Attitudes and behaviour towards food attributes and organic food – a triangular methodological investigation of occasional organic consumers

Organic food is increasingly available in the conventional food retail, where organic products are offered alongside with various other types of products and compete mainly with conventional and the so-called conventional-plus products. The latter are conventional products displaying particular quality attributes on the product packaging, such as ‘no artificial additives’, or ‘from animal welfare husbandry’. Often, these quality attributes also apply to organic products. Occasional organic consumers might prefer such conventional-plus alternatives that are perceived to be ‘between’ organic and conventional products. The overall objective of this PhD thesis was to provide information about the segment of occasional organic consumers. In particular, the thesis focussed on consumer perceptions and attitudes towards the quality of, and preferences for, organic, conventional and conventional-plus products in two countries: Germany and Switzerland. To achieve these objectives, qualitative and quantitative consumer research was combined in order to explore occasional organic consumers’ perceptions and attitudes as well as to observe their preferences and buying behaviour regarding different types of food products: organic, conventional and conventional-plus products. The qualitative research showed that, depending on single criteria, organic production was both positively as well as negatively assessed by consumers. Consumer perception of organic food was found to be highly selective and primarily focussed on the final stage of the particular production process. A major problem is that consumers are still mostly unfamiliar with factors associated with organic production, have a lack of confidence, and often confuse organic with conventional products. Besides this, consumer expectations of organic products are different from the expectations of conventional products. The quantitative research revealed that attitudes strongly determine consumers’ preferences for organic, conventional and conventional-plus products. Consumer attitudes tended to differ more between organic and conventional choices rather than conventional-plus and conventional choices. Furthermore, occasional organic consumers are heterogeneous in their preferences. They can be grouped into two segments: the consumers in one segment were less price sensitive and preferred organic products. The consumers in the other segment were more price sensitive and rather preferred conventional-plus or conventional products. To conclude, given the selective and subjective nature of consumer perception and the strong focus of consumer perception on the final stage of the food production process, specific additional values of organic farming should be communicated in clear and catchy messages. At the same time, these messages should be particularly focussed on the final stage of organic food production. The communication of specific added values in relation with organic products to improve the perceived price-performance-ratio is important since conventional-plus products represent an interesting alternative particularly for price sensitive occasional organic consumers. Besides this, it is important to strengthen affirmative consumer attitudes towards organic production. Therefore, policy support should emphasise on long-term communication campaigns and education programmes to increase the consumer awareness and knowledge of organic food and farming. Since consumers expect that organic food is regionally or at least domestically produced while they less accept organic imports, policy support of domestic and regional producers is a crucial measure to fill the current gap between the increasing consumer demand of organic food and the stagnation of the domestic and regional organic food supply.

From evolution to co-evolution – An empirical study of the role of innovation, policy and public research in industrial dynamics

In the past decades since Schumpeter’s influential writings economists have pursued research to examine the role of innovation in certain industries on firm as well as on industry level. Researchers describe innovations as the main trigger of industry dynamics, while policy makers argue that research and education are directly linked to economic growth and welfare. Thus, research and education are an important objective of public policy. Firms and public research are regarded as the main actors which are relevant for the creation of new knowledge. This knowledge is finally brought to the market through innovations. What is more, policy makers support innovations. Both actors, i.e. policy makers and researchers, agree that innovation plays a central role but researchers still neglect the role that public policy plays in the field of industrial dynamics. Therefore, the main objective of this work is to learn more about the interdependencies of innovation, policy and public research in industrial dynamics. The overarching research question of this dissertation asks whether it is possible to analyze patterns of industry evolution – from evolution to co-evolution – based on empirical studies of the role of innovation, policy and public research in industrial dynamics. This work starts with a hypothesis-based investigation of traditional approaches of industrial dynamics. Namely, the testing of a basic assumption of the core models of industrial dynamics and the analysis of the evolutionary patterns – though with an industry which is driven by public policy as example. Subsequently it moves to a more explorative approach, investigating co-evolutionary processes. The underlying questions of the research include the following: Do large firms have an advantage because of their size which is attributable to cost spreading? Do firms that plan to grow have more innovations? What role does public policy play for the evolutionary patterns of an industry? Are the same evolutionary patterns observable as those described in the ILC theories? And is it possible to observe regional co-evolutionary processes of science, innovation and industry evolution? Based on two different empirical contexts – namely the laser and the photovoltaic industry – this dissertation tries to answer these questions and combines an evolutionary approach with a co-evolutionary approach. The first chapter starts with an introduction of the topic and the fields this dissertation is based on. The second chapter provides a new test of the Cohen and Klepper (1996) model of cost spreading, which explains the relationship between innovation, firm size and R&D, at the example of the photovoltaic industry in Germany. First, it is analyzed whether the cost spreading mechanism serves as an explanation for size advantages in this industry. This is related to the assumption that the incentives to invest in R&D increase with the ex-ante output. Furthermore, it is investigated whether firms that plan to grow will have more innovative activities. The results indicate that cost spreading serves as an explanation for size advantages in this industry and, furthermore, growth plans lead to higher amount of innovative activities. What is more, the role public policy plays for industry evolution is not finally analyzed in the field of industrial dynamics. In the case of Germany, the introduction of demand inducing policy instruments stimulated market and industry growth. While this policy immediately accelerated market volume, the effect on industry evolution is more ambiguous. Thus, chapter three analyzes this relationship by considering a model of industry evolution, where demand-inducing policies will be discussed as a possible trigger of development. The findings suggest that these instruments can take the same effect as a technical advance to foster the growth of an industry and its shakeout. The fourth chapter explores the regional co-evolution of firm population size, private-sector patenting and public research in the empirical context of German laser research and manufacturing over more than 40 years from the emergence of the industry to the mid-2000s. The qualitative as well as quantitative evidence is suggestive of a co-evolutionary process of mutual interdependence rather than a unidirectional effect of public research on private-sector activities. Chapter five concludes with a summary, the contribution of this work as well as the implications and an outlook of further possible research.