CONSUMERS’ PERCEPTION TOWARDS ORGANIC FOOD IN SOME

SELECTED AREAS OF BANGLADESH

TAHMINA AKTER

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION &

INFORMATION SYSTEM

SHER-E-BANGLA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY

DHAKA-1207

DECEMBER, 2021
 CONSUMERS’ PERCEPTION TOWARDS ORGANIC FOOD IN SOME
SELECTED AREAS OF BANGLADESH

BY

TAHMINA AKTER
Reg. No. 19-10377
Mobile: 01914962516
Email: [email protected]

A thesis
Submitted to the Faculty of Agriculture
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE (MS)

IN

AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION

SEMESTER: JULY-DECEMBER, 2021

APPROVED BY:

(MD MASUM ABDULLAH) (TANUSHREE MONDAL)

Supervisor Co-Supervisor
Assistant Professor Assistant Professor
Dept. of Agril. Ext. and Info. System Dept. of Agril. Ext. and Info. System
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University

Prof. Dr. Mohammad Zamshed Alam

Chairman
Examination Committee
 Dept. of Agricultural Extension and Information System
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University
Department of Agricultural Extension and Information System
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University
Sher-e-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka-1207

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “CONSUMERS’ PERCEPTION

TOWARDS ORGANIC FOOD IN SOME SELECTED AREAS OF
BANGLADESH” submitted to the department of Agricultural Extension and
Information System, Faculty of Agriculture, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University,
Sher-e-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of Master of Science (M.S.) in Agricultural Extension, embodies the result of a piece
of bona fide research work carried out by Tahmina Akter, Registration No. 19-10377
under my supervision and guidance. No part of the thesis has been submitted for any
other degree or diploma.

I further certify that any help or source of information, as has been availed of during
the course of this investigation has been duly acknowledged by the Author.

Dated:
Dhaka, Bangladesh Md Masum Abdullah
Supervisor
Department of Agricultural Extension
and Information System
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University
DEDICATED

TO

MY BELOVED

PARENTS
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

At first the author expresses her gratefulness to The Almighty Allah who has helped
her to pursue her higher education in agriculture and for giving the potency of
successful completion of this research work.

With deepest emotion the author wish to express her pious gratitude, indebtedness,
felicitation, sincere appreciation to her research Supervisor Assistant Prof. Md
Masum Abdullah, Department of Agricultural Extension and Information System,
Sher-E-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka, Bangladesh for his discursive
guidance, intense supervision and continuous encouragement during the entire period
of research work.

The author expresses her immense appreciation and gratitude to her Co-supervisor,
Assistant Prof. Tanushree Mondal, Department of Agricultural Extension and
Information System, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka for her valuable
advice and constructive criticism during the critic period of research work.

The author expresses her sincere respect Prof. Dr. Mohammad Zamshed Alam,
Chairman, Department of Agricultural Extension and Information System, Sher-e-
Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka for providing valuable advice and sympathetic
consideration regarding to the research.

The author would like to extend her appreciation to all teachers and staffs of the
Department of Agricultural Extension and Information System, Sher-e-Bangla
Agricultural University, Dhaka for their co-operation and support during the study
period.

The author can never repay the debt of her heavenly grandfather, grandmother and
beloved parents, husband, uncle, aunty, sisters, brothers and well-wishers for their
inspiration, constant encouragement and sacrifice for her higher education.

The Author

i
 CONTENTS
CHAPTER Title PAGE NO.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT i
CONTENTS ii-iii
LIST OF TABLES iv
LIST OF FIGURES iv
LIST OF APPENDIX iv
ABBREVIATIONS v
ABSTRACT vi
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1-9
1.1 General Background of the Study 1
1.2 Emergence of Organic Food Products in Recent Decades 3
1.3 Statement of the Problem 4
1.4 Specific Objectives of the Study 5
1.5 Justification of the Study 5
1.6 Scope and Importance of the Study 6
1.7 Limitations of the Study 7
1.8 Assumptions of the Study 8
1.9 Definition of Terms 8
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 10-17
2.1 Reviews on Consumer Perceptions towards Organic Food 10
2.2 Consumer Perception of Organic Food Quality 14
2.3 Conceptual Framework of the Study 16
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY 18-28
3.1 Locale of the Study 18
3.2 Distribution of the Population, Sample size 21
3.3 Measurement of Variables 21
3.4 Measurement of Independent Variables 22
3.3.1 Age 22
3.3.2 Education 22
3.3.3 Annual family income 23
3.3.4 Source of weekly food shopping 23
3.3.5 Extent of information received about organic food 23
3.3.6 Availability of organic food 24
3.3.7 Barriers to purchasing organic food 24
3.5 Measurement of Dependent Variable 24
3.6 Statement of Hypothesis 25
3.6.1 Research hypothesis 25
3.6.2 Null hypothesis 25
3.7 Instrument for Data Collection 26
3.8 Data Collection 26
3.9 Compilation of Data 27
3.10 Categorization of Data 28
3.11 Statistical Analysis 28
CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 29-40
4.1 Selected Characteristics of the Consumers 29
4.1.1 Age 29
4.1.2 Education 30
4.1.3 Annual family income 31

ii
 4.1.4Source of weekly food shopping 31
4.1.5Extent of information received about organic food 32
4.1.6Availability of organic food 33
4.1.7Barriers to purchasing organic food 33
4.2 Consumers’ Perception towards Organic Food 34
4.3 The relationship between Selected Characteristics of the 35
Respondents on their Perception towards Organic Food
4.3.1 Age and perception towards organic food 36
4.3.2 Relationship between education of the consumers and their 37
perception towards organic food
4.3.3 Relationship between annual family income and perception 37
towards organic food
4.3.4 Relationship between source of weekly food shopping’s of the 38
consumers and their perception towards organic food
4.4.5 Relationship between sources of information about organic food 38
of consumers and their perception towards organic food
4.4.6 Relationship between availability of organic food of consumers 39
and their perception towards organic food
4.4.7 Relationship between barriers to purchasing organic food of the 40
consumers and their perception towards organic food
CHAPTER V SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND 41-46
RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Summary of Findings 41
5.1.1 Selected characteristics of the consumers 41
5.1.2 Consumers’ perception towards organic food 42
5.1.3 The relationship between selected characteristics of the 42
respondents on their perception towards organic food
5.2 Conclusions 43
5.3 Recommendations 44
5.3.1 Recommendations for policy implications 44
5.3.2 Recommendations for further study 45
REFERENCES 47-49
APPENDIX 50-53

iii
 LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page No.
3.1 Distribution of the consumers according to population and sample 21
size
4.1 The salient features of the selected characteristics of the respondents 29
4.2 Distribution of the consumers according to their age 30
4.3 Distribution of the consumers according to their education 30
4.4 Distribution of the consumers according to their annual family 31
income
4.5 Distribution of the consumers according to their source of weekly 32
food shopping
4.6 Distribution of the consumers according to their information about 32
organic food
4.7 Distribution of the consumers according to availability of organic 33
food
4.8 Distribution of the consumers according to their barriers to 34
purchasing organic food
4.9 Distribution of the respondents according to their perception 34
4.10 Pearson’s product moment co-efficient of the correlation showing 36
relationship between focus and explanatory variables

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Title Page No.
2.1 Conceptual framework of the study 17
3.1 A map of Narsingdi district showing study area 19
3.2 A map of Dhaka district showing the study area 20

LIST OF APPENDICES
SL. No. APPENDIX Page No.
English version of an interview schedule used for data
APPENDIX -A 50-52
collection
Correlations matrix between focus and explanatory
APPENDIX-B 53
variables

iv
 ABBREVIATIONS

Ag. Ext. Ed. Agricultural Extension Education

OA Organic Agriculture
MORI Market & Opinion Research International Limited
β Multiple Regression
GM Genetically Modified
et al. All Others
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
UN United Nation
GoB Government of Bangladesh
WHO World Health Organization
MoYS Ministry of Youth and Sports
BARI Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute
SD Standard Deviation
NGOs Non-government Organizations
BARCIK Bangladesh Resource Center for Indigenous Knowledge
UBINIG Unnayan Bikalper Nitinirdharoni Gobeshona
UAO Upazila Agriculture Officer
SAU Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University
SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences
OF Organic Food

vii
 CONSUMERS’ PERCEPTION TOWARDS ORGANIC FOOD IN SOME
SELECTED AREAS OF BANGLADESH

TAHMINA AKTER
ABSTRACT

The present development in the food market indicates that organic food became one
of the important parts of the market. The purposes of the study were thus to describe
the selected characteristics of the consumers perception towards organic food; to
determine the extent of consumers perception towards organic food and to explore the
relationship between each of the selected characteristics of consumers with their
perception towards organic food. The study was purposively conducted at Narsingdi
and Dhaka district. Validated and well-structured interview schedule was used to
th th
collect data from 105 consumers during 15 February, 2022 to 15 March, 2022.
Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation was used. The
majority (79.05 percent) of the respondents had favorable perception towards organic
food compared to having 14.28 percent unfavorable perception towards organic food
and only 6.67 percent had neutral perception towards organic food, respectively.
Among seven selected characteristics of the consumer five characteristics namely;
education, source of weekly food shopping, extent of information received about
organic food and availability of organic food had significant positive relationship with
their perception towards organic food but barriers to purchasing organic food had
negatively significant relationship with their perception towards organic food. The
rest two characteristics namely age and annual family income had no significant
relationship with their perception towards organic food.

vi
viii
 CHAPTER-I
INTRODUCTION

1.1 General Background of the Study

Organic Food (OF) is becoming popular throughout the world day by day. In
general, Organic Food (OF) includes the growing of crops by a set of guidelines
that prohibit synthetic products or chemicals such as fertilizers, pesticides, and
plant growth promoters like hormones. This concept evolved in the first half of the
20th century to respond to incremental chemical practices. The Codex Committee
of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations defined, "Organic
Food is a holistic production management system which promotes and enhances
agro-ecosystem health, including biodiversity, biological cycles, and soil
biological activity. This is accomplished by using, where possible, agronomic,
biological, and mechanical methods, as opposed to using synthetic materials, to
fulfill any specific function within the system” (FAO, 2019). Organic farming
facilitates the usage of eco-friendly technologies and materials that enhances well-
balanced agro-ecosystems. The other primary principle is the prohibition of
artificial chemical use to ensure safe food production. It is noteworthy to mention
that organic farming's primary goal is to balance soil health and productivity
(FAO, 2019).

At present, this system seems to be an ideal and valid solution to produce safe
food and pure foods that minimize the negative consequences to human health and
the environment resulted from chemical agriculture. Consumers are currently
becoming conscious and critical about the quality of food products and by-
products for a healthy life (Mottalib et al., 2018). OF has the potential to produce
safe food in addition to environmental sustainability and preserving cultural
heritage (Mottalib et al., 2018). Consequently, the demand for organic products
has been growing significantly throughout the world, especially in developed

1
countries, which indirectly control developing countries' export markets. Studies
in Africa, Asia, and Latin America indicate that farmers grow organic food
generally earn higher incomes than their conventional counterparts (UN, 2008).
By realizing this fact, agricultural development in many countries has shifted from
conventional agriculture to organic farming systems and introduced the organic
agriculture policy. Though Bangladesh is an agro-based country, most farmers are
poor and equipped with traditional agricultural practices and systems.
Conventional agricultural practices could not keep pace with the ongoing demands
of the burgeoning population.

Consequently, the government introduced the chemical-intensive farming system

to meet increased needs. However, chemical agriculture contributed to achieving
self-sufficiency in grain food production but created many negative consequences
to human health and the environment. Agrochemicals have been linked to a wide
range of human health hazards (Rahman et al., 2015), ranging from short-term
impacts such as headaches and nausea to chronic effects like cancer, reproductive
harm, and endocrine disruption. More than 03 million people are affected by
pesticides, and about 370,000 deaths occur per year (WHO, 2018). In Bangladesh,
every year, a noticeable number of people are affected by agrochemicals and
suffering from diseases (Shammi et al., 2020). Furthermore, depletion of soil
organic matter is another concern of chemical agriculture (Biswas & Naher, 2019).
As a result, overall crop productivity has been declining in Bangladesh. Even a
lack of organic foods is considered one of the significant challenges for
developing inbound tourism in Bangladesh (Rahman, 2021). In addition, the food
safety issue is one of the major concerns for expanding international trade in agro-
products. Buyers in the mainstream markets are increasingly enforcing stringent
conditions on the suppliers to comply with various standards. OA has become an
alternative tool to have safe food, sustain crop productivity, and increase soil
fertility under such situations. However, many growers have come forward to

2
produce organic products and are being sold in different super shops, especially in
Dhaka city at a higher price. Consumers are interested in buying such organic
products. In most cases, they are confused about whether the products are organic
due to a lack of certification. Although the Bangladesh government adopted
Organic Agriculture Policy -2106', its implementation has not yet formally started.
People's perceptions of organic foods have rarely been studied (Rahman & Noor,
2016). The study aimed to assess the awareness level of consumers about organic
products in Bangladesh. The study also strived to determine the current status of
organic farming and explore the problems related to the extension of organic
farming in Bangladesh.

1.2 Emergence of Organic Food Products in Recent Decades

In the early 1990s, organic farming was started in Bangladesh on a minor scale. In
Bangladesh, few Non-government Organizations (NGOs) started organic farming
at first. These NGOs organize interested farmers, provide training, technical
advice, financial support, and help market organic products. Organic farmers
formed groups and co-operated with each other towards a sustainable farming
system. Currently, 75 NGOs and some conscious farmers are working towards
organic farming (Sharma, 2006). Among the NGOs, 47 are directly involved in the
production, where few works for awareness building (Sarker & Itohara, 2008).
Among the NGO's Proshika, Unnayan Bikalper Nitinirdharoni Gobeshona
(UBINIG), Bangladesh Resource Center for Indigenous Knowledge (BARCIK),
and Research Initiatives, Bangladesh (RIB) ranked in the topmost position.
Simultaneously, some private entrepreneurs like Kazi and Kazi Ltd, Shams
Enterprise, Shabajpur Tea Estate Ltd are in the top place to invest in organic
farming. Some entrepreneurs have already started exports their organic products to
different developed countries. Today, horticultural crops, cotton, aromatic rice,
and organic shrimp farming are being practiced on a small scale in Bangladesh to
mainly export and target higher-income urban people. Currently, organic products

3
are being sold through different super shops such as Agora, Meenabazar, Nandan,
etc., yet they do not ensure fair prices for the producing farmers (Mottalib et al.,
2018). Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) also took the initiative
to conduct the necessary research regarding organic farming and established an
Organic Block in its Experimental field at Joydebpur, Gazipur. Considering the
global organic market trend and the expansion of by a private organization and
NGO's in the country, Bangladesh government adopted 'National Organic
Agricultural Policy –2016,' but the action plan has not yet started.

1.3 Statement of the Problem

The demand for organic food products is increasing rapidly but the perception of
purchasing and consuming of organic product has always been the concern around
the globe. An understanding of perception and attitudinal behaviour towards
purchasing of organic food products will be of great importance to producers
(farmers) and retailer (business owner) to understand and fulfill the demand for the
organic food products. From last many years several studies had been conducted
on organic products, the major concern and need of the present study is to provide
complete overview of consumer perceptions regarding organic food products.

Analyzing the issues on perspective, this study was specially designed to find out
the answers on the following questions:
 What is the consumers’ perception towards organic food?
 What are the characteristics of respondents with their perception towards
organic food?
 What are the relationship between selected characteristics of the respondent
their perception towards organic food?

4
1.4 Specific Objective of the Study
1. To describe the selected characteristics of the consumers in relation to their
perception towards organic food;
2. To determine the extent of the consumers perception towards organic food; and
3. To explore the relationship between each of the selected characteristics of the
consumers to their perception towards organic food.

1.5 Justification of the Study

Generally, in considering purchasing organic food products, consumers pass
through five step of consumer decision making process which is need recognition,
information search, evaluation of alternatives, purchase decision, and post
purchase behavior (Armstrong and Kotler, 2010). The buyers usually will
recognize a problem or need when they sense a difference between his or her
actual state and some desired state. For example, a person who has been ill for
some time, may realized a need and look or be motivated for a healthier choice of
product such as an organic product. In this stage, they will search information
related to the organic food products and this process is linked to the perception in
term of selecting the information and assigned a meaning to them. Subsequently,
this will lead to how they perceived the products. Perception is one of the
psychological factors that can influence consumer purchase behavior, and it is the
process by which an individual selects, organizes and interprets the information he
or she receives from the environment (Sheth et al., 2004). What consumer thinks
will affect their action, buying habits, and so forth, thus, perception has strategic
implications for marketers because consumers build decisions based on what they
perceive rather than on the basic of objective reality (Schiffman and Kanuk, 2010).
After acquiring sufficient information, consumers will identify a set of
determinant attributes to use to compare between others alternatives. For instance,
a consumer may look for attributes such as cost, features and values before
purchasing an organic product and use these product attributes or others factors to

5
evaluate the criteria. Hence, their perception and believe on the relative
importance of organic food products attributes as compared to those of non-
organic may influence them to purchase the organic products. In general,
consumers during their decision-making process rely on different product
attributes before deciding whether to buy or consume the organic food products.
After purchasing the product, the consumer will be satisfied or dissatisfied with
their purchase and will engage in post purchase behavior. The findings of this
research will be useful to those who are concerned with planning, implementation
and evaluation of agricultural, rural development and environmental programs.
Various pesticides companies and firms also can make use of the findings of this
research in determining policies and practices for the marketing of their products.
The knowledge and skills gained by the researcher in conducting this research will
enable him to conduct other similar studies in this field.

Considering the above findings, the researcher became interested to undertake a

study to an analysis of consumers’ perception of organic food: a survey study in
some selected areas of Bangladesh. The investigator believes that the findings are
likely to be helpful to develop at sound policy for the agricultural research and
extension system of the country.

1.6 Scope and Importance of the Study

With rising concern of health issues and food safety, many consumers have turned
their site to organic products. The increased consumers' interest in organic food
has been attributed among others to the growing demand for food free from
pesticides and chemical residues. Organic food promotes a balance of human,
other living organisms and the nature. It also promotes no artificial preservatives
and best maintain the originality of food. This prevents excess use harmful
ingredients and thereby ensures health. This study attempted to gain knowledge
about consumer attitude towards organic food product consumption and to see

6
whether there is any potential this might have for changing their behaviour. The
rationale for carrying out this study is that consideration for the environment could
come only from well-informed citizens who are aware of, and fully committed to
their rights to a quality health and environment. Nevertheless, before any
behaviour can be changed, it is necessary to evaluate the current state of
consumers’ awareness and knowledge. Therefore consumer’s attitude, perception
towards organic food products, willingness to pay for organic food product and
intention to purchase organic food will be the main agenda of this study.

1.7 Limitation of the Study

The present study was undertaken with a view to have an understanding of the
consumers’ perception towards organic food. Considering the time, money and
other necessary resources available to the researcher and also to make the study
meaningful and manageable the researcher had to impose certain limitations as
follows:

The study was confined to seven super shops of Narsingdi sadar upazilla and
Dhaka district. The study was confined mainly to consumers’ perception towards
organic food.
i. Major information, facts and figures supplied by the respondents were
applicable to the situation prevailing in the locality during the year 2022.
ii. Out of many characteristics of respondent only seven characteristics of
respondent were selected for investigation in this study.
iii. For information about the study, the researcher was depended on the data
furnished by the selected respondents during data collection.
iv. The respondents for data collection were kept limited within the heads of
farm families.

7
1.8 Assumption of the Study
The researcher had the following assumptions in mind while undertaking this
study:

1. The respondents included in the sample for this study were competent
enough to furnish proper responses to the queries included in the interview
schedule.
2. The researcher who acted as interviewer was adjusted to social and
environmental conditions of the study area. Hence, the data collected by her
from the respondents were free from bias and the respondents furnished their
opinion without hesitation.
3. The responses furnished by the respondents were valid and reliable.
4. Views and opinions furnished by the organic food users included in the
sample were the representative views and opinions of the whole population
of the study area.
5. The findings of the study might have general application to other parts of the
country with similar personal, socio-economic and cultural condition.
6. The information sought by the researcher revealed the real situation to satisfy
the objectives of the study.
7. The findings were useful in choosing the clients as well as for planning
execution and evaluation the extension programme.

1.9 Definition of Terms

A researcher needs to know the meaning and contents of every term that he uses. It
should clarify the issue as well as explain the fact to the investigator and readers.
However, for clarity of understanding, a number of key concepts/terms frequently
used throughout the study defined are interpreted as follows:

8
Age: Age of a respondent defined as the span of his/her life and is operationally
measured by the number of years from his/her birth to the time of interviewing.

Education: Education referred to the development of desirable knowledge, skill,

attitudes, etc. of an individual through the experiences of reading, writing,
observation and related matters.

Annual family income: Annual income referred to the total annual earnings of all
the family members of a respondent from agriculture, livestock and fisheries and
other accessible sources (business, service, daily working etc.).

Extent of information received about organic food: It referred to an

individual’s consumers to or contact with different communication media, source
and personalities being used for dissemination of new technologies.

Barriers to purchasing organic food: Barriers to purchasing organic food refers

to different barriers faced by the consumers during purchasing organic food.

Organic food: Organic produce and other ingredients are grown without the use
of pesticides, synthetic fertilizers, sewage sludge, genetically modified organisms,
or ionizing radiation. Animals that produce meat, poultry, eggs and dairy products
do not take antibiotics or growth hormones.

Consumer: An individual who buys products or services for personal use and not
for manufacture or resale. A consumer is someone who can make the decision
whether or not to purchase an item at the store and someone goes to store and
purchases toy, shirt, beverage or anything else, they are making that decision as a
consumer.

9
 CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

An exertion was made in this Chapter to represent a brief review of related

research information which gives a very clear direction to the researcher for
selection research issue by identifying research gap. Review of literature forms a
linkage between a past and present research works related to problem that helps an
investigator to draw a satisfactory conclusion. However, no study was found
systematic and directly related to the present study. Therefore, an attempt has been
made to review and document closely related literatures in this Chapter available
from books, journals, review papers, concept note, daily newspapers, magazines,
etc. Relevant literatures have been reviewed and illustrated in different sections as
stated below:

2.1 Reviews on Consumer Perceptions towards Organic Food

Sustainable products are always seen as the expensive option (Market & Opinion
Research International Limited (MORI, 2003).

Being environmentally friendly is expressed to be accessible only to the middle

classes. The consumers want to have a choice among the sustainable products
rather than choosing products that are sustainable and those that are not.
Consumers combine information about product attributes and consequences to
evaluate a product and make their choices. They rely on their felt involvement
which is influenced by their experience. The importance placed on each parameter
is based on the consumers’ priorities and values. Experience develops personal
relevance, importance, interest which together derives the motivational state
(Shroeder, 2003).

10
Kutnohorská and Tomšík (2013) this paper presents the results of a quantitative
survey in the Czech organic food market. By using the factor analysis, it showed
that the consumer perception of the health benefits of organic food can be viewed
from several different angles. There were found three factors that explain 58.42%
of variability, which are, based on their relationship with the original items,
interpreted as the “knowledge and responsibility”, “being aware, but lax” and
“health is important, but not related to food”. The first factor contains enough
knowledge related to the health care, the conviction of the importance of food
choice regarding health and the active interest and effort to do something for one’s
health. The second factor contains enough knowledge related to health care, but is
lacking the interest to apply the knowledge and to do something for one’s health,
and the third factor contains the conviction that health is an important asset, but
the perception of the connection between one’s health and food is absent.

Demographic variables as well as lifestyle and environmental attitudes define the

organic consumer profile. Regular consumers of organic food tend to be educated,
affluent and of higher social class (Padel and Foster, 2005 and Stobelaar et al.,
2006).

Awareness of food hazards and knowledge of food hazards were higher among
females and individuals with more education and income (McIntosh et al, 1994;
Torjusen et al., 2001 and Stobelaar et al., 2006).

Lockie et al. (2002) also found strong correlation between increasing consumption
of organic food and levels of formal education. Organic consumers are willing to
pay approximately 10% premium for organic food with an average of 9.5% by
women and 11.4% by men (Urena et al., 2008). Regular consumers would pay a
slightly higher premium around 15%, an average of 12/6% by women and 18% by
men (Urena et al., 2008).

11
Generally, organic foods do not use pesticides or synthetic fertilizers. Presumably
organic food contains fewer chemical residues and veterinary drugs compared to
conventional food. Environmental contaminants however are likely to be found in
food of both productions. Organic food contains only onethird of pesticides that
conventional food does (Baker et al., 2002). It can be said that lower exposure
translates into lower risk. In conventional food, almost all produce will have
pesticide residue below the statutory maximum limits. Consumers express anxiety
on agrochemicals, hormones and medicine in animal production and GMO and
artificial additives in fruits and vegetables (Naspetti and Zanoli, 2006).

With respect to absence of pesticides and fertilizers in organic production, organic

fruits and vegetables have more biochemical energy to synthesise beneficial
secondary plant metabolites such as polyphenolic antioxidants as well as naturally
occurring toxins (Whitehead and Nicholson, 2001).

Nutritional content is a quality aspect that consumers link to personal health. High
content of vitamins, more nourishing meals and a healthy diet were reported as
reasons for purchasing organic food by 4%-7% of regular organic food consumers
(Naspetti and Zanoli, 2006).

Consumers who are concerned about natural foods, the sensory and emotional
appeal of food and more likely to engage in green consumption practices are more
likely to have greater consumption of organic food (Lockie et al., 2004).

Women were identified to have higher health consciousness and were seen as
innovators for change towards healthier diets with their important roles in shaping
a family diet (Fagerli and Wandel, 1999).

12
They are also more health-conscious about the implications of chemical residues
and preservatives (Yiridoe et al., 2005).

Inconsistent findings were recorded on the comparison of sensory qualities of

organic food to conventional food (Bourn and Prescott, 2002). Consumers
described that organic orange juice tasted better than conventional orange juice
and no difference was described between organic and conventional milk (Fillion
and Arazi, 2002).

In recent years, organic food has been attaining a growing consumer demand. A
number of reasons have driven this organic food market trend. The British
consumers perceived organic food as a means of achieving individual and social
values for themselves and their families. The most significant motive for choosing
organic food is the health factor followed by the environmental and animal welfare
factors. Some consumers buy organic food as they perceive a difference in food
quality. Few specific parameters expressed are sensory parameters, followed by
safety and nutrients (Bordeleau et al., 2002).

Animals’ biological function and performance improve slightly when they are fed
with organically produced feed (Magkos et al., 2003). The interpretation of this
finding must be made with caution and any extrapolation to human should
consider metabolic and physiological difference between animals and humans.

Opposing attitude and value towards GM food implies a positive view on the
organic, especially when they are mentioned together. GM food is seen as
manipulative and altering the nature while organic food is seen to preserve the
‘naturalness’ of the environment (Dreezen et al., 2005).

13
Composting food wastes and consumption of locally produced food are among the
most commonly food-related environmental behaviour specified by consumers
compared to consumption of organic food. Awareness on the organic food
consumption needs to be raised and the barriers need to be overcome. The link
between health and environmental benefits should be strengthened to increase
interest among consumers (Magnusson et al., 2003).

2.2 Consumer Perception of Organic Food Quality

It is apparent that most consumers emphasised traditional quality aspects such as
freshness and taste in their food choice (Torjusen et al., 2001; Dimara et al., 2003).

In fruits and vegetables, for example, freshness is generally the important criterion
to look for. Consumers in Thailand were more likely to buy organic fruits and
vegetables if they meet the criterion (Roitner-Schobesberger et al., 2008).

Quality, however is not a well-defined attribute but comprises many other

properties such as sensory attributes (appearance, texture, taste and aroma),
nutritive values, safety determinants, chemical constituents, mechanical properties,
functional properties and defects (Abbott, 1999; Mizrach, 2007).

Sensory analysis becomes primary for consumers in determining their choice

followed by their awareness of invisible qualities such as microbial and
toxicological safety and nutritional value (Thierman, 2000).

Taste will continue to become a prime consideration in consumer food choice

especially after the experience of consuming the food (Fillion and Arazi, 2002).

Although sensory evaluations on whether organic food tastes better than

conventional food have yielded inconsistent results (McEahern and McClean,

14
2002), many buyers believe that organic food tastes better (Roitner-Schobesberger
et al., 2008). It was suggested that it is necessary to treat each product type
separately rather than putting a broad claim on certain product.

Woese et al. (1997) examined more than 150 comparative studies on foods
including cereals, potatoes, vegetables, fruit, wine, beer, bread, milk, eggs as well
as food products made from them. The studies investigated the concentrations of
pesticides residues and environmental contaminants as well as sensory tests and
feeding experiments in animals. It was found that conventional food which are
fertilised with minerals seems to have higher nitrate content that organically
fertilised vegetables and potatoes. In relation to pesticides, lower residue level was
found in vegetables and fruit from organic production.

A six-European countries consumer attitude survey on the GM food revealed that

one-third of the sixcountry population (France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy,
Poland and Portugal) would not choose any form of GM foods (Almeida et al,
2006). They pointed out that they are willing to accept GM foods only if these
food provided ‘health benefits’ and if there were food production benefits. Other
reasons to accept GM foods were also related to cost, taste, labelling and
nutritional improvements. It can be said that GM food acceptance will be greater if
they provide either health or other welfare benefits.

When GM food and organic food are compared, studies have found that
consumers have very positive attitude towards organic food (Magnusson 2004 and
Arvola et al., 2008) while they are quite negative to GM foods (Dreezens et al,
2005).

Consumers in Spain described GM food with attributes such as no benefit,

tampering with nature and high risk while organic foods with attributes such as

15
serving good purpose, necessary and healthy (Koivisto-Hursti and Magnusson,
2003). Many other European consumers’ studies also established negative
attitudes towards genetic modification in food products (Frewer et al., 1995;
Grunert et al., 2000; Gifford and Bernard, 2005). However, public attitudes are
likely to change dramatically when the application is associated to a specific goal
(Heijs et al., 1993).

Negative framing on certain type of production (i.e. conventional farming)

increases influence on the alternative technology (i.e. organic farming) but
positive framing was found to be more effective (Gifford and Bernard, 2005).
Therefore, a message about the benefits of organic farming may have more
meaning to consumers. Consumers tend to accept a somewhat risky technology if
the application is seen to be useful to mankind and the environment. The same
perception applies to organic food. Considerations about health and about the way
the product is produced with regard to animal welfare and environmental care
characterize the consumer perceptions on the health and safety aspect which could
be another aspect of food quality.

2.3 Conceptual Framework of the Study

This study is concerned with an analysis of consumers’ perception towards
organic food. Thus, the perception towards organic food was the main focus of the
study and seven selected characteristics of the respondents were considered as
those might have relationship with perception towards organic food. Perception
towards organic food may be influenced and affected through interacting forces of
many independent factors. It is not possible to deal with all the factors in a single
study. Therefore, it was necessary to limit the factors, which included age,
education, annual family income, source of weekly food shopping, extent of
information received about organic food, availability of organic food and barriers

16
to purchasing organic food. The conceptual framework of the study has been
presented in Fig. 2.1.

Explanatory variables Focus variable

Selected characteristics of the respondents
 Age
 Education
Consumers’
 Annual family income perception towards
 Source of weekly food shopping organic food
 Extent of information received about organic food
 Availability of organic food
 Barriers to purchasing organic food

Figure 2.1 Conceptual framework of the study

17
 CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY

Methodology enables the researcher to collect valid information. It is impossible

to conduct research work smoothly without proper methodology and it is very
difficult to address the objectives with a scientific manner. It requires a very
careful consideration on the part of the researcher to collect valid and reliable data
and to analyze the same for meaningful conclusion. A sequential description of the
methodology was followed in conducting this research work has been presented in
this chapter.

3.1 Locale of the Study

The study was conducted at Narsingdi and Dhaka district purposively. There are
many super shops in Narsingdi and Dhaka district and out of these seven super
shops were selected randomly as the locale of the study. In one sense, one can call
it a grocery store with a wide variety of food and household merchandise. It is also
self-service store and one of the popular businesses in the world. It is actually a
store dealing with fruits, vegetables and daily necessary grocery items. It has also
prepared food like candy, snacks and bread. There are lots of Mini supermarket
are growing in the city areas. It is grocery shop in the sense that it sells a wide
range of food and home items.

In the contemporary world, as well as in Bangladesh, the practice of daily

shopping for everyday necessities has altered. People have opted to go to the
market for necessary items once a week or even once a month in the interim. As a
result, a massive superstore has been developed in the Western world. Maps of
Narsingdi and Dhaka district are presented in Figure 3.1 and 3.2.

18
Figure 3.1: A map of Narsingdi district showing study area

19
Figure 3.2: A map of Dhaka district showing the study area

20
3.2 Distribution of the Population, Sample size
Seven separate lists of super shops of the selected two districts were prepared by
the researcher herself. The list comprised a total of 707 respondents from which
113 consumers from Oxford super shop, 90 consumers from Notun bazar and 105
consumers from A to Z super market under of Narsingdi and 95 consumers from
CSD, 102 consumers from Shwapno, 103 consumers from Kochukhet bazar and
99 consumers from Agora super shop under the Dhaka district which constituted
the population of the study. The total respondents were 707, among of those
respondents comprised of 105 (15% of total population) respondents was the
sample of the study. The distribution of the population sample and number of
respondent are given in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Distribution of the consumers according to population and sample

size
Name of Sample size (15% Reserved
Name of super shop Population
districts of total population) lists
Oxford super shop 113 16 2
Narsingdi Notun bazar 90 14 2
A to Z super market 105 15 2
CSD 95 15 2
Shwapno 102 14 2
Dhaka
Kochukhet bazar 103 16 2
Agora super shop 99 15 2
Total 707 105 14

3.3 Measurement of Variables

The variable is a characteristic, which can assume varying or different values in
successive individual cases. A research work usually contains at least two
important variables viz. independent and dependent variables. An independent
variable is that factor which is manipulated by the researcher in his attempt to
ascertain its relationship to an observed phenomenon. A dependent variable is that
factor which appears, disappears or varies as the researcher introduces, removes or
varies the independent variable (Townsend, 1953). In the scientific research, the

21
selection and measurement of variable constitute a significant task. Following this
conception, the researcher reviewed literature to widen this understanding about
the natures and scopes of the variables relevant to this research. At last she had
selected 7 independent variables and one dependent variable. The independent
variables were: age, education, annual family income, source of weekly food
shopping, extent of information received about organic food, availability of
organic food and barriers to purchasing organic food. The dependent variable of
this study was the “an analysis of consumers’ perception toward organic food: A
survey study in some selected areas of Bangladesh”. The methods and procedures
in measuring the variables of this study are presented below:

3.4 Measurement of Independent Variables

The 8 characteristics of the respondents mentioned above constitute the
independent variables of this study. The following procedures were followed for
measuring the independent variables.

3.4.1 Age
Age of respondents was measured by the period of time from their birth to the
time of conducting interview and it was measured in terms of complete years on
the basis of their response. A score of one (1) was assigned for each year age. This
variable appears in item number one (1) in the interview schedule as presented in
Appendix- A.

3.4.2 Education
Education was measured by assigning score against each successful year of
schooling by a respondent. One score was given for passing each level in an
educational institution. For example, if a respondent passed the final examination
of class five or equivalent examination, his/her education score has given five (5).
Each respondent of can’t read & write has given a score of zero (0). A person not

22
knowing reading or writing but being able to sign only has given a score of 0.5. If
a respondent did not go to school but took non-formal education, his/her
educational status was determined as the equivalent to a formal school student.
This variable appears in item number two (2) in the interview schedule as
presented in Appendix- A.

3.4.3 Annual family income

Annual family income of a respondent referred to the total earning by her/him and
other members of her/his family from agriculture, livestock, poultry, fisheries, and
other sources (service, business, daily wages by working, etc.) during a year. It
was expressed in thousand Taka. In measuring this variable, total earning of an
individual respondent was converted into score. A score of one (01) was given for
every one (01) thousand (‘000’) taka.

3.4.4 Source of weekly food shopping

Source of weekly food shopping of a respondent was measured by the
respondent’s extent of source of weekly food shopping. The degrees source of
weekly food shopping was ‘always’, ‘very often’, ‘sometimes’, ‘rarely’, ‘never’
against suitable scores are assigned as 4, 3, 2, 1 and 0 respectively. If the number
of source of weekly food shopping are six (6), then an individual respondent can
obtain highest score 24 and minimum score 0 (zero).

3.4.5 Extent of information received about organic food

Extent of information about organic food of a respondent was measured by a
respondent’s extent of information received about organic food. The degrees
extent of information received about organic food was ‘always’, ‘very often’,
‘sometimes’, ‘rarely’, ‘never’ against suitable scores are assigned as 4, 3, 2, 1 and
0 respectively. If the extent of information received about organic food are ten
(10), then an individual respondent can obtain highest score 40 and minimum

23
score 0 (zero).

3.4.6 Availability of organic food

Availability of organic food of a respondent was measured by a respondent’s
extent of availability of organic food channels used. The degrees of availability
was ‘Always’, ‘very often’, ‘sometimes’, ‘rarely’, ‘never’ against suitable scores
are assigned as 4, 3, 2, 1 and 0 respectively. If the number of availability of
organic food channels are four (4), then an individual respondent can obtain
highest score 16 and minimum score 0 (zero).

3.4.7 Barriers to purchasing organic food

Barriers to purchasing organic food, after thorough consultation with relevant
experts, respondents and relevant a variable literature, 10 barriers were selected
related to purchasing organic food for the study. A list of 10 probable barriers that
respondents could face in different aspects were listed and asked to indicate the
extent of their barriers to purchasing organic food. It was measured by using a five
point rating scale. For each barrier score of 4, 3, 2, 1 and 0 were assigned to
indicate extent of barriers as very high, high, medium, low and not at all,
respectively. The barrier score was computed for each respondent by adding
his/her scores for all 10 barriers. The possible range of barrier scores thus could be
0 and 40. A total score of 40 indicated highest barriers to purchasing organic food,
while a score of 0 indicated no barriers to purchasing organic food.

3.5 Measurement of Dependent Variable

An analysis of consumers’ perception toward organic food was the main variable
of the study. Ten statements expressing consumers’ perception toward organic
food were constructed. Scoring was done by assigning 4, 3, 2, 1 and 0 scores to the
four alternative responses as strongly agreed", "agreed", "undecided", "disagreed",

24
and "strongly disagreed", respectively in case of a statement. However,
consumers’ perception of organic food was obtained by summing up his/her scores
for all the ten statements in item no. 8 in the interview schedule. Consumers’
perception toward organic food score, thus, obtained for a respondent could range
from zero (0) to 40, where zero (0) indicated no perception and 40, indicated high
perception.

3.6 Statement of the Hypothesis

According to Kerlinger (1973), a hypothesis is a conjectural statement of the
relation between two or more variables. Hypotheses are always in declarative
sentence form and they relate either generally or specifically variables to sentence
form and they relate either generally or specifically variables to variables.
Hypothesis may be broadly divided into two categories, namely research
hypothesis and null hypothesis.

3.6.1 Research hypothesis

The following research hypothesis was put forward to know the relationship
between selected characteristics of the consumers’ on their perception toward
organic food.

Hypothesis: “Each of the seven selected characteristics of the consumers’ has

relationship to their perception toward organic food.”

3.6.2 Null hypothesis

A null hypothesis states that there is no relationship of independent variables to
the dependent variable. The following null hypothesis was undertaken for the
present study:

25
H0: There is no relationship of the selected characteristics of consumers’ with their
perception toward organic food.

If a null hypothesis is rejected on the basis of statistical tests, it is assumed, that

there is a relationship of the concerned characteristics of the consumers’
perception toward organic food.

3.7 Instrument for Data Collection

In order to collect reliable and valid information from the respondents, an
interview schedule was prepared for collection of data from respondents keeping
the objectives of the study in mind. The question and statements contained in the
schedule were simple, direct and easily understandable by the farmers. Simple and
direct question, different scales, closed and open form statements and questions
were included in the interview schedule to obtain necessary information. The draft
interview schedule was prepared in accordance with the objective of the study.
The interview schedule was pre-tested with 10 respondents in the study area
during 05 January to 10 January, 2022.

The draft interview schedule was pretested in actual field situation before
finalizing it for collection of data. The pre-test was helpful to identify
inappropriate questions and statements in the draft schedule. Necessary addition,
alternation and adjustments were made in the schedule on the basis of the
experience of the pretest. The interview schedule was then printed in its final
form. An English version of the interview schedule has been shown in Appendix-
A.

3.8 Data Collection

Data were collected personally by the researcher herself through personal
interview schedule from the sampled super shops. The researcher also discussed

26
the objectives of the present study with the respondents and above mentioned
officers and requested them to provide actual information. A rapport was
established with the people so that they feel easy to answer the questions. The
researcher took all possible care to establish rapport with the respondents so that
they would not feel any indecision while starting the interview. Very good
cooperation was obtained from the super shop workers. No serious difficulty was
faced by the researcher during the collection of data. The interviews were made
individually in the places of respondents. Questions were asked in direct manner
so that the respondents could easily understand the questions. Whenever a
respondent faced difficulty in understanding any questions, care was taken to
explain the same clearly with a view to enabling him to answer it properly.

Before going to the respondents’ super shops for interviewing they were informed
verbally to ensure their availability at super shops as per schedule date and time.
In the case of failure to collect information from the respondents due to their other
business, a revisit was made with prior to appointments. Data were collected
during 15th February, 2022 to 15th March, 2022.

3.9 Compilation of Data

After completion of survey, data recorded in the interview schedules were coded,
compiled, tabulated and analyzed in accordance with the objectives of the study.
In this process, all the responses in the interview schedule were given numerically
coded values. Local units were converted into standard units and qualitative data
were converted into quantitative ones by means of suitable scoring whenever
necessary. All the collected data were checked and cross-checked before
transplanting to the master sheets. To facilitate tabulation, the collected data were
properly coded and transferred from interview schedule to a master sheet.
Tabulation and cross tabulation was done on the basis of categorization developed
by the researcher.

27
3.10 Categorization of Data
For describing the various independent and dependent variables the respondents
were classified into various categories. In developing categories, the researcher
was guided by the nature of data and general consideration prevailing on the social
system. The procedures have been discussed while describing the variable in the
sub-sequent sections of the next chapter.

3.11 Statistical Analysis

Data collected from the respondents were analyzed and interpreted in accordance
with the objectives of the study. The analysis of data was performed using
statistical treatment with SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) computer
program, version 24. Statistical measures as a number, range, mean, standard
deviation were used in describing the variables whenever applicable. Pearson’s
Product Moment Correlation was used to determine the relationship of the
consumers’ perception toward organic food based on selected characteristics.

Throughout the study, five (0.05) percent and one (0.01) percent level of
significance were used as the basis for rejecting any null hypothesis. If the
computed value of (B) was equal to or greater than the designated level of
significance (p), the null hypothesis was rejected and it was concluded that there
was a significant relationship between the concerned variable. Whenever the
computed value of (B) was found to be smaller at the designated level of
significance (p), the null hypothesis could not be rejected. It was concluded that
there was no relationship of the concerned variables.

28
 CHAPTER IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this Chapter the findings of the study and its interpretation are presented in
three sections according to the objectives of the study. The first section deals with
the selected characteristics of the consumers, while the second section deals with
the extent of the consumers perception towards organic food and the third section
deals with the relationship between selected characteristics to their perception
towards organic food.

4.1 Selected Characteristics of the Consumers

In this section the results of the selected characteristics have been discussed. The
salient feature of the respondents with their seven selected characteristics has been
presented in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 The salient features of the selected characteristics of the

respondents
Measuring Rang
Characteristics Mean SD
unit possible observed
Age Years - 18-55 31.68 8.11
Education Year of 14.18 2.760
- 5-18
schooling
Annual family income (‘000’ tk) - 140-1700 575.00 258.62
Source of weekly food 12.99 2.47
Score 0-20 6-19
shopping
Sources of information 22.99 4.64
Score 0-40 9-33
about organic food
Availability of organic 10.14 1.89
Score 0-16 6-16
food
Barriers to purchasing 18.22 4.38
Score 0-40 8-32
organic food

4.1.1 Age
The age score of the consumers ranged from 18 to 55 with an average of 31.68 and
a standard deviation of 8.11. Considering the recorded age consumers were

29
classified into three categories namely young, middle and old aged following
(MoYS, 2012). The distribution of the consumers in accordance of their age is
presented in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 Distribution of the consumers according to their age

Consumers
Categories (years) Mean SD
Number Percent
Young aged (up to 35) 75 71.43
Middle aged (36-50) 28 26.67
31.68 8.11
Old aged (above 50) 2 1.96
Total 105 100

Table 4.2 indicates that the majority (71.43 percent) of the respondents were the
young-aged category while 26.67 percent and 1.96 percent were found middle and
old categories respectively. Data also indicates that the middle and young aged
category constitute almost 98.04 percent of total consumers.

4.1.2 Education
Education of the consumers ranged from 5 to 18 years of schooling having an average
of 14.18 years with a standard deviation of 2.76. On the basis of their education, the
respondents were classified into four categories as shown in Table 4.3

Table 4.3 Distribution of the consumers according to their education

Consumers
Categories Mean SD
Number Percent
Primary education (1-5 class) 1 0.95
Secondary education (6-10 class) 6 5.71
Higher Secondary level (11-12) 35 33.33 14.18 2.76
Above Higher secondary level (above 12) 63 60.00
Total 103 100

Data contained in Table 4.3 indicates the majority 60.00 percent of the consumers were
above higher secondary level of education. It was found that 0.95 percent was primary
level of education, 33.33 percent were higher secondary level of education and 5.71
percent were secondary level of education.
30
4.1.3 Annual family income
The annual family income of the consumers ranged from Tk. 140 thousand to
Tk. 1700 thousand with an average of Tk. 575.00 thousand and standard deviation of
258.62 thousand. On the basis of annual income scores of the consumers, the
consumers were classified into three categories (Mean ± Standard Deviation)
namely small, medium and high number of earning members at family. The
distribution of the consumers according to their annual family income is given in
Table 4.4.

Table 4.4 Distribution of the consumers according to their annual family

income
Consumers
Categories Mean SD
Number Percent
Low income (up to 317) 4 3.81
Medium income (318-833) 89 84.76
575.00 258.62
High income (above 833) 12 11.43
Total 105 100

From Table 4.4 it was observed that the highest portion (84.76 percent) of the
consumers had medium annual family income compared to 3.81 percent having
low and 11.43 percent had high annual family income. Overwhelming majority
(88.57 percent) consumers have low to medium annual family income.

4.1.4 Source of weekly food shopping

The observed source of weekly food shopping of the consumers ranged from 6-19, the
mean being 12.99 and standard deviation of 2.47. According to their observed ranged of
source of weekly food shopping scores; the consumers were classified into three categories
(Mean±SD) as shown in Table 4.5.

31
Table 4.5 Distribution of the consumers according to their source of weekly
food shopping
Categories Consumers Mean SD
Number Percent
Less food shopping (upto 11) 30 28.57
Medium food shopping (12-15) 59 56.19
Large food shopping (above 15) 16 15.24 12.99 2.47
Total 105 100

Data presented in Table 4.5 indicated that 56.19 percent of the consumers had medium
source of weekly food shopping compared to having 28.57 percent less and 15.24
percent high source of weekly food shopping. Findings again revealed that almost all
(84.76 percent) of the consumers had less to medium source of weekly food shopping.

4.1.5 Extent of information received about organic food

The score of extent of information received about organic food of the consumers
ranged from 9 to 33, the mean being 22.99 and standard deviation of 4.64. Based
on observed range, the consumers were classified into three categories as shown in
Table 4.6.

Table 4.6 Distribution of the consumers according to their information about

organic food
Consumers
Categories (score) Mean SD
Number Percent
Low sources (upto 18) 15 14.29
Medium sources (19-27) 73 69.52
22.99 4.64
High sources (above 27) 17 16.19
Total 105 100

Data contained in Table 4.6 indicates that 69.52 percent of the consumers had
medium extent of information about organic food; while 14.29 percent of the
consumer’s had less extent of information about organic food and 16.19 percent
had high sources of information about organic food. Thus, about 85.71% of
consumers had medium to high extent of information about organic food.
32
4.1.6 Availability of organic food
The observed availability of organic food scores of the consumers ranged from 6-
16 against the possible range of 0 to 16, the mean being 10.14 and standard
deviation of 1.89. According to their observed ranged of availability of organic
food scores, the consumers were classified into three categories (Mean±SD) as
shown in Table 4.7.

Table 4.7 Distribution of the consumers according to availability of organic

food
Consumers
Categories Mean SD
Number Percent
Less availability (upto 8) 23 21.91
Medium availability (9-12) 72 68.57
10.14 1.89
High availability (above 12) 10 9.52
Total 105 100

Data presented in Table 4.7 indicated that 68.57 percent of the consumers had
medium availability of organic food compared to having 21.91 percent less and
9.52 percent had high availability of organic food. Findings again revealed that
almost all (90.48 percent) of the consumers had less to medium availability of
organic food.

4.1.7 Barriers to purchasing organic food

The observed barriers to purchasing organic food scores of the consumers ranged
from 8-32 against the possible range of 0 to 40, the mean being 18.22 and standard
deviation of 4.38. According to their observed ranged of barriers to purchasing
organic food scores, the consumers were classified into three categories
(Mean±SD) as shown in Table 4.8.

33
Table 4.8 Distribution of the consumers according to their barriers to
purchasing organic food
Consumers
Categories Mean SD
Number Percent
Low barriers (upto 14) 19 18.09
Medium barriers (15-22) 71 67.62
18.22 4.38
High barriers (above 22) 15 14.29
Total 105 100

Data presented in Table 4.8 indicated that 68.57 percent of the consumers had
medium barriers to purchasing organic food compared to having 18.09 percent low
and 14.29 percent had high barriers to purchasing organic food. Findings again
revealed that almost all (85.71 percent) of the consumers had low to medium
barriers to purchasing organic food.

4.2 Consumers’ Perception towards Organic Food

The observed consumers’ perception towards organic food scores of the
consumers ranged from 11-32 against the possible range of 0 to 40, the mean
being 17.56 and standard deviation of 2.85. Consumers’ perception towards
organic food was categorized into three categories: favorable perception (<20),
neutral perception (20) and unfavorable perception (above 19) considering Mean
±1sd. According to their observed ranged of consumers’ perception towards
organic food scores, the respondents were classified into three categories
(Mean±SD) as shown in Table 4.9.

Table 4.9 Distribution of the respondents according to their perception

Consumers
Categories Mean SD
Number Percent
Favorable perception (<20) 83 79.05
Neutral perception (20) 7 6.67
17.56 2.85
Unfavorable perception (>20) 15 14.28
Total 105 100

34
Similar result was observed Kabir et al. (2018) where highest respondents were
favorable perception. Data presented in Table 4.9 indicated that the majority 79.05
percent of the respondents had favorable perception compared to having 14.28
percent unfavorable and only 6.67 percent had neutral perception. Findings again
revealed that almost all (84.72 percent) of the respondents had favorable to neutral
perception toward organic food.

4.3 The relationship between Selected Characteristics of the Respondents on

their Perception towards Organic Food

Coefficient of correlation was computed in order to explore the relationship

between the selected characteristics of the consumers and their perception towards
organic food. The selected characteristics constituted the explanatory variables and
perception toward organic food constituted the focus variable.

In order to determine the relationship between 7 selected characteristics

(explanatory variables) of the consumers viz. age, education, annual family
income, source of weekly food shopping, extent of information received about
organic food, availability of organic food and barriers to purchasing organic food
and the focus variable i.e., perception toward organic food Pearson’s Product
Moment Correlation was used. Co-efficient of correlation (r) has been used to test
the null hypothesis concerning the relationship between the variables. To reject or
accept the null hypothesis at 0.05 and 0.01 level of probability was used. A
statistically significant and non- significant relationship was observed when the
computed value of “r” was greater or smaller than the tabulated value,
respectively.

From this correlation test, it was found that education, source of weekly food
shopping, extent of information received about organic food, availability of

35
organic food and barriers to purchasing organic food of the consumers had
positive significant relationship with their perception toward organic food. Besides
these two (2) characteristics, (age and annual family income) had no significant
relationship with their perception toward organic food. Interco-relation among all
the variables may be seen in Appendix-B.

The summery of the results of the Co-efficient of Correlation indicating the

relationship between the selected characteristics of the consumers and their
perception towards organic food are shown in Table 4.10.

Table 4.10 Pearson’s product moment co-efficient of the correlation showing

relationship between focus and explanatory variables
Tabulated value Value of coefficient
Focus variable Explanatory variables correlation with 103
0.05 0.01
df
Age 0.038NS
Education 0.284*
Annual family income -0.114NS
Source of weekly food
0.197*
Perception towards shopping
0.192 0.251
Organic Food Extent of information received
0.378**
about organic food
Availability of organic food 0.249*
Barriers to purchasing organic
-0.346**
food
** Significant at p<0.01; *Significant at p<0.05

4.3.1 Age and perception towards organic food

The computed value of “r” (0.038) was smaller than that of the tabulated value
(r=0.192) with 103 degrees of freedom at 0.05 level of probability as shown in
Table 4.10. Hence, the concerned null hypothesis was accepted and it was
concluded that age of the consumers had no significant relationship with their
perception towards organic food.

36
4.4.2 Relationship between education of the consumers and their perception
towards organic food
The coefficient of correlation between level of education and perception towards
organic food is presented in Table 4.10. The coefficient of correlation between the
concerned variables was found to be 0.284. The following observations were made
on the basis of the value of correlation coefficient between the two concerned
variables of the study:

a. The observed value between the concerned variables “r‟‟ (0.284) was
found to be greater than the tabulated value (r = 0.192) with 103 degrees
of freedom at 0.05 level of probability.
b. The null hypothesis could be rejected.
c. The relationship between the concerned variables was statistically
significant at 0.05 level of probability.
d. The relationship showed a positive trend between the concerned variables.

Based on the above findings it was concluded that level of education had
significant positive relationships with the perception towards organic food. This
represents that level of education of the consumers was an important factor in
perception towards organic food and with the increases of education perception
towards organic food increases.

4.3.3 Relationship between annual family income and perception towards

organic food
The computed value of “r” (-0.114) was smaller than that of the tabulated value
(r=0.192) with 103 degrees of freedom at 0.05 level of probability as shown in
Table 4.10. Hence, the concerned null hypothesis was accepted and it was
concluded that annual family income had no significant relationship with their
perception towards organic food.

37
4.3.4 Relationship between source of weekly food shopping of the consumers
and their perception towards organic food
The coefficient of correlation between source of weekly food shopping and
perception towards organic food is presented in Table 4.10. The coefficient of
correlation between the concerned variables was found 0.197. The following
observations were made on the basis of the value of correlation coefficient
between the two concerned variables of the study:

a. The observed value between the concerned variables “r” (0.197) was found
to be greater than the tabulated value (r = 0.192) with 103 degrees of
freedom at 0.05 level of probability.
b. The null hypothesis could be rejected.
c. The relationship between the concerned variables was statistically
significant at 0.05 level of probability.
d. The relationship showed a positive trend between the concerned variables.

Based on the above findings it was concluded that source of weekly food shopping
had significant negative relationship with the perception towards organic food.
This represents that source of weekly food shopping of the consumers was an
important factor in perception and with the increases of source of weekly food
shopping perception towards organic food also increases.

4.3.5 Relationship between extent of information received about organic

food of consumers and their perception towards organic food
The coefficient of correlation between extent of information received about
organic food and perception towards organic food is presented in Table 4.10. The
coefficient of correlation between the concerned variables was found (0.378). The
following observations were made on the basis of the value of correlation
coefficient between the two concerned variables of the study:

38
 a. The observed value between the concerned variables “r” (0.378) was found
to be greater than the tabulated value (r = 0.251) with 103 degrees of freedom
at 0.01 level of probability.
b. The null hypothesis could be rejected.
c. The relationship between the concerned variables was statistically
significant at 0.01 level of probability.
d. The relationship showed a positive trend between the concerned variables.

Based on the above findings it was concluded that extent of information received
about organic food had significant negative relationships with the perception
towards organic food. This represents that extent of information received about
organic food of the consumers was an important factor in perception towards
organic food and with the increases of extent of information received about
organic food on perception towards organic food increases.

4.3.6 Relationship between availability of organic food of consumers and

their perception towards organic food
The coefficient of correlation between availability of organic food of consumers
and their perception towards organic food is presented in Table 4.10. The
coefficient of correlation between the concerned variables was found (0.249). The
following observations were made on the basis of the value of correlation
coefficient between the two concerned variables of the study:

a. The observed value between the concerned variables “r” (0.249) was found
to be greater than the tabulated value (r = 0.192) with 103 degrees of freedom
at 0.05 level of probability.
b. The null hypothesis could be rejected.
c. The relationship between the concerned variables was statistically
significant at 0.05 level of probability.

39
 d. The relationship showed a positive trend between the concerned variables.

Based on the above findings it was concluded that availability of organic food of
consumers had significant positive relationships with their extent of perception
towards organic food. This represents that availability of organic food of
consumers was an important factor in perception towards organic food and with
the increase of availability of organic food of consumers, the extent of perception
towards organic food also increases.

4.3.7 Relationship between barriers to purchasing organic food of the

consumers and their perception towards organic food
The coefficient of correlation between barriers to purchasing organic food and
perception towards organic food is presented in Table 4.10. The coefficient of
correlation between the concerned variables was found (-0.346). The following
observations were made on the basis of the value of correlation coefficient
between the two concerned variables of the study:

a. The observed value between the concerned variables “r” (-0.346) was found
to be greater than the tabulated value (r = 0.251) with 103 degrees of freedom
at 0.01 level of probability.
b. The null hypothesis could be rejected.
c. The relationship between the concerned variables was statistically
significant at 0.01 level of probability.
d. The relationship showed a negative trend between the concerned variables.

Based on the above findings it was concluded that barriers to purchasing organic
food had significant negative relationships with the perception towards organic
food. This represents that barriers to purchasing organic food of the consumers
was an important factor in problem faced and with the increases of barriers to
purchasing organic food perception towards organic food decreases.
40
 CHAPTER V
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter deals with the summary of findings, conclusions and

recommendations of this study.

5.1 Summary of Findings

5.1.1 Selected characteristics of the consumers

Age
The majority (71.43 percent) of the respondents were the young-aged category
while 26.67 percent and 1.96 percent were found middle and old categories
respectively.

Education
The majority 60.00 percent of the consumers were above higher secondary level of
education. It was found that 0.95 percent was primary level of education, 33.33 percent
were higher secondary level of education and 5.71 percent were secondary level of
education.

Annual family income

The highest portion (84.76 percent) of the consumers had medium annual family
income compared to 3.81 percent having low and 11.43 percent had high annual
family income.

Source of weekly food shopping

The majority 56.19 percent of the consumers had medium source of weekly food
shopping compared to having 28.57 percent less and 15.24 percent high source of

41
weekly food shopping.

Extent of information received about organic food

The highest 69.52 percent of the consumers had medium sources of information
about organic food; while 14.29 percent of the consumer’s had less sources of
information about organic food and 16.19 percent had high sources of information
about organic food.

Availability of organic food

Most 68.57 percent of the consumers had medium availability of organic food
compared to having 21.91 percent less and 9.52 percent had high availability of
organic food.

Barriers to purchasing organic food

The majority 68.57 percent of the consumers had medium barriers to purchasing
organic food compared to having 18.09 percent low and 14.29 percent had high
barriers to purchasing organic food.

5.1.2 Consumers’ perception towards organic food

The majority 79.05 percent of the respondents had favorable perception compared
to having 14.28 percent unfavorable and only 6.67 percent had neutral perception.

5.1.3 The relationship between selected characteristics of the respondents on

their perception towards organic food
Information shows that education, source of weekly food shopping, extent of
information received about organic food and availability of organic food had
significant positive relationship with their perception towards organic food but
barriers to purchasing organic food had significant negative relationship to their
perception towards organic food. Of these, extent of information received about

42
organic food were the most important contributing factors (significant at the 1%
level of significant) and education, source of weekly food shopping, availability of
organic food and barriers to purchasing organic food of the respondents were less
important contributing factors (significant at 5% level of significant). Coefficients
of other selected variables do not have any relationship between selected
characteristics of the consumers with their perception towards organic food.

5.2 Conclusions
Following conclusions were drawn on the basis of findings, logical interpretation
and other relevant facts of the study:
1. The majority 79.05 percent of the respondents had favorable perception
towards organic food. Therefore, it may be concluded that individuals having
more perception faced low problems to buy organic food. Instead, we
identified that positive beliefs about the safety of organic food significantly
affect organic food purchases.
2. There existed a positive significant relationship between educations of the
respondent with their perception towards organic food. Therefore, it may be
concluded that the educated person are more keen towards organic food
because of their educational background they know the necessity of organic
food for their health.
3. Findings expressed that extent of information received about organic food of
the consumers had significant positive relationship with their perception
towards organic food. So, it may be concluded that the consumers who have
more access to information sources they are more interested to organic food.
So, public and privates initiatives should be broaden to make the people more
aware about perception towards organic food.
4. Consumers’ source of weekly food shopping and availability of organic food
had significant relationship with their perception towards organic food in the
study area. It is therefore concluded that if the consumers’ source of weekly

43
 food shopping and availability of organic food is increase, consumers’
perception towards organic food also increase.
5. Barriers to purchasing organic food of the consumers showed negative
significant relationship with their perception towards organic food in the study
area. The consumers do not buy organic food when they do not find organic
food in their nearly market.

5.3 Recommendations
Recommendations based on the findings and conclusions of the study have been
presented below:

5.3.1 Recommendation for policy implication

1. It was recommended that steps should be taken by the different government
and non-government organizations like DAE and others to maximize
individual, involvement with super shop. In order to increase perceptions
towards organic food of the consumers, some incentives like food programmed
and logistic support etc. should be done.
2. The findings of the study indicated that education had significant positive
relationship with their perception towards organic food. Therefore, it may be
recommended that the concerned authorities, DAE, GOs and NGOs should take
the special mass education program for the illiterate and low lettered consumers
for solving their problems.
3. The findings revealed that the extent of information received about organic
food had a significant positive relationship with their perception towards
organic food. So, it may be recommended that the concerned authority should
increase training facilities to develop skills of the consumers technologically so
that they can minimize their lacking in perception towards organic food.
4. The source of weekly food shopping and availability of organic food of the
consumers had high significant positive relationship with their perception

44
 towards organic food. It leads to the recommendation that extension service
should provide adequate market management advice to the growers for
increasing their perception towards organic food. It is a fact that if experience
were increased, consumers’ receptive capacity to perception towards organic
food will be increased and thereby marketing ability will be increased.
5. The findings revealed that the barriers to purchasing organic food had a
significant negative relationship with their perception towards organic food. So,
it may be recommended that the extension workers of the concerned authority
should increase the contact with consumers personally and motivate them to be
connected with electronic and printed media that can help them to exchange
related information which will reduce their barriers to purchasing organic food.

5.3.2 Recommendations for further study

1. The study was conducted on the consumers of only one selected area of
Narsingdi and Dhaka district. Finding of the study need verification by
similar research in other areas of the country including areas where
consumers’ perception towards organic food is yet to get popularity.
2. Relationship between selected characteristics of consumers’ with their
perception towards organic food has been investigated in this study. Further
research should be conducted to find out relationship between selected
characteristics of the other personal characteristics of the consumers with
their others problems.
3. In addition to perception towards organic food, those might have other
factors relative to their social, economic, housing, sanitation, nutrition and
domestic etc. Therefore, it may be recommended that research should be
conducted relation to other factors of the consumers.
4. Research should also be undertaken to identify the factors causing
hindrance towards the perception towards organic food. Further research

45
 should be taken related to other issues like knowledge, problems, attitudes
etc.
5. Therefore, future studies should go for consumer-based approach which is
important not only for consumers, but also in terms of responses to changes
in market dynamics.

REFERENCES

46
Abbott, J.A. (1999). Quality measurement of fruit and vegetable. Postharvest
Biology and Technology, 15: 207-225.
Almeida, M.D.V., Pinhao, S., Stewart-Know, B, Parr, H.J. and Gibnet, M.J.
(2006). An overview of findings from a six-country European survey on
consumer attitudes to the metabolic syndrome, genetics in nutrition and
potential agro-food technologies. Nutrition Bulletin, 31: 239-246.
Baker, B.P., Benbrook, C.M., Groth, E. and Benbrook, K.L. (2002). Pesticide
residues in conventional, IPM-grown and organic foods: Insights from three
U.S. data sets. Food Additives and Contaminants, 19(5): 427-446.
Bordeleau, G., Myers-Smith, I., Midak, M. and Szeremeta, A. (2002). Food
quality: A comparison of organic and conventional fruits and vegetables.
Masters thesis. Den Kongelige Veterincer-og Landbohojskole.
Bourn, D. and Prescott, J. (2002). A comparison of the nutritional of the
nutritional value, sensory qualities and food safety of organically and
conventionally produced foods. Critical Reviews in Food Science and
Nutrition, 42: 1-34.
Dimara, E., Petrou, A. and Skuras, D. (2003). The socio-economics of niche
market creation. International Journal of Social Economics, 30(3): 219-
235.
Dreezens, E., Martijin, C., Tenbult, P., Kok, G. and Vries, N.K. (2005). Food and
values: an examination of values underlying attitudes towards genetically
modified and organically grown food products. Appetite, 44: 115-122.
Fagerli, R.A. and Wandel, M. (1999). Gender differences in opinions and practices
with regard to a ‘Healthy diet’. Appetite, 32: 171-190.
Frewer, L.J., Hedderley, D. and Shepherd, R. (1996). What determines trust in
information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs.
Risk Analysis, 16(4): 473-486.
Gifford, K. and Bernard, J.C. (2005). Influencing consumer purchase likelihood of
organic food, International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30, 2: pp 156-163.

47
Grunert, K.G., Bech-Larsen, T. and Bredahl, L. (2000). Three issues in consumer
quality perception and acceptance of dairy products. International Dairy
Journal, 10: 575-584.
Heijs W.J.M, Midden C.J.H. and Drabbe R.A.J. (1993). In Biotechnology:
Attitudes and influencing factors, Eindhoven University of Technology,
Eindhoven. Institute of Food Science and Technology (IFST) (2005)
Organic food, IFST, London.
Kabir, M.H., Islam, M.S., Ali, M.S. and Abdullah, M.M. (2018). Farmers'
Perception towards s Harmful Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture.
Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology.
27(1):1-8; Article no. AJAEES.43006 ISSN: 2320-7027.
http://www.sciencedomain.org/review-history/25905
Koivisto Hursti, U.K. and Magnusson, M.K. (2003). Consumer perceptions of
genetically modified and organic foods. What kind of knowledge matters?,
Appetite, 41: 207-209.
Kutnohorská, O. and Tomšík, P. (2013). Consumers’ perception of the health
aspects of organic Food. Agric. Econ. Czech, 59(7): 293–299.
Magkos, F., Arvaniti, F. and Zampelas, A. (2003). Organic food: nutritious food or
food for thought? A review of the evidence. International Journal of Food
Science and Nutrition, 54(5): 357-371.
Magnusson, M.K., Arvola, A., Koivisto-Hursti, U., Aberg, L. and Sjoden, P.
(2003). Choice of organic food is related to perceived consequences for
human health and to environmental friendly behavior. Appetite, 40: 109-
117.
Market & Opinion Research International Limited. (MORI) (2003). 'Green Choice'
Is Still A Middle Class Affair, MORI, London.
McEahern, M.G. and McClean, P. (2002). Organic purchasing motivations and
attitudes: are they ethical?, International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26:
85-92.

48
McIntosh, W.A., Acuff, G.R., Christensen, L.R. and Hale, D. (1994). Public
perceptions of food safety. The Social Science Journal, 31(3): 285-292.
Mizrach, A. (2008). Ultrasonic technology for quality evaluation of fresh fruit and
vegetable in pre- and postharvest processes. Postharvest Biology and
Technology, 48: 315-330.
MoYS. (2012). The Population Category in Bangladesh. Ministry of Youth and
Sports, Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh.
Naspetti, S. and Zanoli, R. (2006). Organic food quality and safety perception
throughout Europe, EAAE Seminar ‘Marketing Dynamics within the
Global Trading System: New Perspectives, Greece, 29 June-2 July 2006.
Shroeder, M.J.A. (2003). Food Quality and Consumer Value, Springer, Berlin
Heidelberg. Soil Association. Organic farming, food quality and human
health: A review of the evidence, Soil Association, Bristol.
Stobelaar, D.J., Casimir, G., Borghuis, J., Marks, I., Meijer, L. and Zebeda, S.
(2006). Adolescents’ attitudes towards s organic food: a survey of 15 to 16-
year old school children. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(4):
pp 349-356.
Thierman, A.B. (2000) Protecting health, facilitating trade or both? Annals N. Y.
Acad. Sci., 916: 24-30.
Urena, F., Bernabeu, R. and Olmeda, M. (2008). Women, men and organic food:
differences in their attitudes and willingness to pay. A Spanish case study.
International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32: 18-26.
Woese, K., Lange, D., Boess, C. and Bogl, K.W. (1997). A comparison of
organically and conventionally grown foods-Results of a review of the
relevant literature. J. Sci Food Agriculture, 74: 281-293.

APPENDIX-A
English version of the interview schedule
Department of Agricultural Extension and Information System

49
 Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University,

An Analysis of Consumers’ Perception towards Organic food: A survey in the

selected areas of Bangladesh
No of respondent:
Name: Cell No:

Address: Name of the Market:

Please answer the following information

Your information will be kept confidential and will be used for research purpose only.

1. Age
How old are you? .......................... years.

2. Education
Please mention your year of schooling. ..........................Years.

3. Annual family income

What is your annual family income………….Tk./years

4. Source of weekly food shopping

Which of the following is your main source of weekly food shopping?
Statements Always Very Sometimes Rarely Never
Often
Supermarket
Whole sale/retail market
Open Market
On line Market
Street vendor market

5. Extent of information received about organic food:

How often do you use the following sources to obtain information about organic food

50
 Statements Always Very Sometimes Rarely Never
Often
i) Organic farming
certification service
ii) Other organic consumes
iii) Organic farmers
iv) Organic Food traders
v) Demonstration in
supermarket/whole sale
market
vi) Organic shops
vii) Media (Newspaper,
television, radio)
viii) Own interest search
ix) Friends, Family
x) Scientific magazine

6. Availability of organic food

How easy in it for you to find organic food in your area (Availability).

Place Always Very Sometimes Rarely Never

Often
Open market
Whole sale market
Street vendor
Supermarket

7. Barriers to purchasing organic food

Please indicate your level of agreement that the following factors are barriers to
purchasing organic foods.

Very High Medium Low Not at All

Factors high barriers barriers barriers
barriers
i) Unavailability of organic food
ii) High price of organic food
iii) Trust
iv) Lack of quality of organic food
v) Insufficient variety
vi) Lack of local Market
vii) Lack of advertising of organic
product
viii) Lack of knowledge about
organic food
ix) Organic products not being

51
certified
x) Low Production of organic
products

8. Consumers’ perception towards organic food

Strongly Agree undecided Disagree Strongly
Statement agree disagree
i) Organic food is different from in
organic food in aspect of nutrition
ii) I am supporting organic farming
because it is environment friendly
iii) One should emphasized to organic
food
iv) Organic food are being
inspected in regular basis
v) Organic products are heartier
so that people liked it very much
vi) Organic product are fresher so
that people liked it very much
vii) Organic food is better for my
children’s health so that people
liked it very much
viii) Organic practice in good for
environment so that people liked
it very much
ix) Good for sustainable
agriculture
x) Organic food are cheaper so that
people liked it very much

Thank you for your cooperation Signature of the interviewer

APPENDIX-B

Correlations matrix between focus and explanatory variables

52
 Correlations
X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 Y
X1 1
X2 -.007 1
X3 -.154 .007 1
X4 .117 .063 -.103 1
*
X5 -.036 .229 .097 -.079 1
**
X6 .055 .163 .312 .113 .460** 1
* **
X7 .022 -.242 -.108 -.099 -.410 -.463** 1
** * ** *
Y .038 .284 -.114 .197 .378 .249 -.346** 1

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

X1=Age
X2=Education
X3=Annual family income
X4=Source of weekly food shopping
X5=Extent of information received about organic food
X6=Availability of organic food
X7=Barriers to purchasing organic food
Y=Perception towards organic food

53