Should I Pay or Should I Grow? Factors Which Influenced the Preferences of US Consumers for Fruit, Vegetables, Wine and Beer during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Human Values
1.2. Attitudes towards Growers
1.3. Attitudes towards COVID-19
1.4. Engagement with Horticulture
1.5. Conceptual Model
2. Material and Methods
2.1. Survey Instrument
2.2. Approach and Data Analysis
3. Results
Hypothesized Relationship | Coefficient | T Stat | p Value |
---|---|---|---|
H1a: Self-Transcendence -> Hort Engagement Pre-COVID | −0.193 | 3.884 | 0.000 |
H1b: Openness to Change -> Hort Engagement Pre-COVID | 0.054 | 0.937 | 0.349 |
H1c: Self-Enhancement -> Hort Engagement Pre-COVID | 0.256 | 4.214 | 0.000 |
H1d: Conservation -> Hort Engagement Pre-COVID | 0.143 | 2.434 | 0.015 |
H2a: Self-Transcendence -> Hort Engagement Since COVID | −0.137 | 2.833 | 0.005 |
H2b: Openness to Change -> Hort Engagement Since COVID | 0.043 | 0.742 | 0.458 |
H2c: Self-Enhancement -> Hort Engagement Since COVID | 0.276 | 4.216 | 0.000 |
H2d: Conservation -> Hort Engagement Since COVID | 0.203 | 3.355 | 0.001 |
H3: Attitudes Towards Hort Growers -> Hort Engagement Pre-COVID | 0.422 | 7.711 | 0.000 |
H4: Attitudes Towards Hort Growers -> Hort Engagement Since COVID | 0.221 | 3.862 | 0.000 |
H5: Attitudes Towards COVID -> Hort Engagement Since COVID | 0.220 | 3.604 | 0.000 |
H6: Hort Engagement Pre-COVID -> Grow/Process vs. Buy Hort Products Pre-COVID | 0.753 | 24.442 | 0.000 |
H7: Hort Engagement Pre-COVID -> Grow/Process vs. Buy Hort Products Since COVID | 0.284 | 3.289 | 0.001 |
H8: Hort Engagement Since COVID -> Grow/Process vs. Buy Hort Products Since COVID | 0.512 | 5.986 | 0.000 |
4. Discussion
5. Managerial Implications
6. Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Bir, C.; Widmar, N.O. Social pressure, altruism, free-riding, and non-compliance in mask wearing by U.S. residents in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Soc. Sci. Humanit. Open 2021, 4, 100229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hobbs, J.E. Food supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic. Can. J. Agric. Econ. Rev. Can. D’agroecon. 2020, 68, 171–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Thilmany, D.; Brislen, L.; Edmondson, H.; Gill, M.; Jablonski, B.B.R.; Rossi, J.; Woods, T.; Schaffstall, S. Novel methods for an interesting time: Exploring U.S. local food systems’ impacts and initiatives to respond to COVID. Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2021, 65, 848–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cheng, C.; Lau, Y.-C.; Luk, J.W. Social Capital–Accrual, Escape-From-Self, and Time-Displacement Effects of Internet Use During the COVID-19 Stay-at-Home Period: Prospective, Quantitative Survey Study. J. Med Internet Res. 2020, 22, e22740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chenarides, L.; Grebitus, C.; Lusk, J.L.; Printezis, I. Food consumption behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. Agribusiness 2020, 37, 44–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luckstead, J.; Nayga, R.M., Jr.; Snell, H.A. Labor Issues in the Food Supply Chain Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic. Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy 2020, 43, 382–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kassas, B.; Nayga, R.M. Promoting higher social distancing and stay-at-home decisions during COVID-19: The underlying conflict between public health and the economy. Saf. Sci. 2021, 140, 105300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carroll, N.; Sadowski, A.; Laila, A.; Hruska, V.; Nixon, M.; Ma, D.W.; Haines, J. The Impact of COVID-19 on Health Behavior, Stress, Financial and Food Security among Middle to High Income Canadian Families with Young Children. Nutrients 2020, 12, 2352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pandya, A.; Lodha, P. Social Connectedness, Excessive Screen Time During COVID-19 and Mental Health: A Review of Current Evidence. Front. Hum. Dyn. 2021, 3, 684137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, L.; Li, J.; Xia, T.; Matthews, T.A.; Tseng, T.-S.; Shi, L.; Zhang, D.; Chen, Z.; Han, X.; Li, Y.; et al. Changes of Exercise, Screen Time, Fast Food Consumption, Alcohol, and Cigarette Smoking during the COVID-19 Pandemic among Adults in the United States. Nutrients 2021, 13, 3359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bulgari, R.; Petrini, A.; Cocetta, G.; Nicoletto, C.; Ertani, A.; Sambo, P.; Ferrante, A.; Nicola, S. The Impact of COVID-19 on Horticulture: Critical Issues and Opportunities Derived from an Unexpected Occurrence. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chenarides, L.; Grebitus, C.; Lusk, J.L.; Printezis, I. Who practices urban agriculture? An empirical analysis of participation before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Agribusiness 2020, 37, 142–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Campbell, B.L.; Rihn, A.L.; Campbell, J.H. Impact of the Coronavirus pandemic on plant purchasing in Southeastern United States. Agribusiness 2020, 37, 160–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marwah, P.; Zhang, Y.Y.; Gu, M. Impacts of COVID-19 on the Green Industry. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lamm, K.; Powell, A.; Lombardini, L. Identifying Critical Issues in the Horticulture Industry: A Delphi Analysis during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mullins, L.; Charlebois, S.; Finch, E.; Music, J. Home Food Gardening in Canada in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pulighe, G.; Lupia, F. Food First: COVID-19 Outbreak and Cities Lockdown a Booster for a Wider Vision on Urban Agriculture. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wolfson, J.A.; Leung, C.W. Food Insecurity and COVID-19: Disparities in Early Effects for US Adults. Nutrients 2020, 12, 1648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galanakis, C.M. The Food Systems in the Era of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic Crisis. Foods 2020, 9, 523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hobbs, J.E. Food supply chain resilience and the COVID-19 pandemic: What have we learned? Can. J. Agric. Econ. Can. D’agroecon. 2021, 69, 189–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mollenkopf, D.A.; Ozanne, L.K.; Stolze, H.J. A transformative supply chain response to COVID-19. J. Serv. Manag. 2020, 32, 190–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barman, A.; Das, R.; De, P.K. Impact of COVID-19 in food supply chain: Disruptions and recovery strategy. Curr. Res. Behav. Sci. 2021, 2, 100017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chua, G.; Yuen, K.; Wang, X.; Wong, Y. The Determinants of Panic Buying during COVID-19. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 3247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hall, C.; Fieger, P.; Prayag, G.; Dyason, D. Panic Buying and Consumption Displacement during COVID-19: Evidence from New Zealand. Economies 2021, 9, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rombach, M.; Dean, D.L.; Baird, T. Exploring Key Factors Determining US Consumer Preferences for Growing over Buying Fruit in Pre-Covidian and Covidian Times. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brunsø, K.; Scholderer, J.; Grunert, K.G. Testing relationships between values and food-related lifestyle: Results from two European countries. Appetite 2004, 43, 195–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brunsø, K.; Birch, D.; Memery, J.; Temesi, Á.; Lakner, Z.; Lang, M.; Dean, D.; Grunert, K.G. Core dimensions of food-related lifestyle: A new instrument for measuring food involvement, innovativeness and responsibility. Food Qual. Preference 2021, 91, 104192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vermeir, I.; Verbeke, W. Sustainable food consumption among young adults in Belgium: Theory of planned behaviour and the role of confidence and values. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 64, 542–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wagner, U.; Strobl, S. Consumers’ Value Systems in the Consumption of Sustainable Groceries: An Intercultural Study. In Corporate Responsibility, Sustainability and Markets; Palgrave Macmillan: Cham, Switzerland, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Olsen, S.O.; Tuu, H.H. The relationships between core values, food-specific future time perspective and sustainable food consumption. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2020, 26, 469–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meike, R.; Dean, D.L.; Baird, T. Understanding Apple Attribute Preferences of US Consumers. Foods 2022, 11, 166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Onianwa, O.; Mojica, M.N.; Wheelock, G. Consumer characteristics and views regarding farmers markets: An examination of on-site survey data of Alabama consumers. J. Food Distrib. Res. 2006, 37, 119–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wolf, M.M.; Spittler, A.; Ahern, J. A profile of farmers’ market consumers and the perceived advantages of produce sold at farmers’ markets. J. Food Distrib. Res. 2005, 36, 192–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, C. Consumers’ preferences for locally produced food: A study in southeast Missouri. Am. J. Altern. Agric. 2003, 18, 213–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panzone, L.; Hilton, D.; Sale, L.; Cohen, D. Socio-demographics, implicit attitudes, explicit attitudes, and sustainable consumption in supermarket shopping. J. Econ. Psychol. 2016, 55, 77–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yadav, R. Altruistic or egoistic: Which value promotes organic food consumption among young consumers? A study in the context of a developing nation. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2016, 33, 92–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogorevc, M.; Primc, K.; Slabe-Erker, R.; Kalar, B.; Dominko, M.; Murovec, N.; Bartolj, T. Social Feedback Loop in the Organic Food Purchase Decision-Making Process. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bryła, P. The Impact of Consumer Schwartz Values and Regulatory Focus on the Willingness to Pay a Price Premium for Domestic Food Products: Gender Differences. Energies 2021, 14, 6198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grunert, K.G.; Hieke, S.; Wills, J. Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use. Food Policy 2014, 44, 177–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schwartz, S.H. Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 1992, 25, 1–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwartz, S.H.; Cieciuch, J.; Vecchione, M.; Davidov, E.; Fischer, R.; Beierlein, C.; Ramos, A.; Verkasalo, M.; Lönnqvist, J.-E.; Demirutku, K.; et al. Refining the theory of basic individual values. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2012, 103, 663–688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yap, C. Self-Organisation in Urban Community Gardens: Autogestion, Motivations, and the Role of Communication. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, J.; Zhang, G.; Zhao, X.; Sun, L.; Wu, Y. Evaluating the effectiveness of community gardens by a quantitative systematic framework: A study of Saint Louis, Missouri in the United States. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 79, 103676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Basarir, A.; Al Mansouri, N.M.N.; Ahmed, Z.F.R. Householders Attitude, Preferences, and Willingness to Have Home Garden at Time of Pandemics. Horticulturae 2022, 8, 56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vargas, A.M.; de Moura, A.P.; Deliza, R.; Cunha, L.M. The Role of Local Seasonal Foods in Enhancing Sustainable Food Consumption: A Systematic Literature Review. Foods 2021, 10, 2206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bir, C.; Lai, J.; Widmar, N.O.; Thompson, N.; Ellett, J.; Crosslin, C. There’s No Place Like Home: Inquiry into Preferences for Local Foods. J. Food Distrib. Res. 2019, 50, 29–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bir, C.; Widmar, N.O.; Schlesinger-Devlin, E.; Lulay, A. Personal Gardens: Who is Growing Their Own in the US? 2017. Available online: https://www.extension.purdue.edu/extmedia/EC/EC-814-W.pdf (accessed on 12 March 2022).
- de Maya, S.R.; López-López, I.; Munuera, J.L. Organic food consumption in Europe: International segmentation based on value system differences. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70, 1767–1775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sloot, D.; Kutlaca, M.; Medugorac, V.; Carman, P. Recycling Alone or Protesting Together? Values as a Basis for Pro-environmental Social Change Actions. Front. Psychol. 2018, 9, 01229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yue, C.; Gallardo, R.K.; Luby, J.; Rihn, A.; McFerson, J.R.; McCracken, V.; Bedford, D.; Brown, S.; Evans, K.; Weebadde, C.; et al. An Investigation of U.S. Apple Producers’ Trait Prioritization—Evidence from Audience Surveys. HortScience 2013, 48, 1378–1384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Selfa, T.; Jussaume, R.A.; Winter, M. Envisioning agricultural sustainability from field to plate: Comparing producer and consumer attitudes and practices toward ‘environmentally friendly’ food and farming in Washington State, USA. J. Rural Stud. 2008, 24, 262–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Becker, J.; Kennedy, A. American agriculture’s social licence to operate. In Defending the Social Licence of Farming: Issues, Challenges and New Directions for Agriculture; CISRO-Publishing: Collingwood, Australia, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Edwards, P.; Trafford, S. Social licence in New Zealand—What is it? J. R. Soc. N. Z. 2016, 46, 165–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shang, N. “Wearing a mask or not” goes beyond a public health issue in the U.S. Cogent Med. 2021, 8, 1950305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Behe, B.K.; Huddleston, P.T.; Hall, C.R. Gardening Motivations of U.S. Plant Purchasers During the COVID-19 Pandemic. J. Environ. Hortic. 2022, 40, 10–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alton, K.; Ratnieks, F. Can Beekeeping Improve Mental Wellbeing during Times of Crisis? Bee World 2021, 99, 40–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niles, M.T.; Bertmann, F.; Belarmino, E.H.; Wentworth, T.; Biehl, E.; Neff, R. The Early Food Insecurity Impacts of COVID-19. Nutrients 2020, 12, 2096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kinsey, E.W.; Kinsey, D.; Rundle, A.G. COVID-19 and Food Insecurity: An Uneven Patchwork of Responses. J. Urban Health 2020, 97, 332–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoekstra, J.C.; Leeflang, P.S.H. Marketing in the era of COVID-19. Ital. J. Mark. 2020, 2020, 249–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keith, M.G.; Tay, L.; Harms, P.D.; Keith, M.G.; Tay, L.; Harms, P.D. Systems Perspective of Amazon Mechanical Turk for Organizational Research: Review and Recommendations. Front. Psychol. 2017, 8, 1359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goodman, J.K.; Cryder, C.E.; Cheema, A. Data Collection in a Flat World: The Strengths and Weaknesses of Mechanical Turk Samples. J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 2012, 26, 213–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarstedt, M.; Hair, J.F.; Pick, M.; Liengaard, B.D.; Radomir, L.; Ringle, C.M. Progress in partial least squares structural equation modeling use in marketing research in the last decade. Psychol. Mark. 2022, 39, 1035–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindeman, M.; Verkasalo, M. Measuring Values With the Short Schwartz’s Value Survey. J. Pers. Assess. 2005, 85, 170–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manley, S.C.; Hair, J.F.; Williams, R.I.; McDowell, W.C. Essential new PLS-SEM analysis methods for your entrepreneurship analytical toolbox. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2020, 17, 1805–1825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.E.; Hult, G.T.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 3rd ed.; Sage Publications: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.F.; Risher, J.J.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2019, 31, 2–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Henseler, J.; Hair, J.F. On the Emancipation of PLS-SEM: A Commentary on Rigdon (2012). Long Range Plan. 2014, 47, 154–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2011, 19, 139–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diamantopoulos, A. Incorporating Formative Measures into Covariance-Based Structural Equation Models. MIS Q. 2011, 35, 335–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hulland, J. Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strateg. Manag. J. 1999, 20, 195–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chin, W. The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling. In Methodology for Business and Management Modern Methods for Business Research; Marcoulides, G.A., Ed.; Lawence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- U.S. Census Bureau. American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates. 2019. Available online: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/profile?g=0100000US (accessed on 17 May 2022).
- U.S. Census Bureau. Regions. 2019. Available online: https://www.census.gov/popclock/data_tables.php?component=growth (accessed on 17 May 2022).
- Siegner, A.; Sowerwine, J.; Acey, C. Does Urban Agriculture Improve Food Security? Examining the Nexus of Food Access and Distribution of Urban Produced Foods in the United States: A Systematic Review. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jehlička, P.; Daněk, P.; Vávra, J. Rethinking resilience: Home gardening, food sharing and everyday resistance. Can. J. Dev. Stud. 2018, 40, 511–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mori, Y.; Kugel, J.; Krpalek, D.; Javaherian-Dysinger, H.; Gharibvand, L. Occupational Therapy and Therapeutic Horticulture for Women with Cancer and Chronic Pain: A Pilot Study. Open J. Occup. Ther. 2021, 9, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Lu, S.; Tan, L.; Guo, W.; Lown, M.; Hu, X.; Liu, J. Horticultural therapy for general health in the older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0263598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Love, D.C.; Allison, E.H.; Asche, F.; Belton, B.; Cottrell, R.S.; Froehlich, H.E.; Gephart, J.A.; Hicks, C.C.; Little, D.C.; Nussbaumer, E.M.; et al. Emerging COVID-19 impacts, responses, and lessons for building resilience in the seafood system. Glob. Food Secur. 2021, 28, 100494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Luo, S.; Xie, J.; Furuya, K. “We Need such a Space”: Residents’ Motives for Visiting Urban Green Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guimarães, F.; Figueiredo, M.; Rodrigues, J.F. Augmented Reality and Storytelling in heritage application in public gardens: Caloust Gulbenkian Foundation Garden. In Proceedings of the 2015 Digital Heritage, Granada, Spain, 28 September–2 October 2015; pp. 317–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Freq | % | % US Census | |
---|---|---|---|
Age (StDev: 0.940) | |||
18–24 | 18 | 4.7 | 12 |
25–34 | 215 | 56.1 | 18 |
35–44 | 104 | 27.2 | 16 |
45–54 | 27 | 7.0 | 16 |
55–64 | 14 | 3.7 | 17 |
65+ | 5 | 1.3 | 21 |
Total | 383 | 100 | 100 |
Education (StDev: 0.927) | |||
Did not finish high school | 6 | 1.6 | 11 |
Finished high school | 46 | 12.0 | 27 |
Attended university | 40 | 10.4 | 20 |
Bachelor’s degree | 223 | 58.2 | 29 |
Postgraduate degree | 68 | 17.8 | 13 |
Total | 383 | 100 | 100 |
Household Annual Income (StDev: 1.141) | |||
USD0 to USD24,999 | 80 | 20.9 | 18 |
USD25,000 to USD49,999 | 117 | 30.5 | 20 |
USD50,000 to USD74,999 | 119 | 31.1 | 18 |
USD75,000 to USD99,999 | 40 | 10.4 | 13 |
USD100,000 or higher | 27 | 7.0 | 31 |
Total | 383 | 100 | 100 |
Gender (StDev: 0.501) | |||
Male | 196 | 51.2 | 49 |
Female | 187 | 48.8 | 51 |
Total | 383 | 100 | 100 |
Region | |||
Northeast | 83 | 21.7 | 17 |
South | 90 | 23.5 | 38 |
Midwest | 133 | 34.8 | 21 |
West | 77 | 20.1 | 24 |
Total | 383 | 100 | 100 |
Scales and Items | Mean | Std Dev | Factor Loadings | Cronbach’s Alpha | Composite Reliability | Average Variance Extracted |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(a) | ||||||
Schwartz Value: Self-Enhancement | 0.629 | 0.835 | 0.718 | |||
Importance of POWER (social power, authority, wealth) | 4.89 | 1.68 | 0.924 | |||
Importance of ACHIEVEMENT (success, capability, ambition, influence on people and events) | 5.42 | 1.35 | 0.763 | |||
Schwartz Value: Openness to Change | 0.659 | 0.785 | 0.560 | |||
Importance of HEDONISM (gratification of desires, enjoyment in life, self-indulgence) | 5.21 | 1.46 | 0.835 | |||
Importance of STIMULATION (daring, a varied and challenging life, an exciting life) | 5.27 | 1.39 | 0.850 | |||
Importance of SELF-DIRECTION (creativity, freedom, curiosity, independence, choosing one’s own goals) | 5.56 | 1.32 | 0.512 | |||
Schwartz Value: Self-Transcendence | 0.502 | 0.762 | 0.630 | |||
Importance of UNIVERSALISM (broad-mindedness, beauty of nature and arts, social justice, a world at peace, equality, wisdom, unity with nature, environmental protection) | 5.56 | 1.24 | 0.963 | |||
Importance of BENEVOLENCE (helpfulness, honesty, forgiveness, loyalty, responsibility) | 5.51 | 1.30 | 0.576 | |||
Schwartz Value: Conservation | 0.736 | 0.843 | 0.644 | |||
Importance of TRADITION (respect for tradition, humbleness, accepting one’s portion in life, devotion, modesty) | 5.36 | 1.37 | 0.851 | |||
Importance of CONFORMITY (obedience, honoring parents and elders, self-discipline, politeness) | 5.10 | 1.55 | 0.869 | |||
Importance of SECURITY (national security, family security, social order, cleanliness, reciprocation of favors) | 5.66 | 1.12 | 0.672 | |||
(b) | ||||||
Attitudes towards US Growers | 0.839 | 0.876 | 0.503 | |||
US growers have a longstanding tradition and lots of experience in growing sustainable apples | 5.34 | 1.34 | 0.63 | |||
US apple growers contribute to the care and maintenance of the landscape | 5.44 | 1.25 | 0.682 | |||
US apple growers make active contributions to preserve biodiversity | 5.24 | 1.38 | 0.764 | |||
US apple growers treat land resources responsibly | 5.47 | 1.22 | 0.708 | |||
Social pressure on apple growers should be increased as they are the main agents of climate change | 4.98 | 1.55 | 0.743 | |||
Social pressure on apple growers should be increased as they are the main agents of eutrophication | 5.17 | 1.47 | 0.685 | |||
US apple growers are environmentally conscious | 5.32 | 1.37 | 0.745 | |||
Attitudes towards COVID-19 | 0.772 | 0.844 | 0.522 | |||
I feel COVID-19 has changed our culture towards more inequality | 5.04 | 1.53 | 0.837 | |||
I feel COVID-19 has changed how we use technology | 5.63 | 1.20 | 0.588 | |||
I feel COVID-19 has changed our societal structures towards distance | 5.43 | 1.29 | 0.722 | |||
I feel COVID-19 has changed societal processes towards unfairness | 5.32 | 1.35 | 0.722 | |||
I feel COVID-19 has changed our economy towards more instability | 5.37 | 1.36 | 0.723 | |||
(c) | ||||||
Hort Engagement Pre-COVID | 0.954 | 0.961 | 0.731 | |||
Before COVID-19—Growing fruit and vegetables in my own garden | 4.42 | 1.80 | 0.811 | |||
Before COVID-19—Participating in food and seed swaps | 4.40 | 1.93 | 0.884 | |||
Before COVID-19—Reading magazines and books about plants | 4.56 | 1.79 | 0.861 | |||
Before COVID-19—Watching YouTube clips on plant propagation | 4.63 | 1.86 | 0.854 | |||
Before COVID-19—Keeping a high stock of food | 4.63 | 1.63 | 0.766 | |||
Before COVID-19—Making my own bread, jam or juice | 4.54 | 1.84 | 0.850 | |||
Before COVID-19—Brewing wine or beer | 4.06 | 2.05 | 0.884 | |||
Before COVID-19—Keeping bees | 4.17 | 2.09 | 0.877 | |||
Before COVID-19—Participating in food sharing or other sharing opportunities | 4.37 | 2.00 | 0.897 | |||
Hort Engagement Since COVID | 0.938 | 0.948 | 0.671 | |||
Since COVID-19—Growing fruit and vegetables in my own garden | 4.55 | 1.78 | 0.786 | |||
Since COVID-19—Participating in food and seed swaps | 4.40 | 1.94 | 0.870 | |||
Since COVID-19—Reading magazines and books about plants | 4.50 | 1.75 | 0.832 | |||
Since COVID-19—Watching YouTube clips on plant propagation | 4.63 | 1.76 | 0.817 | |||
Since COVID-19—Keeping a high stock of food | 4.79 | 1.56 | 0.653 | |||
Since COVID-19—Making my own bread, jam or juice | 4.60 | 1.83 | 0.799 | |||
Since COVID-19—Brewing wine or beer | 3.97 | 2.01 | 0.873 | |||
Since COVID-19—Keeping bees | 4.17 | 2.04 | 0.838 | |||
Since COVID-19—Participating in food sharing or other sharing opportunities | 4.21 | 1.95 | 0.882 | |||
Grow vs. Buy Fruit Preference Pre-COVID | 0.947 | 0.959 | 0.825 | |||
Before COVID-19, did you prefer buying or growing your own apples and other pip fruit? | 51.78 | 29.99 | 0.914 | |||
Before COVID-19, did you prefer buying or growing your own berries and other soft fruit? | 50.07 | 29.69 | 0.937 | |||
Before COVID-19, did you prefer buying or making your own wine or beer? | 46.18 | 31.97 | 0.891 | |||
Before COVID-19, did you prefer buying or growing your own lemons and other citrus fruit? | 50.88 | 30.87 | 0.914 | |||
Before COVID-19, did you prefer buying or growing your own vegetables? | 59.59 | 29.19 | 0.885 | |||
Grow vs. Buy Fruit Preference Since COVID | 0.945 | 0.958 | 0.820 | |||
Since COVID-19, do you prefer buying or growing your own apples and other pip fruit? | 52.64 | 30.32 | 0.927 | |||
Since COVID-19, do you prefer buying or growing your own berries and other soft fruit? | 51.68 | 29.85 | 0.928 | |||
Since COVID-19, do you prefer buying or making your own wine or beer? | 46.16 | 31.94 | 0.886 | |||
Since COVID-19, do you prefer buying or growing your own lemons and other citrus fruits? | 52.01 | 31.01 | 0.915 | |||
Since COVID-19, do you prefer buying or growing your own vegetables? | 59.78 | 28.77 | 0.871 |
Fornell–Larcker Criterion | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(A) Attitudes towards COVID | 0.723 | |||||||||
(B) Attitudes towards US growers | 0.478 | 0.709 | ||||||||
(C) Conservation | 0.483 | 0.551 | 0.804 | |||||||
(D) Grow/Make vs. Buy Hort Pre-COVID | 0.444 | 0.409 | 0.389 | 0.908 | ||||||
(E) Grow/Make vs. Buy Hort Since COVID | 0.428 | 0.398 | 0.410 | 0.947 | 0.906 | |||||
(F) Hort Engagement Pre-COVID | 0.439 | 0.597 | 0.462 | 0.753 | 0.730 | 0.855 | ||||
(G) Hort Engagement Since COVID | 0.534 | 0.561 | 0.552 | 0.767 | 0.759 | 0.870 | 0.819 | |||
(H) Openness to Change | 0.485 | 0.533 | 0.516 | 0.420 | 0.426 | 0.415 | 0.474 | 0.756 | ||
(I) Self Enhancement | 0.527 | 0.553 | 0.604 | 0.479 | 0.480 | 0.547 | 0.619 | 0.624 | 0.849 | |
(J) Self-Transcendence | 0.413 | 0.384 | 0.499 | 0.128 | 0.159 | 0.152 | 0.251 | 0.510 | 0.325 | 0.810 |
Heterotrait–Monotrait Ratio | ||||||||||
Attitudes towards US growers | 0.599 | |||||||||
Conservation | 0.629 | 0.675 | ||||||||
Grow/Buy Hort Pre-COVID | 0.478 | 0.422 | 0.439 | |||||||
Grow/Buy Hort Since COVID | 0.462 | 0.408 | 0.465 | 1.000 | ||||||
Hort Engagement Pre-COVID | 0.484 | 0.633 | 0.520 | 0.789 | 0.765 | |||||
Hort Engagement Since COVID | 0.604 | 0.603 | 0.640 | 0.809 | 0.801 | 0.915 | ||||
Openness to Change | 0.731 | 0.699 | 0.747 | 0.448 | 0.464 | 0.463 | 0.551 | |||
Self-Enhancement | 0.745 | 0.752 | 0.875 | 0.587 | 0.588 | 0.672 | 0.774 | 0.948 | ||
Self-Transcendence | 0.739 | 0.614 | 0.865 | 0.184 | 0.229 | 0.254 | 0.382 | 1.025 | 0.634 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Rombach, M.; Dean, D.L.; Baird, T.; Kambuta, J. Should I Pay or Should I Grow? Factors Which Influenced the Preferences of US Consumers for Fruit, Vegetables, Wine and Beer during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Foods 2022, 11, 1536. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11111536
Rombach M, Dean DL, Baird T, Kambuta J. Should I Pay or Should I Grow? Factors Which Influenced the Preferences of US Consumers for Fruit, Vegetables, Wine and Beer during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Foods. 2022; 11(11):1536. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11111536
Chicago/Turabian StyleRombach, Meike, David L. Dean, Tim Baird, and Jacob Kambuta. 2022. "Should I Pay or Should I Grow? Factors Which Influenced the Preferences of US Consumers for Fruit, Vegetables, Wine and Beer during the COVID-19 Pandemic" Foods 11, no. 11: 1536. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11111536