The Effect of Nutritional and Environment Information on Consumer’s Willingness-to-pay (WTP) for Products Containing an Upcycled Ingredient

Nguyen Doan Duy Le1, , Diep My Phung Huynh2,3, Quoc Cuong Nguyen2,3
1 Faculty of Food Science and Technology, Ho Chi Minh City University of Industry and Trade, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
2 Department of Food Technology, Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
3 Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Main Article Content

Abstract

This research aims to introduce upcycled food to Vietnamese consumers and investigate which information affects willingness to pay for an upcycled food, that is biscuit products adding spent coffee grounds (SCG). A choice experiment was conducted with more than 200 consumers. Using Multinominal Logit Model (MNL) and Mixed Multinominal Logit Model (MMNL), it is found that the consumers concerned about three information price, antioxidant, coffee flavour, and not pay attention to type of flour, carbon trust information. Among the relevant information, consumers are willing-to-pay a premium of 31.4 thousand VND and 19.6 thousand VND for antioxidant ingredient and coffee flavour.

Article Details

References

[1] Singh, J., et al., Challenges and opportunities for
scaling up upcycling businesses – The case of textile
and wood upcycling businesses in the UK, Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, vol. 150, Nov. 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104439
[2] FAO, Toolkit: Reducing the Food Wastage Footprint,
2013, Rome, Italy.
[3] FAO, Food wastage footprint and Climate Change,
2015, Rome, Italy.
[4] Franca, A. S. and L. S. Oliveira, Chapter 17 - Coffee,
in Integrated Processing Technologies for Food and
Agricultural By-Products, Z. Pan, R. Zhang, and
S. Zicari, Editors, 2019, Academic Press, pp. 413-438.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-814138-0.00017-4
[5] Martinez-Saez, N., et al., Use of spent coffee grounds as
food ingredient in bakery products, Food Chemistry,
vol. 216, pp. 114-122, Feb. 2017.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.07.173
[6] Zhang, J., et al., Addressing food waste: How to
position upcycled foods to different generations,
Journal of Consumer Behaviour, vol. 20, iss. 2,
pp. 242-250, Jul. 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1844
[7] Grasso, S. and D. Asioli, Consumer preferences for
upcycled ingredients: A case study with biscuits, Food
Quality and Preference, vol. 84, Sep. 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.103951
[8] Köpcke, J., From waste to premium: Consumers
perception of value-added surplus products and their
willingness to pay, in BMS: Behavioural, Management
and Social Sciences, Univeristy of Twente, 2020.
[9] Bhatt, S., et al., Consumers’ willingness to pay for
upcycled foods, Food Quality and Preference, vol. 86,
pp. 104035, Dec. 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104035
[10] Asioli, D. and S. Grasso, Do consumers value food
products containing upcycled ingredients? The effect
of nutritional and environmental information, Food
Quality and Preference, vol. 91, Jul. 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104194
[11] Banovic, M., et al., Foods with increased protein
content: A qualitative study on European consumer
preferences and perceptions, Appetite, vol. 125,
pp. 233-243, Jun. 2018.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.01.034
[12] Asioli, D., J. Aschemann-Witzel, and R. M. Nayga Jr.,
Sustainability-related food labels, Annual Review of
Resource Economics, vol. 12, pp. 171-185, Oct. 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-100518-
094103
[13] Annett, L. E., et al., Influence of health and
Environmental information on hedonic evaluation of organic and conventional bread, Journal of Food Science,
vol. 73, iss. 4, pp. H50-H57, Apr. 2008.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2008.00723.x
[14] Dhar, R. and I. Simonson, The effect of forced choice
on choice, Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 40,
iss. 2, pp. 146-160, May. 2003.
https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.40.2.146.19229
[15] Hensher, D. A., J. M. Rose, and W. H. Greene, Applied
Choice Analysis, Cambridge University Press, 2015.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316136232
[16] Louviere, J. J., et al., Stated Choice Methods: Analysis
and Applications, Cambridge University Press, 2000.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511753831
[17] Jaeger, S. R. and J. M. Rose, Stated choice
experimentation, contextual influences and food choice:
A case study, Food Quality and Preference, vol. 19,
iss. 6, pp. 539-564, Sep. 2008.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2008.02.005
[18] Meade, A. W. and S. B. Craig, Identifying careless
responses in survey data, Psychological Methods,
vol. 17, pp. 437-455, 2012.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028085
[19] Cummings, R. G. and L. O. Taylor, Unbiased value
estimates for environmental goods: A cheap talk
design for the contingent valuation method, American
economic Review, vol. 89, no. 3, pp. 649-665,
Jun. 1999.
https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.89.3.649
[20] Silva, A., et al., Revisiting cheap talk with new
evidence from a field experiment, Journal of
Agricultural and Resource Economics, vol. 36,
pp. 280-291, 2011.
[21] McFadden, D., Conditional logit analysis of qualitative
choice behavior, Frontiers in Econometrics,
pp. 105-142, 1974.
[22] Train, K.E., Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation,
2009, Cambridge University Press.
[23] Hensher, D.A. and W.H. Greene, The mixed logit
model: The state of practice, Transportation, vol. 30,
pp. 133-176, May. 2003.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022558715350
[24] Morrison, M., et al., Choice modeling and tests of
benefit transfer, American Journal of Agricultural
economics, vol. 84, iss. 1, pp. 161-170, Feb. 2002.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8276.00250
[25] Gracia, A., M. L. Loureiro, and R. M. Nayga,
Consumers’ valuation of nutritional information:
A choice experiment study, Food Quality and
Preference, vol. 20, iss. 7, pp. 463-471, Oct. 2009.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.03.010
[26] Greene, W. H. and D. A. Hensher, A latent class model
for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit,
Transportation Research Part B: Methodological,
vol. 37, iss. 8, pp. 681-698, Sep. 2003.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-2615(02)00046-2