Analysis of Preferences for Apple and Apple Products of Consumers: Case study Nitra, Slovakia

Authors

  • Kubilay Uçar Faculty of Economics and Management Department of Marketing and Trade Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra tr. A. Hlinku 2, 94976 Nitra, Slovakia
  • Elena Horska Faculty of Economics and Management Department of Marketing and Trade Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra tr. A. Hlinku 2, 94976 Nitra, Slovakia
  • Jozef Palkovic Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Faculty of Economics and Management, Department of Statistics and Operation Research, Slovakia
  • Martina Hudecova Faculty of Economics and Management Department of Marketing and Trade Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra tr. A. Hlinku 2, 94976 Nitra, Slovakia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31437/2414-2077.2022.08.03

Keywords:

Apple consumption, consumer preferences, apple products

Abstract

Proposed paper is focused on the analysis of consumer preferences of apple and apple products in Slovakia, in region Nitra. Data comes from questionary survey, which was conducted for the purpose of this research paper. The most respondents consume fruits regularly. Apple was specifically preferred by 14,29% of surveyed customers. The most of them consume fruits every day. Almost 46% of customers buy fruit in supermarket, only 14,29% buys it directly from farmers. This suggests large space to improve farmers ability to promote and sell their products directly. The main characteristics which influence the apple consumption were high vitamin content, taste of apple and apple variety. The least important were appearance of apple and apple price. This could be influenced by the fact, that apple price was perceived by the most consumers as very low or low.

References

Eurofruit. European fresh produce monitor. Market Intelligence Ltd 2000.

Krebs-Smith S, Cook DA, Subar AF, Cleveland L, Friday J, Kahle LL. Fruit and [5] vegetable intake of children and adolescents in the United States. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1996; 150: 81-86. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.1996.02170260085014

van der Pol M, Ryan M. Using conjoint analysis to establish consumer preferences for fruit and vegetables. Br Food J 1996; 98: 5-12. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070709610150879

Ricks D, Woods T, Sterns J. Chain management and marketing performance in fruit industry. Acta Hort 2000; 536: 661-668. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2000.536.79

Eklund Axelson L, Axelson J. Hypercompetition on horticultural markets. Acta Hort 2000; 536: 485-492. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2000.536.58

Lee JY, Brown MG, Seale JL. Demand relationships among fresh fruit and juices in Canada. Rev Agric Econ 1992; 14: 255-262. https://doi.org/10.2307/1349504

Richards TJ. Dynamic model of fresh fruit promotion: a household production approach. Am J Agric Econ 1999; 81: 195-211. https://doi.org/10.2307/1244460

Richards TJ, Patterson PM. New varieties and the returns to commodity promotion: the case of Fuji apples. Agric Res Econ Rev 2000; 29: 10-23. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1068280500001398

Chrea C, Melo L, Evans G, Forde C, Delahunty C, Cox DN. An investigation using three approaches to understand the influence of extrinsic product cues on consumer behavior: An example of Australian wines. Journal of Sensory Studies 2010; 26(1): 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.2010.00316.x

Symoneaux R, Galmarini MV, Mehinagic E. Comment analysis of consumer’s likes and dislikes as an alternative tool to preference mapping. A case study on apples. Food Quality and Preference 2012; 24(1): 59-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.08.013

Richards TJ. A discrete/continuous model of fruit promotion, advertising, and response segmentation. Agribusiness 2000; 16: 179-196. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6297(200021)16:2<179::AID-AGR4>3.0.CO;2-J

Harker FR, Kupferman EM, Marin AB, Gunson FA, Triggs ChM. Eating quality standards for apples based on consumer preferences. Postharvest Biology and Technology 2008; 50(1): 70-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2008.03.020

Chanda K. Marketing Strateg?es of Horticulture Produce: A Special Reference to Apple Product?on and Marketing, Science. Technology and Development 2021; X(IV): 176-190.

Fischer C, Bossi Fedrigotti V. ‘An Apple A Day’: Is Going Away. What Can We Do to Stop the Decline in Per Capita Apple Consumption? Am J Biomed Sci Res 2020; 10: 226-227. https://doi.org/10.34297/AJBSR.2020.10.001501

Novotorova NK, Mazzocco MA. Consumer Preferences and Trade-Offs for Locally Grown and Genetically Modified Apples: A Conjoint Analysis Approach. Int Food Agribus Manag Rev 2008; 11: 31-53.

Racskó J, Miller DD, Duarte EE, Szukics J, Szabó Z, Soltész M, Nyéki J. Is Consumer Preference for Apple Driven Only by Fruit Quality? Acta Hortic 2009; 831: 331-338. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2009.831.40

Bytyqi N, Skreli E, Verçuni A, Imami D, Zhllima E. Analyzing Consumers’ Preferences for Apples in Pristina, Kosovo. Bodenkultur 2015; 66: 61-69.

De Hooge IE, Oostindjer M, Aschemann-Witzel J, Normann A, Loose SM, Almli VL. This Apple is Too Ugly for Me! Con-sumer Preferences for Suboptimal Food Products in the Su-permarket and at Home. Food Qual Prefer 2017; 56: 80-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.09.012

Denver S, Jensen JD. Consumer Preferences for Organically and Locally Produced Apples. Food Qual Prefer 2014; 31: 129-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.08.014

Moor U, Moor A, Põldma P, Heinmaa L. Consumer Preferences of Apples in Estonia and Changes in Attitudes Over Five Years. Agric Food Sci 2014; 23: 135-145. https://doi.org/10.23986/afsci.40936

Ceschi S, Canavari M, Castellini A. Consumer’s Preference and Willingness to Pay for Apple Attributes: A Choice Experiment in Large Retail Outlets in Bologna (Italy). J Int Food Agribus Mark 2017; 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/08974438.2017.1413614

Bilgin N. Methods and Practical Studies in Social Pschology. Sistem Publishing, Ankara 1995.

Downloads

Published

2022-06-20

Issue

Section

Articles