IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Consumer Awareness of the Jersey Fresh Promotional Program

Listed author(s):
  • Govindasamy, Ramu
  • Sullivan, Kevin P.
  • Puduri, Venkata S.
  • Schilling, Brian J.
  • Brown, Logan

The Jersey Fresh marketing program, one of the nation’s leading examples of state-sponsored agricultural marketing promotion, enables consumers to easily identify quality fresh produce from New Jersey by promoting locally grown fruits and vegetables in the market with Jersey Fresh’s logos. This study utilizes a consumer survey to evaluate the effectiveness of the Jersey Fresh Program in terms of the impact the promotional logos have on consumers. The results of this study provide valuable information that may be used to improve the Jersey Fresh Program, and also may be used in the promotion of other New Jersey farm products as well as products in other states which have similar promotional programs. Among other things, this study demonstrated that the Jersey Fresh promotional program has created significant brand awareness among New Jersey consumers and that consumers are willing to purchase Jersey Fresh produce when it’s available. Consumers reported seeing the Jersey Fresh logo most frequently on in-store produce displays. What’s more, women were more likely than men to be aware of Jersey Fresh, as were married people. Survey participants believed Jersey Fresh produce to be better than produce in other states in terms of quality and freshness. Moreover, consumers associate the Jersey Fresh logo with locally grown, quality produce. Suggestions that emerged from the study include increasing the availability of Jersey Fresh produce during the production seasons would ensure continued consumer patronage. Also, increasing promotions of Jersey Fresh produce in supermarkets may further increase the popularity of Jersey Fresh produce. The study showed that a vii majority of consumers were willing to pay only a small percentage premium for Jersey Fresh produce over the market prices for other fresh produce; therefore, significant price differentials are not recommended for Jersey Fresh produce. The results of this study lead to a better understanding of New Jersey consumers’ shopping behavior, their preferences towards local produce and their demographic composition. The results may be especially encouraging to those developing marketing strategies for Jersey Fresh produce or for other similar New Jersey consumer products.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Rutgers University, Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics in its series P Series with number 36729.

in new window

Date of creation: 2005
Handle: RePEc:ags:rutdps:36729
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Cook Office Building, 55 Dudley Road, New Brunswick, N.J. 08901

Phone: (732) 932-9155
Fax: (732) 932-1100
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

in new window

  1. Kinnucan, Henry W., 1986. "Demographic Versus Media Advertising Effects On Milk Demand: The Case Of The New York City Market," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 15(1), April.
  2. John M. Halloran & Michael V. Martin, 1989. "Should states be in the agricultural promotion business?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(1), pages 65-75.
  3. Adelaja, Adesoji O. & Brumfield, Robin G. & Lininger, Kimberly, 1990. "Product Differentiation And State Promotion Of Farm Produce: An Analysis Of The Jersey Fresh Tomato," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 21(3), September.
  4. Paul M. Patterson & Timothy J. Burkink & Rozlyn S. Lipsey & Jason Lipsey & Richard W. Roth & Mary Kay Martin, 2003. "Targeting tourists with state branding programs," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4), pages 525-538.
  5. Richards, Timothy J. & Patterson, Paul M., 1998. "New Varieties And The Returns To Commodity Promotion: Washington Fuji Apples," 1998 Annual meeting, August 2-5, Salt Lake City, UT 20784, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:rutdps:36729. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.