Search results

The use of multi-level labels can enhance product visibility by enabling labeling of various items. Moreover, it can better accommodate the diversity on both the producer and consumer sides. However, studies on the willingness to pay (WTP) for premium levels of those animal welfare labels are scarce.

We investigate consumers’ WTP for a four-level animal husbandry label introduced to the market by German retailers in 2019 by conducting an online survey with 1,223 German meat consumers using Van Westendorp’s price sensitivity meter (PSM).

There is a significant increase in WTP for level 3 of the husbandry label, but only a slight increase for level 4. One explanation is that consumers may have the mistaken belief that level 3 already includes outdoor access for animals. As a result of this expectation, consumers may not perceive much added value in level 4, which is reflected in their reluctance to pay a higher price. This is reinforced by the finding that once informed of the criteria, 18% of the participants reduced their WTP for level 3, whereas only 6% considered a discount for level 4. Furthermore, 40% were prepared to pay more for level 4 after being informed of the respective criteria than they had previously stated.

To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to analyze and emphasize the importance of clear label communication, particularly for multi-level animal husbandry labels.

The purpose of this paper is to provide insight into whether GM‐labelling leads to different processing behaviour of food stimuli compared to when products are not labelled.

A task was designed to investigate people's categorization behaviour as a function of information provided. In two studies each participant was randomly allocated to either the experimental “GM‐labelled condition”, or the control “non‐labelled condition”.

Different processing strategies and different characteristics are used to judge products that are labelled as genetically modified or not. GM labelling of foods is interpreted to induce analytical processing of information and therefore the products are classified relatively more often on the basis of verifiable categorization criteria compared to when they were not labelled as GM. When products are not labelled as GM, information is more likely to be automatically processed and non‐verifiable categorization criteria are used.

This is the first study to examine the processes that labelling as GM brings about.

Private label brands may be in danger as a result of recent changes in the marketing strategies used by private label firms. The primary competitive advantage of private label brands, good quality at low prices, may be lost if private label firms continue to modify and expand how their brands are marketed. Specifically, changes in private label brands′ advertising, packaging, sales promotion, and product improvement strategies indicate that private label brands are moving closer than ever to manufacturer brand status. To the extent that these changes result in higher average retail prices and/or lower gross margins for retailers, the advantages of private brands to both consumers and distributors will diminish, illustrating that the historical “wheel of retailing” hypothesis may be applicable to private label brands. Investigates the aforementioned trends and provides suggestions for manufacturers and retailers for future brand management strategies.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the socio‐demographic and health variables of a representative sample of Croatian subjects over 15 years of age associated with reading nutrition labels and, in particular, to examine the association of age characteristics of “label users” with nutrition reading habits.

A total of 1,011 randomly selected subjects over 15 years of age were interviewed by telephone. Moreover, 638 “label users” were recruited for assessing nutrition label habits.

Of the subjects, 36 per cent claimed that they had never, 25 per cent rarely, 19 per cent always and 15 per cent sometimes read nutrition labels. Females, participants with the highest levels of education, still undergoing education, physically active and on special diets claimed that they were more likely to read nutrition labels. Among “label users”, younger participants mentioned “curiosity” as the most important reason for reading nutrition labels, while older participants more often pointed out “wish for healthy eating habits”. “Interpretational aids” were often mentioned among younger participants for easier understanding of nutritional information, while older participants requested “bigger letter size”.

The present study provides a starting point for establishing nutrition education targeted at specific groups of consumers. Research is limited to the subject's self‐reported nutrition label reading. Future research is needed to explore the differences between “label users” and “’non‐users”.

As the study showed, a notable difference exists between younger and older subjects regarding nutrition habits that could help experts toward effective communication. Nevertheless, the study could fill the research gaps in nutrition reading habits of specific groups of consumers in European countries, other than northern Europe.

The purpose of this paper is to describe a sustainability certification system and label based on an independent, full life cycle assessment of conventionally produced goods from “cradle to grave”.

The design approach used comprised five phases: review of presently available third party environmental certification systems regarding their suitability for use as a sustainability certification tool for conventionally produced goods; identification of desirable scientific and consumer design criteria for a sustainability certification system and label; identification of key performance indicators for sustainability; description of an independent sustainability certification system based on the desirable design criteria, in particular an independent full life cycle assessment; and market trials of the sustainability label to test consumer reactions and commercial benefits of independent sustainability certification using two commercial case studies in Australia and New Zealand.

None of the third party environmental certification systems reviewed was suitable for use as a sustainability certification tool. Desirable design criteria for a sustainability certification system centred on an independent, full life cycle assessment of operations from “cradle to grave”. A total of eight safety and 12 sustainability key performance indicators were proposed to specifically assess sustainability performance. An instantly recognizable logo comprising a “Green Tick” inside a circle, reminiscent of a government “stamp of approval”, was used as a sustainability label. Market trials of certified household products and lamb meat in Australasia confirmed positive consumer reactions to the “Green Tick” label, and considerable commercial benefits for the companies that used it on their products.

The “Green Tick^™” sustainability certification system and label addresses an identified gap in the market by providing an easily recognizable, independent, life cycle based sustainability certification of consumer products. Market trials indicated that there was measurable consumer support for independent sustainability labelling, and significant commercial benefits for companies whose products qualified for sustainability labelling.

The paper describes the world's first‐ever independent sustainability certification system and label. It is based on third party, full life cycle assessment of products, in accordance with the European Commission's view that sustainability labelling should be based on independent, full life cycle assessments of products. Market trials of the label in the Australasian FMCG sector indicated that consumers responded positively to an easily recognizable, independent sustainability label, and that independent sustainability certification and labelling have significant commercial potential for manufacturers of genuinely sustainable products.

European regulations for labelling the genetically modified commodity crops Round‐up Ready Soya and Bt Maize have been agreed and came into force on 1 September 1998. The regulation requires labelling of ingredients that contain genetically modified DNA or modified protein. Labelling is not required where processing has resulted in modified DNA or protein being destroyed. With the aim of providing consumer information and ensuring consumer choice, UK industry had phased in labelling of genetically modified soya and maize protein since January 1998, ahead of the EU regulation being agreed. This voluntary labelling was on the basis of guidelines drawn up by an IGD Working Group. The voluntary guidelines are very similar to the EU labelling regulation. Under the terms of the labelling regulation, further discussions are necessary in Europe to agree a list of ingredients that will not require labelling on the basis that no modified DNA or protein is present, with the aim that these ingredients do not need to be tested each time they are used. Where efforts have been taken to source the non‐genetically modified varieties, the concept of a threshold has been put forward to allow for adventitious mixing with the genetically modified crop. Further discussions are necessary to agree where the threshold should be set. It is expected that the regulation will be the basis for labelling future genetically modified products.

Kwik‐Save′s decision to make its first ever own‐label food products (No Frills) is a clear evidence that own‐label products are more popular than at any time. Investigates consumer perceptions of national and own‐label grocery products. Reveals that consumers perceive many differences among the two brand types tested. To find the factors accounting for the perceived quality of food, typical consumer explanation for both quality and value for money is about the price and physical attributes of the food brands. Other factors such as store image and food ingredients are equally important. The appeal for own‐label groceries is based on price and consumer scepticism. Product quality is usually the major purchasing factor and the measure of value. The assessment of consumer thinking comes from the marketplace. Cola, lemonade, and orange juice were three product lines put to taste‐on‐test in an effort to assess consumer preferences. Concludes that differences exist in the shoppers′ price and quality perceptions, and brand preference across the product lines tested. Own‐label preference is based on price and value for money rather than quality.

To survey consumers living in Paris, France, to determine the extent to which they use nutrition labels, and to determine the percentage of French consumers who use nutrition labels, how often they use nutrition labels, and how they would like to see current nutrition labels improved. The researchers also wanted to determine the reasons why consumers do not use nutrition labels, and to try and assess users' and non‐users' perceptions about mandatory nutrition labelling.

French consumers (n  =  355) were surveyed in supermarkets in Paris and its suburbs, using a 21‐item questionnaire in May 2004. Interviewers used questionnaires to assess the frequency of respondents' nutrition label use, to investigate the specific nutrient information most commonly consulted on nutrition labels, the types of products on which consumers most often tend to consult nutrition labels, and to collect demographic information.

Only 45.1 per cent of the sample reported reading nutrition labels, with the majority of consumers reading labels only occasionally. Non‐label readers cited lack of interest as the primary reason why they do not read labels, but 95 per cent of the sample, when asked about mandatory nutrition labeling, felt that nutrition labeling should be required of food manufacturers. Research limitations/implications The sample size was small, participation was voluntary and was limited to the city of Paris and its suburbs, and therefore cannot be generalized to the French population.

This is the first study to collect data in a point‐of‐purchase setting in order to examine whether or not French consumers use nutrition labels.

Nutritional labeling of food products is not mandatory in India at present and the Indian Government is on the verge of introducing a code of conduct for it. The aim of this paper is to provide some initial guidelines for the above‐said purpose so as to have consumer friendly labeling policies.

A structured questionnaire‐based survey was used for the purpose of the study. A total of 100 respondents were considered for the study. Data were collected from two superstores located in New Delhi.

Food labels are read by the consumers for brand comparisons and not for consulting nutritional information. Difficult terminology, small font size and inability to understand nutritional labels are the major problems encountered by the consumers. Television, friends, magazines are commonly used for assessing nutritional information. Labels are considered more consumer friendly when benchmarks regarding serving size are provided. Income level, size of household, number of children and age did not play a role in the usage of nutritional labels by the consumers. Consumers with special dietary needs used nutritional labels regularly.

A small sample size is the limitation of the study.

This is the first study of its kind in India. It is valuable for the Indian Government in framing policies regarding nutritional labeling and for imparting nutritional education. It will also help it to draft consumer friendly labels for effective usage.

We have had a number of questions about OCLC spine label displays. Two types of displays, known as “s14” and “s16”, are currently available. Each contains a single spine label and two book card and pocket labels. Some users require only a spine label or some other variation of the spine label displays, so we plan to increase the number of displays. In addition to the “s14” and “s16” displays, users will be able to request a spine label only, or two spine labels, or a spine label with a single book pocket label. These displays should help a number of libraries.