Motivating factors and barriers to sustainable consumer behaviour [1]

International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 75-88

  Stagl, Sigrid ^a   O'Hara, Sabine U ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b GREEN MOUNTAIN COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Consumer behaviour; Local food markets; Sustainable agriculture

Indexed keywords

CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; FOOD CONSUMPTION; FOOD MARKET; URBAN POPULATION;

NEW YORK; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0009698026     PISSN: 14624605     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1504/ijarge.2002.000023     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Euroconference: Quality of Life - Sustainability - Environmental Changes, Event 2: Exchange processes - Societal, institutional, and political determinants guiding environmental behaviour and processing environmental knowledge within society, Rust/Burgenland, Austria, 16-19 October, 1999.
2. Stagl, S. and O'Hara, S.U. (2001) 'Preferences, needs and sustainability', International Journal of Sustainable Development, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp.4-21.
3. Hartman, H. (1997) The Organic Industry - A Market Research, Bellevue, Washington: Hartman & New Hope.
4. OTA is a business association representing the organic industry in the USA and Canada. It has more than 800 members including growers, processors, shippers, retailers, certification organisations and others involved in producing and selling certified organic products.
5. Business Editors (1998) 'New Organic Trade Association study shows meteoric growth for manufacturers of organic food products', Business Wire, p.1.
6. Morgan, J., Barbour, B. and Greene, C. (1990) 'Expanding the organic produce niche: issues and obstacles', in US D. of Agriculture (Ed.) Vegetables and Specialities - Situation and Outlook Yearbook, Washington, D.C., ERS TVS-252.
7. Park, T.A. and Lohr, L. (1996) 'Supply and demand factors for organic produce', American Journal of Agricultural Economics, pp.647-655.
8. As defined by NFM as natural food stores larger than 5,000 square feet and offering fresh meat and seafood.
9. Dunn, J.A. (1995) 'Organic food find opportunity in the natural food industry', Food Review, pp.7-8.
10. Goldreich, S. (1998) 'High goods demand often exceeds supply.' Washington Times, 27 April, pp.D17.
11. Sources: US Census Bureau and 1998 Rand McNally Commercial Atlas
12. CDRPC (1997) Capital District Economic Indicators.
13. Babbie, E.R. (1998) The Practice Of Social Research, Belmont: Wadsworth Pub. Co.
14. US Census Bureau (1990) The Census Tract Street Locator, https://www.census.gov:6868/doc/CenStats/doc/EPDB/ctsl/ctsl.htm.
15. For a similar model see for example Kolodinsky and Pelch [16]
16. Kolodinsky, J.M. and Pelch, L.L. (1997) 'Factors influencing the decision to join a Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) Farm', Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, Vol. 10, pp.129-141.
17. Groh, T. and McFadden, S. (1997) Farms of Tomorrow Revisited - Community Supported Farms, Farm Supported Communities, Kimberton, PA: Biodynamic Farming and Gardening Association, p.294.
18. Ostrom, M.R. (1997) 'Toward a community supported agriculture: a case study of resistance and change in the modern food system', Unpublished Dissertation, University of Wisconsin.
19. Gilman, S. (1997) (Ed.) 1997 CSA Farm Network, Stillwater, NY, 96pp.
20. The numbers at the end of the variable names indicate the question in the survey they belong to.
21. The precise question was, 'Knowing all the above about CSAs would you be interested in joining a CSA?'
22. See appendix for the list of variables.
23. This somewhat surprising result that people who agreed with the statement "I think of myself as a politically active person" instead of having no opinion on this statement had a 43% lower probability of becoming members is in our opinion due to significant differences in political interest between the two non-member groups which were interviewed. This factor did not show up as significant when the two groups were tested separately.
24. An analysis of the quantitative impact of the different factors on the probability of becoming member is technically possible, does however not seem reasonable with regards to the sometimes small sample sizes these numbers would be based upon. Thus the different factors are only listed as indications of different trends in the two groups.