Investigation of the Personal, Social, and Economic Factors Influencing Consumers’ Utility in Choosing Milk Packaging, Case Study: Rasht City

Authors
M. Mojaverian
P. Tonakbar
Department of Agricultural Economics, Sari University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resource, Sari, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Abstract
Packaging is considered as one of the sale attractions and motives. The impacts of socio-demographic variables on the customers’ selection procedure are conceptually interesting and have several managerial interests. The present study aimed to identify the effective personal, social, and economic factors in choosing milk packaging type in the Rasht City. To this end, the options were categorized into 4 groups including “milk without packaging”, “bagged milk”, “packet milk” and “bottled milk”. Data were gathered using a questionnaire and some interviews with people. Multinomial Logit Model was used as research method. The results of Hausman test indicated that the 4 groups of milk packaging were independent of each other and, therefore, the nested structure was not required. Results obtained from model estimates showed that age, gender, family size, educational level, and income variables were statistically significant. Among the variables, “family size” negatively affected selection of other alternatives over the reference group (bagged milk), while other variables had positive effect. Finally, marginal effects were calculated for all variables and for each group. After calculating the marginal effects for all variables of each group, it was observed that the dummy variable "gender" had the most marginal effect in packaged milk group.

Keywords

Subjects

1. Ampuero, O. and Vila, N. 2006. Consumer Perceptions of Product Packaging. J. Consum. Manage., B:100-102.
2. Ares, G. and Deliza, R. 2010. Studying the Influence of Package Shape and Color on Consumer Expectations of Milk Desserts Using Word Association and Conjoint Analysis. Food Quality Prefer., 21: 930–937.
3. Bahreini, R., Bahreini, V. and Farashbandi, R. 2013. Investigating the Effect of Packaging Quality on the Behavior of Food Products Consumer from Customers’ Perspective Who Visit the Busher Province Chain Stores. National Conference of Accounting and Management, Shiraz.
4. Balogh, P., Békési, D., Gorton, M., Popp, J. and Lengyel, P. 2016. Consumer Willingness to Pay for Traditional Food Products. Food Policy, 61: 176-184.
5. Becker, L., van Rompay, T. J. L., Schifferstein, H. N. J. and Galetzka, M. 2011. Tough Package, Strong Taste: The Influence of Packaging Design on Taste Impressions and Product Evaluations. Food Quality Prefer., 22: 17–23.
6. Bloch, P. H. 1995. Seeking the Ideal Form: Product Design and Consumer Response. J. Market., 59(3): 16–29.
7. Celik, Y., Bilgic, A., Karli, B. and Celik, S. 2006. Factors Affecting Milk Consumption Pattern in Southern Anatolian Region: An Application of a Two-Stage Econometric Model. Die Bodenkultur, 57(2): 57-64.
8. Charters, S., Lockshin, L. and Unwin, T. 1999. Consumer Responses to Wine Bottle Back Labels. J. Wine Res., 10: 183–195.
9. Dickson, P. R. 1994. Marketing Management. The Dryden Press, Austin.
10. Doaee, H. and Hosseini, Z. 2008. The Role of Marketing Mix Strategy in the Firm's Export Performance (with an Emphasis on Product Mix). J. Commerc. Surveys, 22.
11. Fakayode, S. B., Omotesho, O. A. and Omoniwa, A. E. 2010. Economic Analysis of Rice Consumption Patterns in Nigeria. J. Agr. Sci. Tech., 12: 135-144.
12. Fenko, A., Schifferstein, H. N. J. and Hekkert, P. 2010. Shifts in Sensory Dominance between Various Stages of User-Product Interactions. Appl. Ergonomics, 41: 34–40.
13. Fujimoto, K. 2005. From Women’s College to Work: Inter-Organizational Networks in the Japanese Female Labor Market. Soc. Sci. Res., 34: 651–681.
14. Greene, W.H. 2012. Econometric Analysis. 7th Edition, ISBN: 978-0-13-139538-1, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
15. Gunden, C., Bilgic, A., Miran, B. and Karli, B. 2011. A Censored System of Demand Analysis to Unpacked and Prepackaged Milk Consumption in Turkey. Quality Quantity, 45: 1273-1290.
16. Hausman, J. A. and Mcfadden, D. 1984. Specification Tests for the Multinomial Logit Model. Econometrical, 52: 1219-1240.
17. Kermaninezhad, F., Torabi, Sh., Hamidkhani, P. and Khoubrou, Sh. 2006. Packaging Design in Introduction. Karin Press,Tehran.
18. Kohansal, M. R., and Firoozzare, A. 2013. Applying Multinomial Logit Model for Determining Socio-Economic Factors Affecting Major Choice of Consumers in Food Purchasing: The Case of Mashhad. J. Agr. Sci. Tech., 15: 1307-1317
19. Kraus, A., Annunziata, A. and Vecchio, R. 2017. Sociodemographic Factors Differentiating the Consumer and the Motivations for Functional Food Consumption. J. Am. College Nutr., 36(2): 116–126.
20. Long, J. S. 1997. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. SAGE Publications, Inc. London EC2A 4PU, United Kingdom.
21. Loose, S.M., Peschel, A. and Grebitus, C. 2013. Quantifying Effects of Convenience and Product Packaging on Consumer Preferences and Market Share of Seafood Products: The Case of Oysters. Food Quality Prefer., 28: 492-504.
22. Mohebbi, B. 2014. The Art of Packaging: An Investigation into the Role of Color in Packaging, Marketing, and Branding. Int. J. Organiz. Leadership, 3: 92–102.
23. Mousavi Shahroudi, S. M. 2011. Determination and Prioritization of Factors Influencing the Development of Tile Export in Iran. International Conference on Business and Economic Research, Malasia.
24. Mutsikiwa, M. and Marumbwa, J. 2013. The Impact of Aesthetics Package Design Elements on Consumer Purchase Decisions: A Case of Locally Produced Dairy Products. J. Business Manage.(IOSR-JBM), 8(5): 64–71.
25. Orth, U. R., Campana, D. and Malkewitz, K. 2010. Formation of Consumer Price Expectation Based on Package Design: Attractive and Quality Routes. J. Market. Theory Practice, 18(1): 23–40.
26. Patsula, P. J. 2001. Successful Business Planning 30 Days: A Step-By-Step Guide for Writing a Business Plan and Starting Your Own Business. 3rd Edition, ISBN 0967840236: 3-24, Patsula Media, Portland.
27. Piqueras-Fiszman, B. and Spence, C. 2012. The Weight of the Container Influences Expected Satiety, Perceived Density, and Subsequent Expected Fullness. Appetite, 58(2): 559–562.
28. Rebollar, R., Lidón, I., Serrano, A., Martín, J. and Fernández, M. J. 2012. Influence of Chewing Gum Packaging Design on Consumer Expectation and Willingness to Buy. An Analysis of Functional, Sensory and Experience Attributes. Food Quality Prefer., 24: 162–170.
29. Reimann, M., Zaichkowsky, J., Neuhaus, C., Bender, T. and Weber, B. 2010. Aesthetic Package Design: A Behavioral, Neural, and Psychological Investigation. J. Consum. Psychol., 20(4): 431–441.
30. Romano, K. R., Rosenthal, A. and Deliza, R. 2015. How do Brazilian Consumers Perceive a Non-traditional and Innovative Fruit Juice? An Approach Looking at the Packaging. Food Res. Int.,74: 123-130.
31. Rundh, B. 2005. The Multi-faceted Dimension of Packaging. Marketing Logistic or Marketing Tool? Br. Food J., 107(9): 670–684.
32. Schwab, J.A. 2002. Multinomial Logistic Regression: Basic Relationships and Complete Problems. Http: //www.utexas.edu /courses/ schwab/ sw388r7/.
33. Silayoi, P. and Speece, M. 2007. The Importance of Packaging Attributes: A Conjoint Analysis Approach. Eur. J. Market., 41(11): 1495–1517.
34. Tuorila, H. and Pangborn, R. M. 1988. Prediction of Reported Consumption of Selected Fat-Containing Foods. Appetite, 11(2): 81–95.
35. Yayar, R. 2012. Consumer Characteristics Influencing Milk Consumption Prefrence. The Turkey Case. Theor. Appl. Econ., 7(572): 25-42.
36. Zarebaqiabad, F. and Ayoobi, M. 2013. Investigating the Different Sizes of Packaging and Its Role in Developing Higher Sales in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises. First National MBA Conference, Kerman.
Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology
Volume 20, Issue 4
September and October 2018
Pages 649-659