474]
  5. Foods. 2020 Jul 17;9(7): [PMID: 32708933]
  6. PLoS One. 2020 May 13;15(5):e0232521 [PMID: 32401798]
  7. Foods. 2019 Nov 15;8(11): [PMID: 31731668]
  8. Food Sci Nutr. 2018 Jun 19;6(6):1462-1472 [PMID: 30258588]
  9. Appetite. 1995 Dec;25(3):267-84 [PMID: 8746966]
  10. Nutrients. 2021 Oct 26;13(11): [PMID: 34836044]
  11. Appetite. 2011 Aug;57(1):50-8 [PMID: 21477633]
  12. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2010 Mar;64(3):324-7 [PMID: 20087380]
  13. Lancet Planet Health. 2019 Jul;3(7):e318-e329 [PMID: 31326072]
  14. J Hum Hypertens. 2007 Sep;21(9):717-28 [PMID: 17443205]
  15. Appetite. 2013 Jan;60(1):193-202 [PMID: 23063609]
  16. Nutrients. 2017 Aug 23;9(9): [PMID: 28832549]
  17. Front Aging Neurosci. 2017 Feb 07;9:18 [PMID: 28223933]
  18. Nutrition. 2016 Mar;32(3):296-302 [PMID: 26691768]
  19. Foods. 2021 Mar 29;10(4): [PMID: 33805357]
  20. Int J Cancer. 2017 Feb 1;140(3):591-599 [PMID: 27759938]
  21. Appetite. 2011 Aug;57(1):110-20 [PMID: 21550369]
  22. Nutrients. 2017 Mar 29;9(4): [PMID: 28353635]
  23. Ann Oncol. 2016 Jan;27(1):81-96 [PMID: 26371287]
  24. Adv Nutr. 2012 Jul 01;3(4):506-16 [PMID: 22797986]
  25. Foods. 2021 Feb 03;10(2): [PMID: 33546323]
  26. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2021 Nov;20(6):5641-5674 [PMID: 34698434]
  27. Front Psychol. 2020 Sep 16;11:583768 [PMID: 33041952]
  28. Nutrients. 2018 Nov 28;10(12): [PMID: 30487459]
  29. Lancet. 2019 Feb 2;393(10170):447-492 [PMID: 30660336]
  30. Plant Foods Hum Nutr. 2017 Dec;72(4):325-334 [PMID: 28988409]
  31. Health Aff (Millwood). 2019 Sep;38(9):1557-1566 [PMID: 31479362]

Grants

  1. 513-01-040900-P00064-04/Innovation Incubator+, Intelligent Development Operational Program 2014-2020

MeSH Term

Consumer Behavior
Diet
Fruit
Poland
Vegetables

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0fruitproductsconsumptioninnovativepurchasepreserveshigherPolandconsumerpropensityfrequencyconsumersshoppingresultsindicatefoundinnovationDuelowlevelrelationdietaryrecommendationsmanyEuropeancountriesincludingmultidirectionalactionstakenincreaseOneideasintroductionmaingoalstudydeterminerelationshipfruitsresearchsampleconsisted600respondentsdeclaredconsumeresponsiblefoodhouseholdsobtainedconsumedadditionstatisticallysignificantdifferencesinnovatorsnon-innovatorstermsincomeexpenditurespurchasesplacespurchasedproductcharacteristicsdetermineddecisionlogisticregressionsupermarket/hypermarketonlineweeklyspendinggreaterimportanceattributedbiodegradabilitypackagingincreasedfavorabilityrelatively238%314%327%216%respectivelyrelationshipsmayimportantimplicationsprivatepublicstakeholdersvegetablesectorInnovationFactorIncreasingFruitConsumption:Casebehaviormarket

Similar Articles

Cited By