IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i11p4521-d1402448.html

Analysis of Consumer Preferences for Green Tea Products: A Randomized Conjoint Analysis in Thai Nguyen, Vietnam

Author

Listed:
  • Bui Xuan Hong

    (Graduate School of Innovation and Practice for Smart Society, Hiroshima University, Higashihiroshima 739-8529, Japan
    Faculty of Economics and Rural Development, Thai Nguyen University of Agriculture and Forestry, Thai Nguyen City 250000, Vietnam)

  • Masaru Ichihashi

    (Graduate School of Innovation and Practice for Smart Society, Hiroshima University, Higashihiroshima 739-8529, Japan
    The IDEC Institute, Hiroshima University, 1-5-1 Kagamiyama, Higahsihiroshima 739-8529, Japan
    Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Hiroshima University, Higashihiroshima 739-8529, Japan
    Network for Education and Research on Peace & Sustainability (NERPS), Hiroshima University, Higashihiroshima 739-8529, Japan)

  • Nguyen Thi Bich Ngoc

    (Faculty of Economics and Rural Development, Thai Nguyen University of Agriculture and Forestry, Thai Nguyen City 250000, Vietnam
    The IDEC Institute, Hiroshima University, 1-5-1 Kagamiyama, Higahsihiroshima 739-8529, Japan)

Abstract

How local economies can successfully develop remains an important issue for any developing country. One mechanism for promotion of economic development is government-driven policy. The problem is that it is not clear whether public-led economic promotion attracts consumers and which promotion factors are relatively significant for boosting particular goods. This paper examines attributes of green tea products likely influencing consumer preferences, focusing on the Thai Nguyen area in Vietnam as an example. In this area, the “One Commune, One Product” (OCOP) project has been implemented by the local government. This study employs randomized conjoint analysis based on data collected from 450 randomly selected consumers in several local supermarkets. Interestingly, the results show that online style sales have a negative preference for the purchase of green tea products, while transparency, such as the traceability of the product and product information, and reliability, such as certification, enhance the purchase of these products by consumers. However, this finding is not necessarily robust because our results indicate that approximately 90% of consumers tend to choose the default pair, which means that they do not actively prefer the product, possibly implying that this kind of public-led promotion is not yet broadly familiar to all people.

Suggested Citation

  • Bui Xuan Hong & Masaru Ichihashi & Nguyen Thi Bich Ngoc, 2024. "Analysis of Consumer Preferences for Green Tea Products: A Randomized Conjoint Analysis in Thai Nguyen, Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-17, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:11:p:4521-:d:1402448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/11/4521/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/11/4521/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hong, Ilyoo B., 2015. "Understanding the consumer's online merchant selection process: The roles of product involvement, perceived risk, and trust expectation," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 322-336.
    2. Narangerel Ganbold & Shah Fahad & Hua Li & Tumendemberel Gungaa, 2022. "An evaluation of subsidy policy impacts, transient and persistent technical efficiency: A case of Mongolia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(7), pages 9223-9242, July.
    3. Mok, Min Seok & Sohn, So Young & Ju, Yong Han, 2010. "Conjoint analysis for intellectual property education," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 129-134, June.
    4. Ubilava, David & Foster, Kenneth, 2009. "Quality certification vs. product traceability: Consumer preferences for informational attributes of pork in Georgia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 305-310, June.
    5. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    6. Tran, Duc & Goto, Daisaku, 2019. "Impacts of sustainability certification on farm income: Evidence from small-scale specialty green tea farmers in Vietnam," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 70-82.
    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. Xiaojing Li & Xianli Xia & Jiazhen Ren, 2022. "Can the Participation in Quality Certification of Agricultural Products Drive the Green Production Transition?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-16, September.
    2. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    3. Lisanne de Blok & Max Heermann & Julian Schuessler & Dirk Leuffen & Catherine E. de Vries, 2024. "All on board? The role of institutional design for public support for differentiated integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 25(3), pages 593-604, September.
    4. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    5. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny, 2011. "Demand for improved food safety and quality: a cross-regional comparison," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108791, Agricultural Economics Society.
    6. Catherine E De Vries & Simon Hix & Miriam Sorace, 2025. "Reforming supranational institutions: Insights from a conjoint experiment in 16 countries," European Union Politics, , vol. 26(4), pages 649-666, December.
    7. Wu Li & Pengya Ai & Annette Ding, 2023. "More Than Just Numbers: How Engagement Metrics Influence User Intention to Pay for Online Knowledge Products," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440221, January.
    8. Jiawei Fu & Xiaojun Li, 2024. "A Formal Theory of Survey Experiment Generalizability: Attention and Salience," Papers 2405.06779, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2026.
    9. Liu, Ruifeng & ,, 2021. "What We Can Learn from the Interactions of Food Traceable Attributes? a Case Study of Fuji Apple in China," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315916, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Trinh Le Tan & Khanh Nguyen Chau Ngoc & Hien Le Thi Thanh & Hoai Nguyen Thi Thu & Uyen Vo Truong Hoang, 2024. "Enhancing Repurchase Intention on Digital Platforms Based on Shopping Well-Being Through Shopping Value, Trust and Impulsive Buying," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(3), pages 21582440241, September.
    11. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    12. Okada, Isamu, 2024. "What procedures matter to social acceptance of mining? A conjoint experiment in Peru," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    13. Wietzke, Frank-Borge, 2024. "Perceptions of social class in Africa. Results from a conjoint experiment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    14. Robert Kubinec, 2018. "Patrons or Clients? Measuring and Experimentally Evaluating Political Connections of Firms in Morocco and Jordan," Working Papers 1280, Economic Research Forum, revised 26 Dec 2018.
    15. Heap, Shaun P. Hargreaves & Koop, Christel & Matakos, Konstantinos & Unan, Asli & Weber, Nina Sophie, 2021. "We Cannot Disagree Forever! Reality Polarization and Citizens’ Post-Pandemic Fiscal Adjustment Preferences," SocArXiv 69tup, Center for Open Science.
    16. Hongxia Wang, 2025. "RETRACTED ARTICLE: Exploring Brand Attachment Dynamics in Live Streaming Platforms: a TikTok Perspective in the Digital Knowledge Economy," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 16(2), pages 5967-5998, June.
    17. E. Keith Smith & Dennis Kolcava & Thomas Bernauer, 2024. "Stringent sustainability regulations for global supply chains are supported across middle-income democracies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    18. Vrânceanu, Alina & Dinas, Elias & Heidland, Tobias & Ruhs, Martin, 2023. "The European refugee crisis and public support for the externalisation of migration management," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 279441, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    19. Mei-Yin Kuan & Szu-Yung Wang & Jiun-Hao Wang, 2021. "Investigating the Association between Farmers’ Organizational Participation and Types of Agricultural Product Certifications: Empirical Evidence from a National Farm Households Survey in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-18, August.
    20. Nicole Castillo & Roberto D. Ponce Oliva & Julián Andrés Diaz Tautiva, 2024. "Charting the Path: Unraveling the Research on Organizations and Certification Schemes (1999–2022)," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(4), pages 21582440241, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:11:p:4521-:d:1402448. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.