IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i23p16370-d1289518.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer Perception of Food Product Packaging Materials Sustainability versus Life Cycle Assessment Results: The Case of Processed Tomatoes—A Quantitative Study in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Marisa Bock

    (Faculty of Life Sciences, Department of Nutrition and Home Economics, HAW Hamburg, 21033 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Stephan G. H. Meyerding

    (Faculty of Life Sciences, Department of Nutrition and Home Economics, HAW Hamburg, 21033 Hamburg, Germany)

Abstract

Due to increasing environmental awareness, especially among the young German population, people are increasingly striving to buy food in the most environmentally friendly way. In this context, packaging is becoming the focus of sustainability assessment, not because of its protection against food waste but because of the increasing amount of packaging rubbish. The aim of this study is to investigate the influence of the packaging material on the environmentally friendly purchase decisions of consumers in Generations Y and Z and whether they can correctly assess the environmental impact of the different materials. For this purpose, an online choice experiment was conducted with a representative sample of 250 German consumers. The respondents could choose between products with different characteristics, such as price, packaging material, label, and origin. The results show that origin is the most important factor, followed by packaging material. With the help of a latent class analysis, the respondents were divided into three segments, which differ in whether origin or material is more important in the sustainability assessment of a product. Furthermore, a lack of knowledge about the environmental impact of specific product attributes among the respondents is evidenced, and a comparison with scientific data from product lifecycle assessments shows that they have difficulties correctly assessing the environmental impact of packaging material.

Suggested Citation

  • Marisa Bock & Stephan G. H. Meyerding, 2023. "Consumer Perception of Food Product Packaging Materials Sustainability versus Life Cycle Assessment Results: The Case of Processed Tomatoes—A Quantitative Study in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-25, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:23:p:16370-:d:1289518
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/23/16370/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/23/16370/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klaiman, Kimberly & Ortega, David L. & Garnache, Cloé, 2016. "Consumer preferences and demand for packaging material and recyclability," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 1-8.
    2. Minton, Ann P. & Rose, Randall L., 1997. "The Effects of Environmental Concern on Environmentally Friendly Consumer Behavior: An Exploratory Study," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 37-48, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhihui Wang & Liangzhen Nie & Eila Jeronen & Lihua Xu & Meiai Chen, 2023. "Understanding the Environmentally Sustainable Behavior of Chinese University Students as Tourists: An Integrative Framework," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Korey Fennell & Jack Fehlberg & Sukhdeep Singh & Laurent M. Matuana & Sungeun Cho & Eva Almenar, 2024. "Consumers’ Behavior toward Packaging Containing Agricultural Waste as a Plastic Filler for Food: An Exploratory Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-22, January.
    3. Jingze Jiang, 2016. "Peer Pressure in Voluntary Environmental Programs: a Case of the Bag Rewards Program," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 155-190, June.
    4. Quinn, Martin & Feeney, Orla, 2022. "Domestic Waste Management in Ireland - the Journey Towards Financialization," QBS Working Paper Series 271266, Queen's University Belfast, Queen's Business School.
    5. Arne K. Albrecht & Gianfranco Walsh & Simon Brach & Dwayne D. Gremler & Erica Herpen, 2017. "The influence of service employees and other customers on customer unfriendliness: a social norms perspective," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 827-847, November.
    6. Gonçalves, Helena Martins & Lourenço, Tiago Ferreira & Silva, Graça Miranda, 2016. "Green buying behavior and the theory of consumption values: A fuzzy-set approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 1484-1491.
    7. Pakvalit Kurkoon & Daranee Pimchangthong & Veera Boonjing, 2015. "A Conceptual Framework for Individual Green Information Technology Consumption and its Impact," Journal of Business & Management (COES&RJ-JBM), , vol. 3(3), pages 388-396, July.
    8. Mansoora Ahmed & Sun Zehou & Syed Ali Raza & Muhammad Asif Qureshi & Sara Qamar Yousufi, 2020. "Impact of CSR and environmental triggers on employee green behavior: The mediating effect of employee well‐being," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5), pages 2225-2239, September.
    9. Zhang, Wenqing & Liu, Liangliang, 2022. "Exploring non-users' intention to adopt ride-sharing services: Taking into account increased risks due to the COVID-19 pandemic among other factors," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 180-195.
    10. Petschnig, Martin & Heidenreich, Sven & Spieth, Patrick, 2014. "Innovative alternatives take action – Investigating determinants of alternative fuel vehicle adoption," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 68-83.
    11. João M. Lopes & Sofia Gomes & Tiago Trancoso, 2023. "The Dark Side of Green Marketing: How Greenwashing Affects Circular Consumption?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-17, July.
    12. Eva M. Murgado-Armenteros & María Gutierrez-Salcedo & Francisco José Torres-Ruiz, 2020. "The Concern about Biodiversity as a Criterion for the Classification of the Sustainable Consumer: A Cross-Cultural Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-14, April.
    13. Leary, R. Bret & Vann, Richard J. & Mittelstaedt, John D. & Murphy, Patrick E. & Sherry,, John F., 2014. "Changing the marketplace one behavior at a time: Perceived marketplace influence and sustainable consumption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(9), pages 1953-1958.
    14. Raffaelli, R. & Menapace, L., 2018. "Indirect questioning as a debiasing mechanism in preference elicitation for sustainable food? First evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277039, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Menapace, Luisa & Raffaelli, Roberta, 2020. "Unraveling hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 416-430.
    16. Hsiao-Ping Chang & Chun-Chieh Ma & Han-Shen Chen, 2019. "Climate Change and Consumer’s Attitude toward Insect Food," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-17, May.
    17. Sisi Wu & Xuan Gong & Yunfei Wang & Jian Cao, 2022. "Consumer Cognition and Management Perspective on Express Packaging Pollution," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-23, April.
    18. Waris, Idrees & Hameed, Irfan, 2019. "Using Extended Model of Theory of Planned Behavior to Predict Purchase Intention of Energy Efficient Home Appliances in Pakistan," MPRA Paper 109612, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Johan Jansson, 2011. "Consumer eco‐innovation adoption: assessing attitudinal factors and perceived product characteristics," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 192-210, March.
    20. Nilsson, Jonas & Jansson , Johan & Isberg, Sofia & Nordvall, Anna-Carin, 2011. "Determinants of customer satisfaction with socially responsible investments: Do ethical and environmental factors impact customer satisfaction with SRI profiled mutual funds?," Sustainable Investment and Corporate Governance Working Papers 2011/2, Sustainable Investment Research Platform.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:23:p:16370-:d:1289518. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.