Consumer preferences for eco-labels on seafood products An ... · CONSUMER PREFERENCES FOR...

CONSUMER PREFERENCES FOR ECO-LABELS ON SEAFOOD PRODUCTS

Exposé: Bachelor Thesis

Consumer preferences for eco-labels on seafood products – An empirical study of

consumer choice and the influence of eco-labels with regard to wild and farmed

seafood

Katharina Lange

BA – English and American Culture and Business Studies

Universität Kassel


Abstract:

Do consumers have preferences towards the specific eco-label that comes with a

seafood product or are other factors relevant for their choice? The research

conducted within the scope of this bachelor’s thesis, investigates consumer

preferences of a variety of eco-labels pleading for and supporting ecologically friendly

and sustainable production and process methods of seafood and aims to find out

how these preferences occur. It is assumed that consumers do have label-specific

preferences which will be dissected in the course of the study. Based on previous

findings of influencing factors of consumer preferences towards green products and

eco-labels, the underlying influences for consumer preferences of eco-labels on

seafood products and their formation will be investigated by conducting an online

survey in the form of a choice-based conjoint-analysis (CBCA). This method enables

participants to choose between alternatives and find out more about interrelating

factors. Results indicate that label-specific preferences can be attributed to

consumers’ propensity to buy wild fish rather than farmed fish but that the gap in-

between wild and farmed seafood can be minimized when additionally the product is

organic. The results can help businesses to find more effective ways to improve and

market their products and may be used for further research in this field. Moreover,

labeling organizations can benefit from the insights and make labels more

comprehensive for possible customers.

Keywords: Eco-labels, sustainable seafood, consumer behavior, consumer

preferences,

green consumption


Introduction:

According to the European Commission (2009), one of the major challenges of

today’s society is to keep the economy growing while being less demanding of the

environment by developing sustainable and efficient production methods that are less

wasteful and more eco-friendly.

Due to the rising awareness of the detrimental effects that selfish consumption

patterns can have on our social and ecological environment, the topic of

sustainability and ecological as well as ethical consumption have been becoming

inevitable over the past years and are a major issue that today’s society and

economy have to address and deal with.

Climate change, environmental pollution and destruction, dubious and unfair

labor conditions, overfished seas, etc. are all concomitants of unsustainable

consumption that are caused and intensified by consumers all around the globe. For

a long time, the majority of consumers did not necessarily place a great deal of

importance on the issue of sustainability and ecological as well as ethical aspects of

consumption. The availability and cost of purchased goods, for example, are often

their main concerns. Additionally, being able to consume products independent of the

season or country of origin, has become a convenience for many. Yet, many

products contain material or are produced under circumstances which are hazardous

to the environment and support production and process methods that are wasteful,

unethical and anti-social.

While modern technology makes it possible to spread news via a variety of

tools, information has never been as accessible and reached recipients as rapidly as

today. People have the ability to gather information about topics they are interested


in, instead of merely relying on news agencies to provide them with input. Therefore

news can go viral at a much higher speed and reach a wider audience than ever

before.

Since, quite frequently, over the past years, more and more private or public

institutions, public characters, and individuals etc. have appealed to the general

public as well as businesses worldwide, to reassess their consumption patterns and

production methods, as some of them have been heavily criticized, the awareness of

these and similar issues has increased. In fact, the growing amount of information

revealed about these concerns and possible future threats have spawned the

urgency to act and have motivated consumers to take the impact of their

irresponsible consumption patterns into consideration, question their behavior and

adopt more social, sustainable, and ethical lifestyles.

Hence, green and ethical products have been penetrating the market. While

during the 1960s this was found to be rather peculiar, over the past decades it has

become apparent that the demand for eco-friendly and sustainable products has

been shifting towards a broader consumer segment and has now reached the

general market (Wenzel et al. 2008). In fact, collected data show that the majority of

respondents are willing to purchase greener products (O’Rourke & Ringer 2015) and

Gu et al. (2014) point out that “[…] there is a growing trend to incorporate socially

responsible considerations into purchasing decisions” (p.1)..

In order to market green products, companies utilize specific marketing tools

that inform buyers about the product’s effect on the environment. Eco-labels, which

are seals attached to the product that indicate its origin or contribution to

sustainability, are one marketing method that I will take a closer look at in the course

of this work.

Especially the problem of overfishing and its impacts on ocean health, causing


depletion of fish-stocks and degradation of marine biodiversity and marine eco-

systems, is an issue that requires invariable attention. Not only because the well-

being of marine life is at stake but also because this problem reaches much further,

threatening not only the environment but also the ever growing world population

which exerts an enormous amount of pressure on it. With this in mind, I will

investigate the effects of eco-labels on consumers.

In the following I will establish a framework that, given the issue of

unsustainable seafood production, will be based on explanations and concepts of

ecological consumer behavior with regard to the strategy of eco-labeling and its

impacts on consumer choice.

Consumerism/ Consumer behavior:

Consumerism is the driving force of a capitalistic economy, “a moral doctrine in

developed countries”, or “an ideology of conspicuous consumption” (Dermody, 2011,

p.86) some might even say. But this “narcissistic, nihilistic” (p.86) behavior has

undergone changes.

Statistics suggest that most of the witnessed ecological side effects such as

climate change and environmental pollution are caused by humans (Dermody 2011,

p.85), more specifically, unsustainable consumption patterns. The rising awareness

of these issues among consumers and increased information intake have therefore

acted as initiators of the trend towards green and sustainable consumerism (it has

also been named ‘ethical- or green political consumerism’ e.g by Boström &

Klintman, 2008).

The terms can be used interchangeably and denominate consumer behavior that


aims at consuming products that are less harmful to the environment than

conventional products and generally the notion of adopting more pro-social and

environmental consumption patterns (Pinto et al. 2014; Connolly & Pothero, 2008).

‘Green consumers’ are people who are “aware of [their] obligation[s] to protect the

environment by selectively purchasing green products or services” (Roy 2011,

p.193). These consumers are concerned about the impacts of their consumption on

the environment and society and are therefore considerate of making responsible

buying decisions (Gu et al. 2014). Hansen and Schrader (2004) suggest that the

reachability of a sustainable development is highly dependent on the sustainability of

consumption. It is also said that green consumers still act in order to satisfy their

universal needs but that ecological and social, instead of conventional, motives now

additionally play a role for purchasing goods (Hansen & Schrader, 2004, p.342;

Ottmann 2011). Nevertheless, inconsistencies of whether the labeled product is

purchased due to “altruistic” or “selfish” reasons (Michaud, Llerena, & Joly,

2013,p.313) prevail. Michaud et al. (2013) argue that both, private and public factors

motivate a consumer’s choice.

The way people think and act has a direct influence on their own consumption

behavior and surroundings. But it goes further. Not only do consumers’ choices

influence their direct environment, entire supply-chains and economies are affected

which subsequently leads back to the consumer. In fact, according to Hansen and

Schrader (2004) the green consumer takes different roles at the same time – buyer,

user, and recycler. By adopting these roles the consumer determines the extent of

sustainable development (p.342 f.). Dermody (2011) summarizes: “Consumers act as

interpretive agents who, in creating meaning from their consumerism, play,

individually and collectively, within a spectrum ranging from acceptance to

(pseudo)rejection of the dominant identity and lifestyle images conveyed by


advertising and mass media, and for many, are willingly seduced by these images”

(p.87).

In short, consumers follow the behavior of what the majority is doing and are thereby

influenced by the media. This shows that consumers play a central and crucial role in

the buying process.

The role of businesses:

Corporate actions follow general objectives that companies establish as a

framework to operate and take them into account when considering various tools and

strategic methods to make decisions (Decker, Kroll, Meißner, & Wagner, 2015).

Therefore, businesses and manufacturers as well can be held accountable for

negative environmental impacts such as climate change or the enormous waste of

resources, dubious labor conditions, or irresponsible production methods etc. if their

goals do not involve environmental aspects. For companies, ecological and economic

goals are harder to stipulate and some fear that pursuing one might interfere with and

inhibit others, for example losing profits due to additional costs connected to using

alternative sustainable resources, making innovations, and efforts to allow traceability

of their sourced products and material. The relative importance companies assign to

their goals can thus lead them to neglect those that seem to be less important.

However, the increasing demand for greener products poses a crucial task to

businesses and manufacturers alike. Today, more than ever, consumers tend to

question their own consumption behavior, due to the rising awareness of negative

ecological effects. Therefore, instead of thoughtlessly buying products that merely

serve the function of satisfying basic needs, modern consumers demand more of the

product they buy. They specifically look for attributes like transparency along supply

chains, fair labor conditions, sustainability and eco-friendliness. Therefore, corporate


actions have to entail more than just promising the largest profit or the biggest market

share to a company. While these factors are still important, as they keep companies

alive and liquid, listening and responding to consumers’ wishes is just as pivotal.

Mansvelt (2010) underlines that “[m]uch of the visible work of shaping green

consumerism is undertaken by agents (everything from firms to charities, activist

groups, and individuals) keen to reveal the connections between producers and

consumers by focusing on the material connection along commodity chains and

networks, and in linking the symbolic meaning of commodity production and

consumption to notions of knowledge, ethicality, fairness, and transparency” (ix).

The role of marketing/ Green marketing:

The role that marketing takes with regard to green consumption is

indispensible. As Decker et al. (2015) point out, strategic marketing aims at

implementing a company’s business plan with a target-oriented approach. This

includes using market opportunities with the consideration of a company’s resources

and goals to be met. Green marketing specializes on promoting products that reduce

negative impacts on the environment and communicate company sustainable actions

(Schroth, Helfer & Gonshorek 2011). Ottman (2011) points out that green marketing

can provide “far-reaching business opportunities” (p.15) and says that these practices

not only improve a company’s image but can consequently pledge higher profits and

“enhance corporate equity” (p.18) while doing good to the society and environment.

Especially with regard to sensitive topics such as environmental impacts,

corporate reputation, identity and company image are crucial attributes for a

company as customers use this knowledge to help make their decisions about

alternating products (Falkenreck, 2010). Falkenreck (2010) emphasizes that “image


is able to replace the missing information about a product if the brand is known”

(pp.31-32). These interrelating attributes can add to a company’s perceived

trustworthiness and be valuable for companies who want to keep their customers and

address new ones.

Today, customers are much more sensitive and amenable to any kind of news.

Thanks to modern technology and social media, news are spreading faster and

further which makes companies all the more susceptible to negative reputations. With

the help of marketing strategies, they can build a positive, authentic and sustainable

image that will set them apart from other competitors.

Therefore businesses and marketers alike have to design comprehensive and

effective methods that will give consumers the information they need in order for

them to make more conscious buying decisions that will not only make them active

participants in embracing a sustainable lifestyle but will also help businesses to

emerge in sustainable practices and thus relieve the environment, improve working

conditions and make consumption more thoughtful. In response to the eco-

movement, producers and companies have adapted their strategies towards more

sustainable products and corporate actions.

Overfishing:

A topic that has been occurring frequently in the media lately is the issue of

overfishing, meaning that fish stocks are exploited to an unacceptable level (Good,

2011) which is only one of a whole chain of negative side effects of human impact on

marine life. Furthermore, it leads to depletion of resources, degraded water quality

and destruction of biomass (Good, 2011).

Seafood is an important food resource and belongs to “one of the most traded


food commodit[ies] worldwide” (FAO 2014b; p.46). Therefore it does not merely serve

the function of nourishing people but also depicts a major benefit for entire

economies. Its significant role is further depicted in data collected by the FAO (Food

and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). According to them, fish and

fishery product exports made up for $136 billion in 2013 (2014b, p.47).

Yet, with the world population continuously growing further, even more people

depend on ocean resources with already “three billion people rely[ing] on fish as a

major resource of protein” (The Living Blue Planet Report, 2015; p.2) and for more

than 200 million people the whole industry behind is their source of livelihood

(http://www.un.org). This additionally exhausts the diminishing resources by putting

even more pressure on them.

The WWF’s Living Blue Planet Report (2015) points to the alarming state of ocean

health and marine bio-diversity due to human impact. Not only has it been found that

between 1970 and 2012 a 49% decline of marine vertebrates took place, but with it a

general decline in the marine ecosystem (p.6). Many species are endangered with

the main threats being exploitation of fish populations, habitat degradation and

climate change (p.7). But overfishing is not the only issue. Since oceans are highly

interactive ecosystems, changes affect it entirely. Coral reefs and other habitats

which not only nourish marine life, are shrinking and therefore directly affect water

quality, and entire regions which largely depend on the social, cultural and economic

value that derives from them (p.12). (FAO 2014b) Statistics show that between 1972

and 2012 frozen fish production for human consumption has increased from 38% to

55% of the total production amount (p.43). According to FAO statistics 79.7 million

tons of marine catch were produced in 2012 worldwide (p.37). Additionally a total of

almost 29% of fish stocks were characterized as overfished (p.37) and that “In 2012,

more than 86 percent (136 million tons) of world fish production was utilized for direct


human consumption” (p.42).

The impacts of the production of fish products and its effects on the

environment are also manifested in the increasing role these issues play with regard

to consumer choices (Good, 2011). The rising awareness of consumers regarding

overfishing and negative environmental effects due to fishing methods has procured

a movement towards sustainable seafood which aims at a production that neither

threatens fish stock existence nor marine biomass by regulating harvesting methods

(Good, 2011)

Hence, due to this movement and the request for transparency of product

ingredients, origins, PPMs and impacts on the environment, the amount of eco-labels

on product packaging has been growing rapidly in recent years. In fact, various

environmental and non-profit organizations as well as consumer protection agencies

have been trying to promote transparency and raise consumers’ awareness of

purchasing goods by using labeling-strategies.

Eco-labeling:

Eco-labeling on product packaging confirms the efforts producers and

companies make with respect to sustainable actions such as reducing their

ecological footprint by indicating production steps, assuring that workers work under

fair labor conditions and receive appropriate compensation or that goods are

resourced from renewable primary products, etc. In addition to that, eco-labels

support consumers’ decision making of ‘green products’ (Thogersen et al. 2010) In

order to attain certificates and with them the eligibility to use certain eco-labels, many

manufacturers undergo certification processes. These entail third parties to assess

the methods and actions of manufacturers according to predetermined standards of


the respective certifying agency (Watson & Andrews, 2011, p. 48).

Boström and Klintman (2011) define ‘green labeling’ (p.27) as a source of

information for consumers, and a political instrument alike but at the same time point

out that they also serve as an “eco-standard” or an “involuntary rule” (p.27). Eco-

labels such as the Fairtrade logo, the FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) and

especially the Bio label (indicating organically sourced goods) are well established on

the market. However, the present dissertation will focus on a selection of labels

designated for seafood products.

Using the technique of eco-labeling for seafood products depicts a crucial

marketing tool for consumers and businesses alike. According to Market Imperfection

Theory, consumer’s lack of available information of product-specific attributes causes

market imperfections that can be reduced (but not eliminated) by providing product-

specific information (Wagner, 2009, p.1076). Eco-labeling is a method of information

provision that can rectify or at least minimize this problem to some extent. But the

technique is not only beneficial for consumers, the resulting implications for farmers

and suppliers that have to adhere to strict regulations that apply once certification is

granted, may help maintain seafood production at its current levels while focusing on

sustainable actions and alleviate stock-extinction and threatening of the ecosystem

(Good, 2011).

As consumers especially focus their attention on information that corresponds

with their believes (Falkenreck, 2010), eco-labeling systems may be used to not only

influence their buying decision towards products of companies that seem to be more

reputable and trustworthy, but also by companies to promote their benevolent

endeavors and use labels of the respective organization which approved their

sustainable actions on their packages. Falkenreck (2010) suggests that based on the

corporate actions individuals observe and depending on the relative importance they


ascribe to it, they form opinions about the company’s “trustworthiness, reliability,

[and] social responsibility, […]” (p.22) which builds corporate reputation. To raise

consumer’s awareness, eco-labeling can be a helpful tool. Even though certification

is a voluntary process and it can be time-as well as cost consuming, businesses

found that, in order to maintain and attract new customers, they have to consider new

developments and adapt to their demands. As Deere (1999) puts it: “Eco-labeling

schemes are increasingly perceived as a way simultaneously to maintain the

productivity and economic value of fisheries while providing incentives for improved

fisheries management and the conservation of marine biodiversity” (p.3).

As Nilsson, Tuncer and Thidell (2004) prove, it depends exclusively on

consumer’s trust whether labeling schemes are accepted or not. Moreover, Boström

and Klintman (2011) underline that consumers simply do not have the ability to

overlook entire supply chains and that therefore the uncertainty about what we

actually consume persists when eating food. The consumer cannot see whether a

product has been treated with preservatives or how, for example, seafood was

caught. This information is mainly brought to them by consumer-protection agencies

who look into these circumstances. The resulting uncertainty and mistrust towards

producers is their main problem. Hence, this is where eco-labels take effect – at the

interface between consumers’ abilities and confusing market processes. While

substituting consumers’ senses and knowledge, “they [eco-labels] provide us with

‘mediated transparency’” (Boström & Klintman, 2011, p.7).

According to the Ecolabel Index, over 99 eco-labels are active in Germany.

However, the abundance and proliferation of eco-labels make it difficult for

consumers to keep track of all the information given to them with these specific labels

and cause confusion, lack of trust and can lead them to ignore seals entirely. Yet, in

order for eco-labels to work, consumers need to be aware of them and have


information about what they entail. Consumers who cannot dissect the information

they are presented, fail to process the input and are not responsive to the respective

label.

Therefore, I will examine three eco-labels designated to indicate sustainable

seafood products and their influence on consumer choice. While, over the past years,

and especially because of the urgency of the matter, various domains of the

influences of seafood eco-labels have been researched, I will focus my attention

mainly on consumer preferences for specific seafood labels. The insights will help

gain valuable information about consumer behavior and the effectiveness of labels in

this field. Additionally, the results may be able to support further research in similar

domains on the one hand, but also be meaningful for companies and marketers on

the other, so that they can develop new approaches and improve their strategies that

will reach a broader audience and help consumers make more conscious and

informed buying decisions that will at the same time support social and ecological

endeavors.

In order to establish a basic understanding for the labels to be dealt with, I will

first shortly introduce the organizations operating behind them, their main goals and

their approaches until I will reveal the composition of my study and the methodology I

will use to test my hypotheses.

MSC-label:

The most well-known label within the seafood spectrum is the label of the

Marine Stewardship Council. Initiated by the WWF and Unilever in 1997 but

operating independently since 1999, the organization has the goal to eliminate


overfishing, keeping oceans healthy, and enhance bio-diversity while maintaining and

supporting a sustainable productivity (www.msc.org). The organization exclusively

focuses on wild fisheries that adhere to the MSC’s certification standards. As of 2015,

278 fisheries have been certified and together they make up for 10 per cent of the

wild caught seafood in the world (www.msc.org). Worldwide, almost 30 000 products

are MSC-labeled – with 4139 in Germany. In order to meet their goals, according to

their website: www.msc.org, three basic principles are established that potential

certified fisheries have to meet.

1. Sustainable fish stocks

2. Minimizing environmental impact

3. Effective management

A fully detailed process description can be found on the MSC website.

Even though the MSC’s attempts seem clear, they have been criticized in the

past. They were accused of not being transparent enough, lack of traceability, and

allowing certification of industrial fisheries. Furthermore, Gulbrandsen (2009) lists that

the majority of their certified fisheries show similarities in their structure and are

situated in developed countries. However, most of the world’s fisheries do not fit in

this scheme.

ASC-label:

The ASC (Aquaculture Stewardship Council) – label is the equivalent to the

MSC-label with the distinction that it certifies sustainable farmed fish caught from

aquaculture. The non-profit organization is comparably young and was founded by

http://www.msc.org/

http://www.msc.org/

http://www.msc.org/


the WWF and IDH (Dutch Sustainable Trade Initiative) in 2010 (www.asc-aqua.org).

They focus on certifying responsible farmed seafood and aim to establish

environmental and social integrity.

Aquaculture takes on a special role in the seafood industry. According to data

collected by the United Nations, aquaculture is the fastest growing food sector among

animal food production (http://www.un.org). In fact, statistics of the FAO reveal that in

2012, the production of farmed fish reached an all-time high with 90.4 million tons

(FAO 2014b, p.18) and 58 per cent of the fish consumed is sourced from aquaculture

(The Living Blue Planet Report 2015). Since the world population is steadily growing,

wild resources become scarce and oceans are overfished to an alarming extent.

Sustainable aquaculture has the opportunity to satisfy the demand and help relieve

the severe pressure on depleting fish stocks. However, aquaculture has often been

heavily criticized for its irresponsible production methods and negative impacts on the

environment, such as depletion of ecosystems, aquatic pollution and reduction of

climate change resilience in coastal areas. Moreover, it has been connected to

disease-outbreaks among various species. Therefore, many people are skeptical

towards it. (The Living Blue Planet Report 2015, p.29).

Yet, the relatively novel implementation of the ASC certification could be a

solution, as fisheries who attain certification commit to a variety of standards to

maintain and improve and therefore support healthier ways of farmed fish production

that do not impair the environment and the animals as much.

Nevertheless, even though both labels have been criticized, it is necessary to

acknowledge their efforts to finding a solution for overfishing and thereby protecting

the environment and society so that future generations have access the same

resources as current ones. It is with certainty that there are loopholes to close and

http://www.asc-aqua.org/

http://www.un.org/


other irregularities to fix but given the relative short amount of time these

organizations have been active, they have to be given credit for their commitment.

And even though there is disagreement about the impact and the effectiveness labels

have, it has helped raise awareness about multiple ecological issues.

Organic seafood label

The organic label (Bio-Siegel) is yet another protected eco-label used to

indicate organic production or aquaculture of goods. Producers who want to put the

label on their products have to go through a certification process in order to attain

eligibility. With the consumer trust that derives from the organic label, the certifiers

aim to establish a more positively regarded alternative to conventional aquaculture.

The use of the organic label for aquaculture has been implemented in 2009

and can increasingly be seen on product packaging of seafood.

(https://www.oekolandbau.de/erzeuger/tierhaltung/artspezifische-

anforderungen/aquakultur/). Intensive livestock farming and its severe negative

impacts on animal health, water quality and marine habitats has put aquaculture into

a bad position for somewhat aware consumers and therefore suffers from its

reputation

Previous Research:

Previous research dealt with a variety of aspects relevant to consumption of

products endued with seafood eco-labels. In the following I will summarize the most

important and striking findings. Since consumer behavior is such a fundamental field

with regard to this topic, I will additionally include selected studies that will help to

https://www.oekolandbau.de/erzeuger/tierhaltung/artspezifische-anforderungen/aquakultur/

https://www.oekolandbau.de/erzeuger/tierhaltung/artspezifische-anforderungen/aquakultur/


understand consumer choice and the exerting influences. Then I will provide an

extended literature review that will be essential for my further research of the topic.

The different studies conducted can be categorized into different content

groups – Consumer-specific and product-specific. Moreover, within these groups,

sub-groups can be dissected. While some findings overlap, others differ due to

different research methods and main focuses and therefore give an incentive to look

closer into them.

A significant amount of studies focused mainly on consumer specific

characteristics influential to consumer choice regarding eco-labels, such as the level

of consumer involvement or awareness of the matter and the information consumers

have, the influence of trust of the certifying agency, but also socio-economic, as well

as demographic factors. Others researched product-specific influences on consumer

choice. This entails e.g. the price, fish-species, package design, the degree of

processing, country-of-origin, the harvesting method etc.

However, all studies agree that in order for eco-labels to work, consumer

recognition is imperative and they must be aware of the issues addressed with them.

Deere (1999), sets the premises for eco-labeling schemes that they all share. He

points out that consumer’s buying behavior is not only focused on price quality and

health standards but that it also underlies product-specific characteristics that can be

connected to environmental, ecological, economic and social objectives (p.4).

Wessels, Johnston and Donath (1999) found that consumer acceptance of seafood-

ecolabels may be influenced by the following variables: species characteristics of the

fish, consumer preference indicators, demographics and trust in certifying agency

(p.1087) but also point out that in order to support sustainable fishing, they actually

have to purchase seafood and be aware of the background of labeling. In line with

that, Brécard et al. (2009) emphasize that the more information about the


circumstances and effects of seafood harvesting and production consumers have,

the higher their demand for eco labels on fish products (p.121).

Vanhonacker, Altintzoglou, Luten and Verbeke (2011) found in a study with

data collected in Norway, Belgium and Spain, that regarding the catching method of

seafood, consumers who buy wild caught fish have high involvement and subjective

knowledge while the contrary applies for consumers who buy farmed fish. They also

state that irrespective of the catching method of seafood, country-of-origin seems to

have no impact on the buying decision. Contrary to this Carlucci, Nocella, Devitiis,

Viscecchia, Bimbo and Nardone (2015) published an extensive review of the most

striking studies concerned with consumer behavior and fish consumption in order to

organize the heterogeneous findings. They summarize that “characteristics of fish

that emerged as the most relevant for consumers are the following: country of origin,

production method, preserving method, product development, packaging, and eco-

labeling” (p.223). Brécard et al.’s (2009) investigations confirm these findings.

Brécard, Hlamimi, Lucas and Perraudeau (2009) researched the potential

factors influencing the perceptions of European consumers with regard to eco labels

on environmentally friendly caught seafood. They tested the variables: intrinsic

motivation, information, localization and socio economic factors. The results show

that it is a combination of all of the above and that the notion of pricing is the most

important purchase factor but also prove that significant connections between the

ecological component and consumer behavior occur. Furthermore, their account

confirms their assumption about consumer-specific characteristics stating that "the

typical 'green fish consumer' is a young woman, well educated, well informed on the

state of marine resources and not very trusting of the regulation of the fisheries"

(p.115) and that eco-sensitive consumers who are interested in marine resource

preservation have the same characteristic disposition.


As the method of aquaculture has been a contentious topic lately, Mauracher

et al. (2012) have devoted their research to organic aquaculture, pointing out the

beneficial implications for the ever growing world population and the need to find

innovative ways that approach this problem. They examine consumer’s willingness-

to-pay (WTP) for organic farmed fish and whether they would be apt to pay a

premium price. The researchers tested respondents’ attitudes towards organic fish

products and their preferences of organic production methods. The four attributes

tested in this study are: geographic origin, size, production method and price.

Findings show that indeed, like other studies found (Carlucci et al. 2015; Brécard et

al. 2009), geographic origin has a strong impact on consumer choice, as it also

supports local economy if production takes place in the home country or even region.

Indicating COO and production place on the product may help producers gain a

premium price and be an effective communication strategy in promoting organic

aquaculture.

Kole et al. (2008) investigated the effects of indicating product information on

cod fish on consumer’s perception of the product. Product type, price, freshness and

the advantages of fish farming were found to have an influence on product

evaluation. The product (cod) was evaluated less favorable when indicating farming

advantages. Wild cod was evaluated more favorably when indicating the capture

method and was preferred over the unlabeled kind. In a real-life experiment the

researchers found evidence that confirmed that the farmed kind was perceived

negatively compared to wild catch.

Claret et al. (2012) conducted an exploratory study investigating the extent of

influential factors (COO, obtaining method, storage conditions, and purchasing price)

on consumer perceptions during the decision making process in buying sea fish. In

line with other findings, COO is indeed the most relevant attribute with the others


being a little less relevant.

Gulbrandsen (2009) highlights the fact that although the application of eco-

labels can have the effect to maintain and increase marine bio-diversity, it is unlikely

that they can fix the massive problem of overfishing and depleted fish-stocks in our

oceans. This is due to the fact that certification organizations mainly certify fisheries

in developed countries, the majority of fisheries however operate in developing

countries.

In Jacquet and Pauly’s (2007) study the researchers closely examined the

effectiveness of seafood awareness campaigns and point out successes and

difficulties of social marketing which eco-labeling is a part of. They state that due to

the market itself, because it differs from country to country, lack of traceability and

misleading renaming strategies of producers who want to circumvent specific rules,

consumers feel confused and lose trust which hence, works against the efforts of

implementing sustainable seafood production methods and additionally prevents

consumers from being educated about making smart food choices. They also criticize

that there are no effective ex post measurements of these campaigns which are

however necessary to find new ways that activate the consumer to rethink his/her

consumption behavior. Therefore, more research should focus on finding methods

that can solve these problems and close the gaps.

While investigating the full impact of eco-labels on eco-friendly behavior, Testa,

Iraldo, Vacari and Ferrari (2013) found out that mainly due to information

asymmetries on behalf of the consumers they do not buy the greener option of a

product. Because of the inflationary use of a product’s greenness and a mistrust in

businesses deriving from consumer’s general attitude that businesses only apply

marketing strategies in order to promote their products. Their account on the impact

of eco-labels provides a significant contribution to the field of ecological marketing.


Their study suggests further that eco-labels do influence consumer behavior when

the recipient is aware of what is conveyed. It can support purchasing green goods as

long as the design is comprehensive. Contrasting other studies, they found that the

role of personal characteristics in influencing eco-friendly buying behavior cannot be

nailed down to a specific profile anymore and green consumption and eco-friendly

behavior are not restricted to a distinguished set of consumers anymore, but rather

concern a wide range of consumers from all different backgrounds. They conclude

that eco-labels as a marketing tool can be highly effective and increase consumer

awareness and sensitiveness and that they can increase perceived behavioral

control of consumers.

The study of Laureiro, McCluskey and Mittelhammer (2001) researched the

influencers of choosing organic over eco-labeled products. They find that organic

appears generally safer than eco-labeled especially when it comes to pesticide

treatment and that while consumers who buy eco-labeled products do not want to

sacrifice quality for environmental-friendliness of the product, consumers of organic

goods are more likely to do so. They indicate that consumers who are very

concerned about environmental issues choose organic over eco-labeled, and people

who do not utter any concern choose conventional products. Consumers with some

concern decide for the eco-labeled option and therefore support the intermediacy of

eco-labeled products.

Purpose:

The aim of the study is to find out whether consumers of seafood have

preferences towards the kind of eco-label that certifies the product. If so, it will further

be investigated if these preferences influence consumers’ choice or whether there

are other underlying factors that are decisive in this context. It is hypothesized that


consumers do have label-specific preferences and that these have a direct impact on

product choice, meaning that consumers choose a product with their preferred label

over a differently labeled or unlabeled equivalent.

A special focus will be set on the performance of labeling schemes regarding farmed

fish compared with wild-caught seafood by a contrasting juxtaposition of the MSC-

label, the ASC-label, and the organic label and a possible combination of organic and

MSC, as well as organic and the ASC-label.

Previous studies mainly focused on influential factors of product-specific

characteristics on consumer behavior such as (the product price, a specific fish

species, its conservation method, consumer’s attributes such as level of involvement)

with eco-labels being one of them. Calucci et al. (2014) analyzed numerous studies

focusing on the topic of seafood and consumers but there are little results of studies

measuring consumer responses with regard to preferences of a selection of seafood

eco-labels.

Especially with regard to the relatively new ASC-label which certifies fisheries

which exercise criticized aquaculture, it will be interesting to see whether the label

can rebuild the damaged image of fish farming and prompt consumers to value it just

like wild fish. Kole et al. (2008) focused their research on consumers’ perception of

wild compared to farmed fish and found in fact, that consumers evaluated farmed fish

less favorably than wild fish when indicating the catching method.

Based on the findings of Laureiro et al. (2001), who found that organic

products (apples in their study) are preferred over eco-labeled ones and eco-labeled

products over conventional ones, I argue that, with regard to seafood, similar results

will be observed and that combining organic with eco-labeled seafood will be

perceived as even more positive.


Hypotheses:

H1: The more problem-specific knowledge consumers have, the more

preferences for specific seafood labels exist.

H1a: The more unacquainted consumers are with the impacts of unsustainable

fishing practices, the less preferences of seafood labels they have.

H2: If there are consumers who have label-specific preferences, the more they

prefer MSC over ASC due to the nature of the catching method.

H3: The more label-specific preferences consumers have, the more they prefer

organically-labeled seafood over MSC- and ASC- labeled seafood.

H4: The preference discrepancy between MSC and ASC-labeled seafood

minimizes once the ASC product also contains a label certifying it as organic.

Brand-name products have completely different possibilities to reach their

customers with marketing strategies compared to off-brand products. They have a

high market share and customers are more familiar with the specific companies.

Therefore it would be interesting to find out if seafood eco-labels can pull products

from opposing sides of the price spectrum closer together and add value to off-brand

products which would be decisive for the purchase.

H5: When an eco-label is attached to the product package, the more likely it is

that off-brand product purchases increase (maybe due to the quality indicator).

The insights will help gain valuable information about consumer behavior and

the effectiveness of labels in field of seafood products. Additionally, the results may

be used to support further research in similar domains on the one hand, but also be

meaningful for companies and marketers on the other, so that they can develop new


approaches and improve their strategies that will reach a broader audience and help

consumers make more conscious and informed buying decisions that will at the same

time support social and ecological endeavors.

Methodology:

I will base my research on theoretical frameworks of consumer preferences

and consumer choice of green products as well as rely on previous findings to

develop my approach and support my argumentation. Furthermore, the study will

incorporate a conjoint-analysis in order to measure consumers’ preferences. As

Lehnert (2009) points out, preferences are one-dimensional constructs that do not

indicate why consumers prefer certain products. However, by measuring preference

structure, propositions about the interrelation of factors affecting the product’s utility

and the resulting preferences for a specific product can be made (pp.101).

The conjoint measurement was first introduced in the 1960s and was applied in

marketing beginning in the 1970s (Baier & Brusch, 2009). Due to its applicability to

real-life situations it depicts a useful tool for marketing research (Baier & Brusch,

2009; Lehnert, 2009). This technique can be used to find out more about the relative

importance and the interrelation of a variety of attributes influencing the decision-

making process. Being known as a decompositional technique, the consumer’s

overall judgment over a product is the starting point for the analysis (Green & Wind,

1975). After that, the overall judgment is being decomposed into different utility

values that give information about the relative importance about the components

influencing the decision which makes it possible to understand the consumer’s

preferences (Green & Wind, 1975). This technique yields the consumer’s preference

structure based on a previously provided set of alternative choices (Green &


Srinivasan, 1990). A beneficial fact about the conjoint measurement is that the

respondent evaluates alternatives similar to the actual shopping process where the

consumer has to weigh his/ her choices and choose a product (Baier & Brusch 2009).

Another benefit of conjoint analysis is that it can provide pricing information of

potential product attributes (Homburg & Krohmer, 2009). With the resulting information,

products can be improved and designed specifically to the preferences of consumers

(Green & Wind, 1975).

Naturally, since the practices of conjoint-analysis were first implemented, there

have been developments that improved the technique in line with technical

innovations, such as computer based research, and in order to minimize and

eliminate possible errors, as well as improve reliability and validity (Baier & Brusch,

2009). Lehnert (2009) used a similar approach to test consumer preferences for

organic and fair-trade labeled products. His methodology specifies on choice-based

conjoint-analysis (CBCA). The application of CBCA makes it possible to make

assumptions based on the preferences and choices of the respondents as long as

they choose according to their maximum utility whereas the traditional approach

investigates the benefit contribution and does not make statements about choice

criteria (p.197).

The choice-based conjoint-analysis became popular in the 1990s and has to

be distinguished from the traditional method (Balderjahn, Hedergott & Peyer in Baier

and Brusch, 2009). Whereas the traditional conjoint-analysis (TCA) asks the

respondents to evaluate individual product profiles which include predetermined

factors and product features, and aims at retrieving overall judgments about these

combinations, the choice-based conjoint-analysis provides sets of individual profiles

out of which the respondent has to choose one or even has the possibility to choose

none. This has the advantage that the situation is similar to the actual shopping


process (Balderjahn et al. 2009, p.129 ff; Lehnert 2009, p. 196). While the TCA uses

rating or ranking scales to indicate preferences, CBCA respondents receive so-called

Choice Tasks and are instructed to choose between alternatives (Balderjahn et al.

2009, p.130). Since however, this study will investigate more than two alternatives, it

is necessary to expand the binary approach and use a multinominal logit-model that

also calculates the likelihood of individual choices (Decker & Wagner, 2000). The

consumer’s utility function, which is the dependent variable, consists of the part

worths of the independent variables, product-specific attributes (Homburg &Krohmer,

2009).

Therefore, the CBCA seems to be an appropriate measurement for the purpose of

the research. However, even though the CBCA offers many advantages compared to

older methods, a striking disadvantage is that, even though the outcome gives

information about the presence of preferences, it does not tell how strong those

preferences are. By means of the hierarchical-bayes estimation, combined with the

CBCA, individual part-worths can be derived (Homburg &Krohmer, 2009). My

research will follow a similar approach as Zulauf, Oswald and Wagner (2013) who

tested the effects of a number of labels (fair-trade, country-of-origin) with a

hierarchical bayes approach.

Research Design:

The research design will comprise an online survey showing the respondents

pictures of a variety of seafood products with or without eco-label and the possibility

to click on the labels in order to gain more information about what they entail. Prices

and other relevant information will appear next to the product. Then the respondent

will be asked to choose between the offers. The pictures and labels will be mixed in a


correlating way so that relevant information can be inferred and from the ‘customer’s

choice’. The research design has the advantage that the decision making process

can be compared to a real-life situation, as customers are presented with a set of

alternatives which they can choose from.

In addition to this, typical questions about socio-demographic and economic

information as well as usual buying behavior will be asked which will further influence

the results so that relations and connections between preferences of labels and

consumer characteristics can be generated.

Additional literature review:

Authors Content Findings Keywords

van Amstel, M., Driessen, P., & Glasbergen, P. (2008). Eco-labeling and information asymmetry: A comparison of five eco-labels in the Netherlands. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(3), 263-276. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.07.039

Reliability of the information indicated of five food labels is analyzed.

It is revealed that eco-labels do not communicate adequately as they cannot fill the gap of information asymmetries between buyer and seller. Eco-labels are often ambiguous regarding environmental information, they do not convey enough information about ecological impacts of the production, are generally lacking.

Eco-label performance, effectiveness, reliability, information asymmetries, ambiguous content

Akst, J., & Zielinska, A. (2012, May 14). Can Fish Eco-Labeling be Trusted? Retrieved November 21, 2015, from http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/32087/title/Can-

Criticism towards major certifying agencies is raised, accusing them to certify livestocks that are less than sustainable.

Researchers concluded that: “after examining 71 MSC-certified stocks and 76 FOS-certified stocks of mackerel, swordfish, tuna, and

Overfishing, sustainability, ecology, conservation


Fish-Eco-Labeling-be-Trusted-/

other species. In total, 31 percent of the supposedly sustainable MSC stocks and 19 percent of FOS stocks are not worthy of the label”.

Agnew, D., Gutierrez, N., Stern-Pirlot, A., & Hoggarth, D. (2013). The MSC experience: Developing an operational certification standard and a market incentive to improve fishery sustainability. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 216-225.

doi:10.1093/icesjms/fst091

The article gives an overview of the implementation of the MSC seal and explains the most crucial challenges the MSC is facing - being establishing an inclusive standard and being scientifically adaptive with regard to the fast evolving fisheries management - from an insider's view (the authors are MSC staff). They also explain what fisheries have to do in order to maintain their MSC certification. General facts and numbers about the MSC seal and certification process are included in the report

Credibility, accessibility and improvement of their measures are necessary in order to make way for a sustainable future.

MSC-label, seafood, sustainable fisheries, certification

Gardiner, P., & Viswanathan, K. (2004). Ecolabelling and Fisheries Management (pp. 1-44).

Penang: WorldFish Center.

The paper covers the topic of eco-labeling in the fishing sector in developing countries and argues that it is unlikely that a globally operating labeling scheme will gain ground and be widely accepted in Asian countries by backing this argument with the claim that even though eco-labeling in the fish sector is currently successful, it predominantly is in "eco-conscious, or niche markets" (iv) and global improvement of sustainable fisheries is not guaranteed. It focuses on the management of fisheries and the certification process, as well as government regulations. Additionally the paper deals with the critical arguments against MSC labeling. "The concept of eco-labeling is based on the assumption that consumers are willing to pay the 'green' premium on goods in order to satisfy their beliefs in environmental sustainability" (p.27)

In order to improve sustainable fisheries management, eco-labeling is just a small part. Fisheries in developing countries need to get access to the certification process.

Eco-labeling, MSC, developing countries, green premium, WTP

Esch, F.-R., & Langner, T.. (2004). Sozialtechnische Gestaltung der Ästhetik von Produktverpackungen. In A. Gröppel-Klein (Ed.), Konsumentenverhaltensforschung im 21. Jahrhundert

(pp. 413-440). Wiesbaden: Gabler.

The authors refer to the importance of the appearance of product packaging with regard to communication channels as at this point there is intensive customer contact.

Packaging is one crucial factor for communicating a product to the consumer. They can help to support building a brand image and influence consumers’ purchase decisions as the final decision to buy a product is made in front of the shelf (point of scale).

Packaging, customer contact, communication channel, point of scale, decision making

De-Coding Seafood Eco-Labels: Why We Need Public Standards. (2010). Retrieved November 20, 2015, from http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org.

The authors introduce the most common seafood eco-labels and depict their differences. They also define facts of eco labels that should be acknowledged by consumers and should be met as a minimum in order to be considered sustainable. Among them: Ecological and social impacts, diversity among seafood, transport distance to the market and health and safety standards for PPMs. (p.7)

Private eco-labels have been proliferating the market since no national label is active. The report alludes to the inadequacy of private institutions certifying products. This leaves loopholes for wrong intentions and prevents sustainable development. A label authorized by the government would limit this.

Eco-labeling, labels, sustainable development, effectiveness, private vs. public organizations


Grunert, K. G. (2004). Prozessverfolgende Conjoint-Analyse: Neue Möglichkeiten der Analyse des Informations- und Entscheidungsverhaltens von Konsumenten. In A. Gröppel-Klein (Ed.), Konsumentenverhaltensforschung im 21. Jahrhundert (pp. 501-516). Wiesbaden: Gabler.

Grunert’s (2004) account implies the application and an example of an improved version of a choice-based conjoint-analysis through hierarchical bayesian analysis techniques. This effects in higher external validity. Imperfections and doubts but also benefits and positive outlooks are highlighted. Grunert illustrates the approach by investigating consumers’ information and decision-making behavior.

CBCA, hierarchical-bayesian approach, methodology

Hicks, R. L. (2007). Performance-based Labelling. In A. K. Basu, N. H. Chau, U. Grote (Eds.) New Frontiers in Environmental and Social Labeling. (pp. 37-58). Heidelberg: Physica Verlag.

The chapter discusses the fact that the labeling technique has a positive and altering effect on production methods as long as the consumer rates both highly, the product itself and the way it was produced. This also entails a higher willingness-to-pay for ecologically labeled products which again has the effect that producers are more motivated to alter their production towards cleaner, greener and more sustainable methods . Hicks researches the connection of consumers’ relatively low willingness-to-pay for ecologically labeled products with missing information of specific labels on the consumers' behalf. He researches the overall performance meaning the extent to which their mission contributes to an overall positive achievement. The article focuses on the amount of information presented to the consumer and its' dependence on consumers' WTP. Two stated preference experiments are used. The first showing the consumer different varieties of coffee, both labeled (in this case only informing them about not having negative social or environmental impacts) and unlabeled. The second experiment contains more profound information about benefits for the producers.

WTP is lower if there is no significant difference and vice versa. The results show that if the label contains more information about producer benefits, consumers are willing to pay more. Also the price premium of poorly performing labeled products is lower than the on one of better performing ones. Performance-based labels increase information requirements for certifying agencies (p.55)

Consumer attitudes, WTP, eco-labeled products, price premium

O'Rourke, D., & Ringer, A. (2015). The Impact of Sustainability Information on Consumer Decision Making. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 00(0), 1-11. doi:10.1111/jiec.12310

The article analyzes an enormous amount of online purchase interactions with regard to the impact of sustainability information on purchase intentions varying across different types of consumer, issues, and product categories. Simply changing or adding information on the product will less likely reach consumers of conventional products (mainstream consumers). Thus purchase behavior cannot be changed. Nonetheless, changing the design by making it more appealing to mainstream consumers could help to catch their attention. Limitations: When making purchase decisions consumers are primarily concerned with price and quality. The study does not include this fact.

Environmentally aware consumers were more likely to be influenced by sustainable information on products. Health ratings (those most connected to self-interest) are statistically significant with regard to sustainability information and its impact on purchase behavior (p.8)

attitudes-behavior gap behavior change consumers decision making industrial ecology sustainability information

Rahbar, E., & Wahid, N. (2011). Investigation of green marketing tools' effect on consumers' purchase behavior. Business Strategy Series, 12(2), 73-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17515631111114877

Eco-labeling as a tool of green marketing is examined by the authors. They focus on the effect of green marketing on consumer behavior.

Awareness of and trust in the label are driving factors of resulting consumer behavior. Green advertisements are effective in so far as they inform customers about various environmental and social issues.

Green marketing, eco-labels as marketing tools


Subasinghe, R., Soto, D., & Jia, J. (2009). Global aquaculture and its role in sustainable development. Reviews in Aquaculture, 1(1), 2-9. doi:10.1111/j.1753-5131.2008.01002.x

The article underlines the possible positive contribution of aquaculture as a fairly new food production method. Against the widely spread doubts about fish farming, the authors emphasize the importance of sustainable aquaculture fish farming in our rapidly evolving and growing world. It puts forward the appeal that more sustainable regulations have to be put out there in order to guarantee, extend and develop sustainability in fish farming and underlines that for our society it is absolutely necessary to look into fish farming as the oceans are massively overfished and fish consumption increases rapidly.

In order to feed the increasing world population and due to depleting fish stocks, sustainable aquaculture is a possible and necessary solution.

Aquaculture, fish consumption, world population, fish farming

Thøgersen, J., Haugaard, P., & Olesen, A. (2010). Consumer responses to ecolabels. European Journal of Marketing, 44(11/12), 1787-1810. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090561011079882

Implementation of a new ecolabel (as the MSC logo was then relatively new) scheme and consumer responses for sustainable fishery (MSC). Focus is on consumer’s personal factors. They examine two phases of the process, namely the perception and understanding of the label and the completion of the adoption process. The first phase is dependent on two things: the consumer’s environmental concern addressed by the eco-label and the expressiveness of the goals that are intended to be reached. Data was collected via questionnaire in a shopping mall in Denmark.

Pace of the adoption process is dependent on the individual’s motivation, previous experience with eco-labels and trust in the specific organization.

Wenzel, E., Kirig, A., & Rauch, C. (2008). Greenomics: Wie der grüne Lifestyle Märkte und Konsumenten verändert.

München: Redline Wirtschaft.

The book introduces future trends and refers to the changing economy and society towards more eco-friendly and sustainable practices and lifestyles. The authors define a new lifestyle of a group of people which represents the tenor of our modern society – the LOHAS: Lifestyle of Health and Sustainability (p.11) (see also Lehnert 2009; Zentes, Morschett, Krebs 2008). This group of consumers is characterized as living a healthy and indulgent lifestyle while paying attention to responsibility and sustainability (p.12). The authors argue that LOHAS are neither identified by a specific age nor do they have a certain income. They do not reject consumption but demand transparency and clarity and therefore need communication strategies that address them at eye level (p.16). They call for authenticity and are more critical than ever. For them, quality is essential and they feel highly responsible. Wenzel et al. point out that it is utterly important to maintain the quality standards in order for the consumers to build and maintain trust in the products. Since the demand of organic products cannot be satisfied by domestic producers anymore, products need to be imported. Supply chains extend and it becomes harder to maintain transparency and guarantee sustainability within the entire supply chain. (p.87)

Especially the food diversity year-round, the long ways of transportation and the multitude of food scandals connected to it push consumers towards regional products that are easier to track and therefore build trust and ensure transparency (p.87). As a result labels indicating country or region of origin have found to be decisive factors in the buying process as they are associated with safety and can be checked. Regional products make it possible for the consumer to consume with a clear conscience (p.88)

Consumer behavior, market trends, LOHAS, green consumption

, sustainability


Structure:

1. Abstract

2. Introduction

3. Consumerism

3.1. Consumer behavior

3.1.1. Theories of consumer choice and consumer behavior with regard to ecological products

3.2.1. Concepts of consumer preferences

3.2. The role of businesses

3.3. The role of marketing/ Green marketing

4. Overfishing

5. Eco-labeling

5.1. MSC-label

5.2. ASC-label

5.3. Bio-label

5.4. Discussion

6. Previous research

6.1. Discussion

7. Purpose

8. Hypotheses

9. Methodology:

9.1. Basics

9.2. Objectives

10. Research Design

10.1. Data collection


10.2. Data analysis

10.3. Interpretation and Discussion

11. Conclusion


Bibliography:

Boström, M., & Klintman, M. (2011). Eco-standards, Product labelling and Green

consumerism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Brécard, D., Hlaimi, B., Lucas, S., Perraudeau, Y., & Salladarré, F. (2009).

Determinants of

demand for green products: An application to eco-label demand for fish in

Europe.

Ecological Economics, 69(1), 115-125. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.07.017

Baier, D. (2009). Conjointanalyse: Methoden, Anwendungen, Praxisbeispiele. Berlin,

Heidelberg: Springer.

Baier, D., & Brusch, M. (2009). Erfassung von Kundenpräferenzen für Produkte und

Dienstleistungen. In Conjointanalyse Methoden, Anwendungen,

Praxisbeispiele (pp. 3

-17). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

Balderjahn, I., Hedergott, D., & Preyer, M. (2009). Choice-Based Conjointanalyse. In

Conjointanalyse Methoden, Anwendungen, Praxisbeispiele (pp. 129-146).

Berlin,

Heidelberg: Springer.

Carlucci, D., Nocella, G., Devitiis, B., Viscecchia, R., Bimbo, F., & Nardone, G.

(2015).

Consumer purchasing behaviour towards fish and seafood products. Patterns

and

insights from a sample of international studies. Appetite, 84, 212-227.

doi:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666314004887


Carrington, M., Neville, B., & Whitwell, G. (2014). Lost in translation: Exploring the

ethical

consumer intention–behavior gap. Journal of Business Research, 67 (1), 2759-

2767.

doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.09.022

Claret, A., Guerrero, L., Aguirre, E., Rincón, L., Hernández, M., Martínez, I.,

Rodríguez, C.

(2012). Consumer preferences for sea fish using conjoint analysis:

Exploratory study of the importance of country of origin, obtaining method,

storage

conditions and purchasing price. Food Quality and Preference, 26(2), 259-266.

doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.05.006

Connolly, J., & Prothero, A. (2008). Green Consumption: Life-politics, risk and

contradictions. Journal of Consumer Culture, 8(1), 117-145.

doi:10.1177/1469540507086422

Decker, R., & Wagner, R. (2000). Log-lineare Modelle und Logit. In A. Herrmann & C.

Homburg (Eds.), Lehrbuch. Marktforschung. Methoden, Anwendungen,

Praxisbeispiel

(2nd ed., pp.551–577). Wiesbaden: Gabler.

Deere, C. (1999). Eco-Labeling and Sustainable Fisheries. Retrieved November 15,

2015,

retrieved from: http://www.fao.org/

http://www.fao.org/


Dermody, J. (2011). Consumerism. In J. Mansvelt & P. Robbins (Eds.), Green

Consumerism

an A-to-Z guide (pp. 85-88). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

European Commisssion. (2009). Sustainable Development. Retrieved November 17,

2015,

from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/escp_en.htm

Falkenreck, C. (2010). Reputation transfer to enter new B-to-B markets: Measuring

and

modelling approaches. Contributions to management science. Heidelberg,

London:

Physica Verlag; A Springer Company.

FAO. 2014b. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture. Fisheries and

Aquaculture

Department, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy.

Golden, Jay S.; Vemeer, Dan; Clemen, Bob u. a. (2010): An Overview of Ecolabels

and

Sustainability Certifications in the Global Marketplace. Durham, NC, USA:

Corporate

Sustainability Initiative - Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions –

Duke

University.

Good, Ryan Z. (2010). Fish. In J. Mansvelt & P. Robbins (Eds.), Green Consumerism

an A

to-Z guide (pp. 149-151). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.


Green, P. E., & Srinivasan, V. (1990). Conjoint Analysis in Marketing: New

Developments

with Implications for Research and Practice. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 3–19.

http://doi.org/10.2307/1251756

Green, P. & Wind, Y. (1975, July). Retrieved November 12, 2015, from

https://141.51.26.35/ CSCO 0075676763663A2F2F756F652E626574

/1975/07/new

way-to-measure-consumers-judgments

Gu, W., Chhajed, D., Petruzzi, N., & Yalabik, B. (2015). Quality design and

environmental

implications of green consumerism in remanufacturing. International Journal of

Production Economics, 162, 55-69. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.12.040

Gulbrandsen, L. (2009). The emergence and effectiveness of the Marine Stewardship

Council.

Marine Policy, 33(4), 654-660. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2006.09.003

Hansen, U., & Schrader, U. (2004). Informationsrecht und Informationsverhalten der

Konsumenten - zentrale Bedingungen eines nachhaltigen Konsums. In A.

Gröppel

Klein (Ed.), Konsumentenverhaltensforschung im 21. Jahrhundert (pp. 341-

366).

Wiesbaden: Gabler.

Homburg, C., & Krohmer, H. (2009). Marketingmanagement: Strategie - Instrumente

-


Umsetzung - Unternehmensführung (3., überarb. und erw. Aufl.). Lehrbuch.

Wiesbaden: Gabler.

Jacquet, J., & Pauly, D. (2007). The rise of seafood awareness campaigns in an era

of

collapsing fisheries. Marine Policy, 31(3), 308-313.

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2006.09.003

Kole, A., Altintzoglou, T., Schelvis-Smit, R., & Luten, J. (2008). The effects of

different

types of product information on the consumer product evaluation for fresh cod

in real

life settings. Food Quality and Preference, (20), 187-194. Retrieved November

19,

2015,

fromhttp://www.researchgate.net/profile/Themistoklis_Altintzoglou/publication/

40094817_The_effects_of_different_types_of_product_information_on_the_

consumer_product_evaluation_fo_fresh_cod_in_real_life_settings/links/

00b495344d22082f0f000000.pdf

Lehnert, M. (2009). Praferenzanalyse ethischer Produkte: Eine

verhaltenswissenschaftliche

Analyse am Beispiel von Bio und Fairtrade (Vol. 25). Hamburg: Kovac.

Loureiro, M. L., McCluskey, J. J., & Mittelhammer, R. C.. (2001). Assessing

Consumer

Preferences for Organic, Eco-labeled, and Regular Apples. Journal of

Agricultural and


Resource Economics, 26(2), 404–416. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40987117

Mansvelt, J., & Robbins, P. (Eds.). (2010). Green Consumerism an A-to-Z guide.

Thousand

Oaks, California: Sage.

Mauracher, C., Tempesta, T., & Vecchiato, D. (2012). Consumer preferences

regarding the

introduction of new organic products. The case of the Mediterranean sea bass

(Dicentrarchus labrax) in Italy. Appetite, 63, 84-91. Retrieved November 16,

2015.

Michaud, C., Llerena, D., & Joly, I. (2013). Willingness to pay for environmental

attributes of

non-food agricultural products: A real choice experiment. European review of

agricultural economics : ERAE, 40(2), 313–329.

O'Rourke, D., & Ringer, A. (2015). The Impact of Sustainability Information on

Consumer

Decision Making. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 00(0), 1-11.

doi:10.1111/jiec.12310

Ottman, J. (2011). The new rules of green marketing strategies, tools, and inspiration

for

sustainable branding. San Francisco, California: Berrett-Koehler

Pinto, D., Herter, M., Rossi, P., & Borges, A. (2014). Going green for self or for

others? Gender and identity salience effects on sustainable consumption.

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38, 540-549. doi: 10.1111/ijcs.12114


Roy, M. (2011). Green Consumer. In J. Mansvelt & P. Robbins (Eds.), Green

Consumerism

an A-to-Z guide (pp. 193-196). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Schroth, S. T., Helfer, J. A. & Gonshorek, D. O. (2011). Green Marketing. In J.

Mansvelt &

P. Robbins (Eds.), Green Consumerism an A-to-Z guide (pp. 224-228).

Thousand Oaks,

California: Sage.

Tanzer, J. (2015). Living Blue Planet report: Species, habitats and human well-being.

Gland:

WWF International.

Testa, F., Iraldo, F., Vaccari, A., & Ferrari, E. (2013). Why Eco-labels can be

Effective

Marketing Tools: Evidence from a Study on Italian Consumers. Business

Strategy and

the Environment, 24(4), 252-265. doi: 10.1002/bse.1821

Thøgersen, J., Haugaard, P., & Olesen, A. (2010). Consumer responses to

ecolabels.

European Journal of Marketing, 44(11/12), 1787-1810.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090561011079882

Vanhonacker, F., Altintzoglou, T., Luten, J., & Verbeke, W. (2011). Does fish origin

matter

to European consumers? British Food Journal, 113(4), 535-549.


Wagner, R. (2009). Market Imperfection Theory. In C. Wankel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of

business in today's world (pp.1076–1077). Los Angeles [i.e. Thousand Oaks,

Calif.]:

SAGE Publications.

Watson, D., & Andrews, M. (2010). Certification Process. In J. Mansvelt & P. Robbins

(Eds.), Green Consumerism an A-to-Z guide (pp. 45-48). Thousand Oaks,

California:

Sage.

Wenzel, E., Kirig, A., & Rauch, C. (2008). Greenomics: Wie der grüne Lifestyle

Märkte und

Konsumenten verändert. München: Redline Wirtschaft.

Wessells, C., Johnston, R., & Donath, H. (n.d.). Assessing Consumer Preferences for

Ecolabeled Seafood: The Influence of Species, Certifier, and Household

Attributes.

American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1084-89.

doi:http://www.jstor.org/stable/1244088

Zulauf, K., Oswald, A. & Wagner, R. (2013), Hierarchical Bayes Approach for

Analyzing the

Impact of Labeling on the Country of Origin Effect., Proceedings of the 42nd

EMAC

Conference, Lost in Translation: Marketing in an Interconnected World.,

EMAC,

Istanbul.


Work plan:

Time period: Activity: Description:

- 23.03.16 Final exposé

Research design

Hand in final exposé,

Design survey: define

variables, select question

format, collect secondary

data

24.03.16 – 07.04.16

25.-28.03.16 Easter

Data collection Distribution of online

surveys

Write introduction and

theoretical background

08.04.16 – 25.04.16 Data analysis and

interpretation

Statistical analysis and

interpretation of the

results

Write methodology

section

26.04.16 – 11.05.16 Write final thesis Write discussion and

conclusion

12.05.16 – 23.05.16 Final thesis Revision

Proofread

Print

23.05.16 Due date Hand in final thesis

Consumer preferences for eco-labels on seafood products An ... · CONSUMER PREFERENCES FOR...

Documents

Transcript of Consumer preferences for eco-labels on seafood products An ... · CONSUMER PREFERENCES FOR...