Rural Ties and Consumption of Rural Provenance Food Products—Evidence from the Customers of Urban Specialty Stores in Portugal
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Urban Specialty Stores Selling Rural Provenance Foods
2.2. Rural Provenance Food Products’ Choice and Consumption
2.3. Rural Ties as Explaining Consumers’ Food Choices
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Data Collection
3.2. Data Analysis
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Sample Profile
4.2. Rural Provenance Food Products Acquired, Motivations and Images
4.2.1. Type of Products
4.2.2. Acquisition and Consumption Motivations
4.2.3. Images about Products and Rural Areas of Provenance
4.2.4. Rural Ties as Determinants of Food Choice
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Features | 1 Less important | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 More important |
That they are produced in Portugal | |||||
If they look good | |||||
That they are local | |||||
Having a fair price | |||||
If they are fresh produce | |||||
If they are officially certified (PDO, IGP, Organic…) | |||||
To know the producers | |||||
To know the products’ brands | |||||
To know the products already | |||||
If they have been recommended by friends and/or family | |||||
If they are small-scale produced | |||||
To be produced in Portuguese rural areas | |||||
The fact that I can buy the products in my residency area | |||||
Being advertised on mass media/ social media | |||||
That they are healthier | |||||
To trust in the store and in its specialized costumer service | |||||
To support Portuguese agriculture and rural areas | |||||
Their nutritional information | |||||
If their production carries a low environmental impact |
- 8.1. Cultural visits (monuments, historical villages) |_|
- 8.2. Participate in cultural and/or religious events (festivals, traditional festivities, pilgrimages) |_|
- 8.3. Nature Tourism activities (local fauna and flora watching, visiting protected areas) |_|
- 8.4. Taste local gastronomy and wines, including thematic routes (wine, chestnut) |_|
- 8.5. Hunting and/ or fishing |_|
- 8.6. Buy food products locally produced |_|
- 8.7. Buy handicraft locally made |_|
- 8.8. Participate in local traditional economic activities (grape harvest, crop harvest) |_|
- 8.9. Visiting relatives |_|
- 8.10. Other |_| Which other?_____________________________________________________________________________
References
- Silva, A.; Figueiredo, E.; Truninger, M.; Eusébio, C.; Forte, T. A typology of urban specialty shops selling rural provenance food products—A contribution from Portugal. Br. Food J. 2021, 123, 3902–3917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bianchi, C. Exploring urban consumers’ attitudes and intentions to purchase local food in Chile. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2017, 23, 553–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Figueiredo, E. Rural Provenance Food as Cultural Heritage—A way of promoting rural attractiveness and development? In Handbook of Research on Cultural Heritage and Its Impact on Territory Innovation and Development; Oliveira, L., Amaro, A.C., Melro, A., Eds.; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2021; pp. 114–137. [Google Scholar]
- Fonte, M. Knowledge, Food and Place. A Way of Producing, a Way of Knowing. Sociol. Rural. 2008, 48, 200–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kneafsey, M.; Venn, L.; Bos, E. Consuming Rural Connections: Tracing Leeks Back to Their Roots. In Transforming the Rural: Global Processes and Local Futures (Research in Rural Sociology and Development); Miele, M., Higgins, V., Bjorkhaug, H., Truninger, M., Eds.; Emerald: Bingley, UK, 2017; pp. 197–220. [Google Scholar]
- Mayer, H.; Habersetzer, A.; Meili, R. Rural-Urban Linkages and Unsustainable Regional Development: The Role of Entrepreneurs in Linking Peripheries and Centres. Sustainability 2016, 8, 745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bessière, J.; Tibère, L. Traditional food and tourism: French tourist experience and food heritage in rural spaces. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2013, 93, 3420–3425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sims, R. Food, place and authenticity: Local food and the sustainable tourism experience. J. Sustain. Tour. 2009, 17, 321–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meah, A.; Watson, M. Cooking up consumer anxieties about ‘provenance’ and ‘ethics’. Food Cult. Soc. 2013, 16, 495–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Truninger, M. O Campo vem à Cidade? Agricultura Biológica, Mercado e Consumo Sustentável; Imprensa de Ciências Sociais: Lisbon, Portugal, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Fonte, M.; Papadopoulos, A.G. (Eds.) Naming Food after Places—Food Relocalisation and Knowledge Dynamics in Rural Development; Ashgate: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Gangjee, D.S. Proving provenance? Geographical indications certification and its ambiguities. World Dev. 2017, 98, 12–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowen, S.; Master, K. New rural livelihoods or museums of production. Quality food initiatives in practice. J. Rural. Stud. 2011, 27, 73–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, E.J.; Russo, J.E. Product familiarity and learning new information. J. Consum. Res. 1984, 11, 542–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seo, S.; Kim, O.; Sumin, O.; Yun, N. Influence of informational and experiential familiarity on image of local foods. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2013, 34, 295–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernández-Ferrín, P.; Calvo-Turrientes, A.; Bande, B.; Artaraz-Minón, M.; Galán-Ladero, M. The valuation and purchase of food products that combine local, regional and traditional features: The influence of consumer ethnocentrism. Food Qual. Prefer. 2018, 64, 138–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ribeiro, J.D.; Figueiredo, E.; Soares da Silva, D. Ligações familiares–o consumo de produtos agroalimentares locais em meio urbano: O caso de Aveiro. AEEA (Orgs). In Proceedings of X CIER—Colóquio Ibérico de Estudios Rurales; Universidad de Palencia: Palencia, Spain, 2014; pp. 79–84. [Google Scholar]
- Casini, L.; Contini, C.; Romano, C.; Scozzafava, G. New trends in food choice: What impact on sustainability of rural areas? Agric. Agric. Sci. Procedia 2016, 8, 141–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Reid, J.; Rout, M. Getting to know your food: The insights of indigenous thinking in food provenance. Agric. Hum. Values 2016, 33, 427–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tamagnini, V.; Tregear, A. An assessment of niche marketing opportunities in the delicatessen meat sector. Br. Food J. 1998, 100, 228–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mapes, G. Marketing elite authenticity: Tradition and terroir in artisanal food discourse. Discouse Context Media 2020, 34, 100328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haugun, M.; Grande, J. The role of marketing in local food networks. Intr. J. Food Syst. Dyn. 2017, 81, 1–13. [Google Scholar]
- Sheth, J.N.; Newman, B.E.; Gross, B.L. Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. J. Bus. Res. 1991, 22, 159–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sidali, K.; Obermowe, T.; Filaretiva, O.; Spiller, A. Sensory marketing: Evidence from a cluster analysis of German consumers. Rev. Eletrónica Em Gestão Educ. E Tecnol. Ambient. 2013, 11, 2448–2461. [Google Scholar]
- Asioli, D.; Canavari, M.; Castellini, A.; Magistris, T.; Gottardi, F.; Lombardi, P.; Pignatti, E.; Spadoni, R. The role of sensory attributes in marketing organic food: Findings from a qualitative study of Italian consumers. J. Food Distrib. Res. 2011, 42, 16–21. [Google Scholar]
- Bryla, P. Organic food consumption in Poland: Motives and barriers. Appetite 2016, 105, 737–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Castellini, G.; Savarese, M.M.; Castiglioni, C.; Graffigna, G. Organic food consumption in Italy: The role of subjective relevance of food as mediator between organic food choice motivation and frequency of organic food consumption. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Von Meyer-Höfer, M.; Von der Wense, V.; Spiller, A. Characterising convinced sustainable food consumers. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 1082–1104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, H.; Lee, S. Applying effective sensory marketing to sustainable coffee shop business management. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6430. [Google Scholar]
- Montanari, M. Food is Culture; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Kushwah, S.; Dhir, A.; Sagar, M.; Gupta, B. Determinants of organic food consumption. A systematic literature review on motives and barriers. Appetite 2019, 143, 104402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Camillo, A.; Di Pietro, L. Creating competitive advantage for calabrian-made products: The influences of culture and price perception. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2015, 21, 44–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jansen, M. Determinants of organic food purchases: Evidence from household panel data. Food Qual. Prefer. 2018, 68, 19–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barska, A.; Solis, J.E. Consumers and local food products: A perspective for developing online shopping for local goods in Poland. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carolan, M. Big data and food retail: Nudging out citizens by creating dependent consumers. Geoforum 2018, 90, 142–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toften, K.; Hammervoll, T. Niche marketing research: Status and challenges. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2013, 31, 272–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uusitalo, O. Consumer perceptions of grocery retail formats and brands. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2001, 29, 214–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, K.; Cheong, Y.; Zheng, L. The current practices in food advertising: The usage and effectiveness of different advertising claims. Int. J. Advert. Rev. Mark. Commun. 2009, 28, 527–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Birch, D.; Memery, J.; Kanakaratne, M.S. The mindful consumer: Balancing egoistic and altruistic motivations to purchase local food. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2018, 40, 221–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andersson, H. Nature, nationalism and neoliberalism on food packaging: The case of Sweden. Discourse Context Media 2020, 34, 2–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Memery, J.; Angell, R.; Megicks, P.; Lindgreen, A. Unpicking motives to purchase locally produced food: Analysis of direct and moderation effects. Eur. J. Mark. 2015, 49 (7/8), 1207–1232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DuPuis, E.; Goodman, D. Should we go home to eat? Toward a reflexive politics of localism. J. Rural. Stud. 2005, 21, 359–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bryla, P. The role of appeals to tradition in origin food marketing. A survey among Polish consumers. Appetite 2015, 91, 302–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lusk, J.; Briggeman, B. Food values. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2009, 91, 184–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lacoeuilhe, J.; Louis, D.; Lombart, C. Impacts of product, store and retailer perceptions on consumers’ relationship to terroir store brand. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 39, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castelló, E.; Mihelj, S. Selling and consuming the nation: Understanding consumer nationalism. J. Consum. Cult. 2018, 18, 558–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hughner, R.S.; McDonagh, P.; Prothero, A.; Shultz, C.J.; Stanton, J. Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review of why people purchase organic food. J. Consum. Behav. Int. Res. Rev. 2007, 6, 94–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amilien, V.; Fort, F.; Ferrás, N. Hyper-real territories and urban markets: Changing conventions for local food–case studies from France and Norway. Anthropol. Food 2007. Available online: https://aof.revues.org/446 (accessed on 21 December 2021). [CrossRef]
- Bardone, E.; Spalvena, A. European Union food quality schemes and the transformation of traditional foods into European products in Latvia and Estonia. Appetite 2019, 132, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sedikides, C.; Wildschut, T.; Arndt, J.; Routlege, C. Nostalgia. Past, present, and future. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2008, 17, 304–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guerrero, L.; Guàrdia, M.D.; Xicola, J.; Verbeke, W.; Vanhonacker, F.; Zakowska-Biemans, S.; Sajdakowska, M.; Sulmont-Rossé, C.; Issanchou, S.; Contel, M.; et al. Consumer-driven definition of traditional food products and innovative in traditional foods. A qualitative cross-cultural study. Apettite 2009, 52, 345–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bessière, J. Local development and heritage: Traditional food and cuisine as tourist attractions in rural areas. Sociol. Rural. 1998, 38, 21–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soares da Silva, D.; Figueiredo, E.; Eusébio, C.; Carneiro, M.J. The countryside is worth a thousand words—Portuguese representations on rural areas. J. Rural. Stud. 2016, 44, 77–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Figueiredo, E. Imagine There’s No Rural: The Transformation of Rural Spaces into Places of Nature Conservation in Portugal. Eur. Urban Reg. Stud. 2008, 15, 159–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Profile | Total | Consumption of Traditional Food Products of Portuguese Rural Origin * | Chi-Square Test | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | % | Consume Frequently | Does not Consume Frequently | Value | p-Value | |
(n = 1175, 76.1%) | (n = 369, 23.9%) | |||||
Gender | ||||||
Male | 756 | 49.1 | 50.2% | 45.5% | 2.420 | 0.120 |
Female | 785 | 50.9 | 49.8% | 54.5% | ||
Age | ||||||
Less than 25 | 101 | 6.5 | 5.6% | 9.5% | ||
[25–64] | 1133 | 73.4 | 73.4% | 73.4% | 8.603 | 0.014 |
More than 64 | 310 | 20.1 | 21.0% | 17.1% | ||
Marital status | ||||||
Single | 428 | 27.9 | 27.7% | 28.5% | ||
Married/Cohabiting | 927 | 60.4 | 60.1% | 61.1% | 1.567 | 0.667 |
Divorced | 109 | 7.1 | 7.2% | 6.8% | ||
Widowed | 72 | 4.7 | 5.1% | 3.5% | ||
Education level | ||||||
Less than secondary education | 425 | 27.7 | 27.8% | 27.4% | ||
Secondary education | 332 | 21.7 | 20.9% | 24.2% | 1.899 | 0.387 |
Higher education | 775 | 50.6 | 51.3% | 48.4% | ||
Economic status | ||||||
Employed | 965 | 62.7 | 62.5% | 63.6% | ||
Student | 103 | 6.7 | 6.1% | 8.7% | ||
Retired | 339 | 22.0 | 22.6% | 20.1% | 4.311 | 0.366 |
Unemployed | 101 | 6.6 | 6.8% | 5.7% | ||
Other | 30 | 2.0 | 2.0% | 1.9% | ||
Nationality | ||||||
Portuguese | 1166 | 75.8 | 78.5% | 67.1% | 19.680 | 0.000 |
Non-Portuguese | 373 | 24.2 | 21.4% | 32.9% | ||
Monthly household income | ||||||
Less than 1000 € | 445 | 40.6 | 39.1% | 45.4% | ||
[1001–2200 €] | 390 | 35.6 | 37.5% | 29.8% | 5.863 | 0.118 |
[2201–3000 €] | 97 | 8.9 | 9.0% | 8.4% | ||
More than 3000 € | 163 | 14.9 | 14.4% | 16.4% |
Products bought | Total | Consumption of Traditional Food Products of Portuguese Rural Origin * | Chi-Square Test | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | % | Consume Frequently | Does not Consume Frequently | Value | p-Value | |
(n = 1175, 76.1%) | (n = 369, 23.9%) | |||||
Type of products ** | ||||||
Wine and other beverages | 463 | 30.3 | 30.2% | 30.7% | 0.034 | 0.853 |
Cheese and other milk derivatives | 335 | 21.9 | 23.0% | 18.8% | 2.878 | 0.090 |
Cured meat and other animal-based products | 326 | 21.3 | 21.3% | 21.5% | 0.004 | 0.945 |
Vegetables, fruits, and derivates | 300 | 19.6 | 20.9% | 15.5% | 5.277 | 0.022 |
Sweets | 170 | 11.1 | 10.0% | 14.7% | 6.145 | 0.013 |
Bread and cereal products | 157 | 10.3 | 10.4% | 9.8% | 0.131 | 0.718 |
Honey, jams, and preserves | 104 | 6.8 | 6.6% | 7.6% | 0.486 | 0.486 |
Olive oil | 100 | 6.5 | 7.1% | 4.9% | 2.176 | 0.140 |
Crafts and similar products | 32 | 2.1 | 2.0% | 2.4% | 0.290 | 0.591 |
Hygiene, cosmetics, and similar products | 26 | 1.7 | 1.2% | 3.3% | 7.033 | 0.008 |
Origin—Agricultural regions ** | ||||||
Trás-os-Montes | 598 | 41.8 | 42.5% | 39.6% | 0.984 | 0.321 |
Beira Interior | 398 | 27.8 | 26.6% | 31.5% | 3.204 | 0.073 |
Alentejo | 235 | 16.4 | 17.0% | 14.8% | 0.961 | 0.327 |
Entre Douro e Minho | 228 | 15.9 | 16.0% | 15.6% | 0.040 | 0.842 |
Beira Litoral | 138 | 9.6 | 8.7% | 12.5% | 4.597 | 0.032 |
Ribatejo e Oeste | 84 | 5.9 | 5.9% | 5.8% | 0.000 | 0.985 |
Algarve | 10.00 | 0.70 | 0.01 | 0.01 | (a) |
Reasons to Buy Portuguese Rural Food Products * | Total | Consumption of Traditional Food Products of Portuguese Rural Origin * | T-Test | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | Mean | Consume Frequently | Does not Consume Frequently | Value | p-Value | |
(n = 1175, 76.1%) | (n = 369, 23.9%) | |||||
Mean | Mean | |||||
That they are produced in Portugal | 1553 | 4.25 | 4.34 | 3.98 | 6.782 | 0.000 |
If they look good | 1552 | 4.09 | 4.08 | 4.11 | −0.503 | 0.615 |
That they are local | 1475 | 4.12 | 4.14 | 4.07 | 1.353 | 0.176 |
Having a fair price | 1553 | 4.19 | 4.23 | 4.07 | 2.895 | 0.004 |
If they taste better | 1552 | 4.34 | 4.38 | 4.22 | 3.172 | 0.002 |
If they are fresh produce | 1552 | 4.18 | 4.20 | 4.12 | 1.431 | 0.153 |
If they are officially certified (PDO, IGP, Organic…) | 1551 | 3.50 | 3.52 | 3.43 | 1.304 | 0.193 |
To know the producers | 1551 | 3.47 | 3.51 | 3.32 | 2.831 | 0.005 |
To know the products’ brands | 1550 | 3.50 | 3.52 | 3.44 | 1.254 | 0.210 |
To know the products already | 1549 | 3.64 | 3.66 | 3.56 | 1.566 | 0.118 |
If they have been recommended by friends and/or family | 1551 | 3.78 | 3.78 | 3.78 | 0.104 | 0.917 |
If they are small-scale produced | 1549 | 3.83 | 3.87 | 3.75 | 1.865 | 0.062 |
To be produced in Portuguese rural areas | 1550 | 3.96 | 4.02 | 3.80 | 3.532 | 0.000 |
The fact that I can buy the products in my residence area | 1544 | 3.64 | 3.73 | 3.35 | 4.969 | 0.000 |
Being advertised on mass media/ social media | 1550 | 3.18 | 3.13 | 3.38 | −3.229 | 0.001 |
That they are healthier | 1549 | 3.92 | 3.98 | 3.74 | 3.856 | 0.000 |
To trust in the store and in its specialized costumer service | 1549 | 4.02 | 4.10 | 3.79 | 5.106 | 0.000 |
To support Portuguese agriculture and rural areas | 1551 | 4.11 | 4.16 | 3.94 | 3.631 | 0.000 |
Their nutritional information | 1548 | 3.79 | 3.81 | 3.73 | 1.202 | 0.230 |
If their production carries a low environmental impact | 1552 | 3.95 | 3.98 | 3.85 | 1.870 | 0.062 |
Image of Portuguese Rural Areas | Total | Consumption of Traditional Food Products of Portuguese Rural Origin * | Chi-Square Test | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | % | Consume Frequently | Does not Consume Frequently | Value | p-Value | |
(n = 1175, 76.1%) | (n = 369, 23.9%) | |||||
Words related to rural Areas ** | ||||||
Gaze, tranquility, and well-being | 571 | 37.0 | 36.3% | 39.3% | 1.068 | 0.301 |
Environment and natural elements | 461 | 29.9 | 29.3% | 31.7% | 0.759 | 0.384 |
Farming | 270 | 17.5 | 18.2% | 15.4% | 1.429 | 0.232 |
Abandonment, isolation, and ageing | 254 | 16.5 | 15.2% | 20.6% | 5.996 | 0.014 |
Roots and nostalgia | 246 | 16.0 | 15.9% | 16.3% | 0.034 | 0.854 |
Authentic, traditional, and unique | 233 | 15.1 | 15.7% | 13.3% | 1.268 | 0.260 |
Places, villages, and ways of life | 206 | 13.4 | 13.2% | 13.8% | 0.089 | 0.765 |
Food products and characteristics | 184 | 11.9 | 13.0% | 8.7% | 4.907 | 0.027 |
Undeveloped and problematic | 83 | 5.4 | 5.0% | 6.5% | 1.198 | 0.274 |
Growth and diversity | 50 | 3.2 | 3.6% | 2.2% | 1.785 | 0.182 |
Image of Portuguese Rural food Products | Total | Consumption of Traditional Food Products of Portuguese Rural Origin * | Chi-Square Test | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | % | Consume Frequently | Does not Consume Frequently | Value | p-Value | |
(n = 1175, 76.1%) | (n = 369, 23.9%) | |||||
Words related to rural food products ** | ||||||
General quality | 329 | 21.8 | 21.2% | 23.8% | 1.081 | 0.298 |
Sensorial features of products | 312 | 20.7 | 19.9% | 23.2% | 1.892 | 0.169 |
Meat and animal-based products | 297 | 19.7 | 19.3% | 21.0% | 0.551 | 0.458 |
Cheese and other milk derivates | 252 | 16.7 | 16.9% | 16.1% | 0.121 | 0.728 |
Hand-made, traditional, experience and know-how | 180 | 11.9 | 11.2% | 14.2% | 2.372 | 0.142 |
Vegetables cereals and fruits | 178 | 11.8 | 11.9% | 11.5% | 0.050 | 0.823 |
Distinction and authenticity | 177 | 11.7 | 11.5% | 12.6% | 0.322 | 0.570 |
Nature/environment/sustainability | 174 | 11.5 | 10.9% | 13.4% | 1.620 | 0.203 |
Wine | 144 | 9.5 | 9.6% | 9.3% | 0.038 | 0.846 |
Farmers and farming | 112 | 7.4 | 8.1% | 5.2% | 3.514 | 0.061 |
Honey, jams, and sweets | 76 | 5.0 | 4.7% | 6.0% | 0.952 | 0.329 |
Family/nostalgia | 74 | 4.9 | 5.4% | 3.3% | 2.747 | 0.097 |
Freshness | 59 | 3.9 | 3.9% | 3.8% | 0.010 | 0.921 |
Organic | 55 | 3.6 | 4.0% | 2.5% | 1.942 | 0.163 |
Selection/monotony | 52 | 3.4 | 3.9% | 1.9% | 3.424 | 0.064 |
Regional, local, from specific places | 47 | 3.1 | 3.6% | 1.6% | 3.493 | 0.062 |
Trustworthy | 33 | 2.2 | 1.8% | 3.6% | 4.198 | 0.040 |
Gastronomy and cuisine | 29 | 1.9 | 2.2% | 1.1% | 1.766 | 0.184 |
National character | 22 | 1.5 | 1.6% | 1.1% | 0.450 | 0.502 |
Chemically free/healthy | 21 | 4.7 | 4.9% | 4.1% | 0.401 | 0.527 |
Price | 12 | 0.8 | 1.0% | 0.3% | (a) |
Familiarity with Rural Areas | Total | Consumption of Traditional Food Products of Portuguese Rural Origin * | Chi-Square Test | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | % | Consume Frequently | Does not Consume Frequently | Value | p-Value | |
(n = 1175, 76.1%) | (n = 369, 23.9%) | |||||
Relatives living in Portuguese rural areas | ||||||
Yes | 775 | 50.4 | 52.1% | 44.7% | 6.180 | 0.013 |
No | 764 | 49.6 | 47.9% | 55.3% | ||
Visited rural areas in the last three years | ||||||
Yes | 936 | 60.7 | 63.7% | 51.2% | 18.278 | 0.000 |
No | 606 | 39.3 | 36.3% | 48.8% | ||
Visited relatives in rural areas in the last three years | ||||||
Yes | 396 | 25.6 | 28.0% | 18.2% | 14.266 | 0.000 |
No | 1148 | 74.4 | 72.0% | 81.8% | ||
Visited rural areas to taste local gastronomy and wines | ||||||
Yes | 767 | 49.7 | 51.8% | 42.8% | 9.122 | 0.003 |
No | 777 | 50.3 | 48.2% | 57.2% | ||
Visited rural areas to buy food products | ||||||
Yes | 566 | 36.7 | 38.9% | 29.5% | 10.582 | 0.001 |
No | 978 | 63.3 | 61.1% | 70.5% | ||
Visited rural areas to buy handicraft | ||||||
Yes | 501 | 32.4 | 32.3% | 33.1% | 0.083 | 0.773 |
No | 1043 | 67.6 | 67.7% | 66.9% | ||
Visited rural areas to participate in local traditional economic activities | ||||||
Yes | 228 | 14.8 | 16.0% | 10.8% | 5.940 | 0.015 |
No | 1316 | 85.2 | 84.0% | 89.2% |
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
Figueiredo, E.; Forte, T.; Eusébio, C.; Silva, A.; Couto, J. Rural Ties and Consumption of Rural Provenance Food Products—Evidence from the Customers of Urban Specialty Stores in Portugal. Foods 2022, 11, 547. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11040547
Figueiredo E, Forte T, Eusébio C, Silva A, Couto J. Rural Ties and Consumption of Rural Provenance Food Products—Evidence from the Customers of Urban Specialty Stores in Portugal. Foods. 2022; 11(4):547. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11040547
Chicago/Turabian StyleFigueiredo, Elisabete, Teresa Forte, Celeste Eusébio, Alexandre Silva, and Joana Couto. 2022. "Rural Ties and Consumption of Rural Provenance Food Products—Evidence from the Customers of Urban Specialty Stores in Portugal" Foods 11, no. 4: 547. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11040547