IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iefi15/206215.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fresh-cut salad and shelf life date extension: a segmentation of Italian consumers

Author

Listed:
  • Stranieri, S.
  • Baldi, L.

Abstract

Shelf-life estimation has become increasingly important due to the growing consumer interest in fresh and safe food products and the European policy indications to consider it as a key issue for the sustainable management of food waste within the supply chains. To date, no legislation on the shelf life date of the most of food products exists. Several studies demonstrate that logistic management and the technology available in the fresh-cut sector would allow to extend the shelf life date of products without compromising their intrinsic quality attributes and to achieve a more sustainable production by a strong reduction of unsold stock. The aim of the study was to segment consumers on the basis of their attitude towards the extension of the shelf life date in the fresh-cut salad sector. On the basis of the clusters found, the paper discusses if the information concerning such technology is a useful tool to inform consumers on product characteristics or if it entails a risk of information overload.

Suggested Citation

  • Stranieri, S. & Baldi, L., 2015. "Fresh-cut salad and shelf life date extension: a segmentation of Italian consumers," 2015 International European Forum (144th EAAE Seminar), February 9-13, 2015, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 206215, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iefi15:206215
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.206215
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/206215/files/08-Stranieri%20Baldi%20%20IGLS%202015.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.206215?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katie Abrams & Courtney Meyers & Tracy Irani, 2010. "Naturally confused: consumers’ perceptions of all-natural and organic pork products," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 27(3), pages 365-374, September.
    2. Andrea Bieberstein & Jutta Roosen & Stéphan Marette & Sandrine Blanchemanche & Frederic Vandermoere, 2013. "Consumer choices for nano-food and nano-packaging in France and Germany," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 40(1), pages 73-94, February.
    3. Lusk, Jayson L. & Jamal, Mustafa & Kurlander, Lauren & Roucan, Maud & Taulman, Lesley, 2005. "A Meta-Analysis of Genetically Modified Food Valuation Studies," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(1), pages 1-17, April.
    4. Mena, Carlos & Terry, Leon A. & Williams, Adrian & Ellram, Lisa, 2014. "Causes of waste across multi-tier supply networks: Cases in the UK food sector," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 144-158.
    5. Jill J. McCluskey & Johan F.M. Swinnen, 2004. "Political Economy of the Media and Consumer Perceptions of Biotechnology," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1230-1237.
    6. Wim Verbeke, 2005. "Agriculture and the food industry in the information age," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(3), pages 347-368, September.
    7. Curtis, Kynda R. & Wahl, Thomas I. & McCluskey, Jill J., 2003. "Consumer Acceptance of Genetically Modified Food Products in the Developing World," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57858, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    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. Stranieri, S. & Baldi, Lucia & Manzoni, V., 2014. "Fresh-cut salad consumer and shelf life date extension: more or less information?," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182942, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Elena Briones Alonso & Lara Cockx & Jo Swinnen, 2017. "Culture and food security," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven 591898, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    3. Martin Browning & Lars Gårn Hansen & Sinne Smed, 2013. "Rational inattention or rational overreaction? Consumer reactions to health news," IFRO Working Paper 2013/14, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    4. Delmond, Anthony R. & McCluskey, Jill J. & Yormirzoev, Mirzobobo & Rogova, Maria A., 2018. "Russian consumer willingness to pay for genetically modified food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 91-100.
    5. Julianna M. Butler & Christian A. Vossler, 2018. "What is an Unregulated and Potentially Misleading Label Worth? The case of “Natural”-Labelled Groceries," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(2), pages 545-564, June.
    6. Kubitzki, S. & Henseleit, M. & Herrmann, R., 2010. "Informationsgewinn und Markttransparenz durch Labeling? – Eine kritische Würdigung der neuen Lebensmittelkennzeichnung „Ohne Gentechnik“," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 45, March.
    7. Gauly, Sarah & Müller, Andreas & Spiller, Achim, 2017. "New methods of increasing transparency: Does viewing webcam pictures change peoples' opinions towards modern pig farming?," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 260769, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    8. Caswell, Julie A. & Joseph, Siny, 2007. "Consumer Demand for Quality: Major Determinant for Agricultural and Food Trade in the Future?," Working Paper Series 7390, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
    9. Stranieri, Stefanella & Banterle, Alessandro, 2015. "Consumer Interest in Meat Labelled Attributes: Who Cares?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 18(4), pages 1-18, November.
    10. Ying (Jessica) Cao & David R. Just & Calum Turvey & Brian Wansink, 2015. "Existing Food Habits and Recent Choices Lead to Disregard of Food Safety Announcements," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 63(4), pages 491-511, December.
    11. Martin Browning & Lars Gårn Hansen & Sinne Smed, 2019. "Heterogeneous Consumer Reactions to Health News," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(2), pages 579-599.
    12. Johan F.M. Swinnen & Thijs Vandemoortele, 2009. "Trade, Development, and the Political Economy of Public Standards," LICOS Discussion Papers 23609, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    13. Johan F.M.Swinnen & Thijs Vandemoortele, 2011. "On Butterflies and Frankenstein: A Dynamic Theory of Regulation," LICOS Discussion Papers 27611, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    14. Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano & Lamonaca, Emilia, 2020. "Objective risk and subjective risk: The role of information in food supply chains," MPRA Paper 104515, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Hu, Wuyang & Chen, Kevin Z. & Yoshida, Kentaro, 2006. "Japanese Consumers’ Perceptions on and Willingness to Pay for Credence Attributes Associated with Canola Oil," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(1), pages 1-13, April.
    16. H. Eggert & M. Greaker, 2011. "Trade, GMOs and Environmental Risk: Are Current Policies Likely to Improve Welfare?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(4), pages 587-608, April.
    17. Kyriaki Remoundou & Drichoutis Andreas & Phoebe Koundouri, 2010. "Warm glow in charitable auctions: Are the WEIRDos driving the results?," DEOS Working Papers 1028, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    18. Christina Tsouti & Christina Papadaskalopoulou & Angeliki Konsta & Panagiotis Andrikopoulos & Margarita Panagiotopoulou & Sofia Papadaki & Christos Boukouvalas & Magdalini Krokida & Katerina Valta, 2023. "Investigating the Environmental Benefits of Novel Films for the Packaging of Fresh Tomatoes Enriched with Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Compounds through Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-22, May.
    19. Stéphan Marette & John Beghin & Anne‐Célia Disdier & Eliza Mojduszka, 2023. "Can foods produced with new plant engineering techniques succeed in the marketplace? A case study of apples," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(1), pages 414-435, March.
    20. Jayson Lusk, 2011. "The market for animal welfare," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(4), pages 561-575, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:iefi15:206215. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ilbonde.html .

    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.