May 12, 2008
Shoppers Choose Local Produce Over Organics
By Tom Ryan
Shoppers are opting for locally grown produce over organic alternatives, according to the Shopping for Health 2008 survey released by the Food Marketing Institute (FMI) and Prevention. When cost is the same, 50 percent of consumers surveyed said they would choose locally grown produce versus organic (28 percent). Only nine percent would choose a store-packaged alternative at the same price.
When store-packaged strawberries are less expensive than the organic or locally grown varieties, 45 percent said they would choose store-packaged; 34 percent would still choose locally grown; and 22 percent, organic.
“Shoppers’ new interest in locally grown food reflects their strong desire to purchase fresh fruits and vegetables,” said Cary Silvers, director of consumer insights for Rodale, the publisher of Prevention, in a statement. “The battle between organic and locally grown represents who shoppers believe can deliver the freshest produce.”
Meanwhile
consumers who once purchased organic but no longer do cited the following reasons
for their change in behavior:
- 70 percent say it’s too expensive;
- 39 percent cite the lack of perceivable
difference between organic and non-organic foods; - 33 percent are concerned about
the safety of organic produce.
The 2008 Shopping for Health survey of America’s supermarket shoppers
is the 16th in an annual series conducted by FMI and Prevention with
the support of Men’s Health and Women’s Health magazines.
Discussion Questions: Do you also see a “battle” between locally grown and organic as to which delivers the freshest produce? Do the Shopping for Health survey results point to a much bigger opportunity for locally grown produce and perhaps a smaller one for organics?
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
It’s a hypefest for foodies!
All the phrase “locally grown” insures is that the product hasn’t traveled too far. It could be old, the product of a hot house or irrigated with questionable water for all the consumer knows. Ditto with organics. You can apply some pretty nasty things to produce and still call it organic.
The “battle” between organics and locally grown shows how confused advocacy eaters are. And, no wonder, the industry hasn’t helped much.
Most consumers assume certain product attributes are present in “local” and “organic” product that may or may not be there. If we really care about consumers we will do a better–and more complete–job of educating them.
The numbers show that consumers are most interested in price. Take price out of the equation and by and large, they will choose local whenever they have the chance, even if the label said “produced locally with conventional methods.” I like this maxim: If you put the product in your mouth, you will be inclined to buy local. If not (a shirt, for instance), people are less likely to care.
What happens when some TV station bothers to test some food labeled organic, and finds hormones, pesticides, and other chemicals, anyway? Sooner or later, TV stations will see their ratings soar when they find some scandals to exploit. The testing fees are very reasonable compared to the ad rates gained when viewership soars.
The local vs. organic data seems to simply illustrate the greater organic vs. non-organic issue. That only 28% would choose organic probably mirrors the intention to buy for organics as a whole. And 28% is a very significant portion. Local has a freshness belief system inherent in it, and would motivate intention for those customers not in the organic camp.
Organic is still perceived by many as a lifestyle choice, while local simply is a common sense belief about freshness (not necessarily true). Price is and will be the primary inhibitor to organic, in the absence of widely accepted health benefits or poor health findings associated with non-organics.
The consumer is being asked to go against decades of trust in making the organic switch. It isn’t just that organics are better for you…the arguments are that non-organics are bad for you. And the commonly accepted “science” in support of this isn’t there. There’s a lot of psychobabble that applies in this marketing challenge. Suffice it to state that changing this particular buying pattern will require time…time for the generations to shift and for previously held beliefs and opinions to be no longer relevant.
The study involved “consumers…,” in other words, it was not very targeted. If the goal is to get upscale, educated consumers, this is a group that wants local and organic and fresh, pretty clearly (they want it all, in other words). However, if it is to get middle class or lower middle class target customers, price by necessity becomes more important than local and organic and I think fresh would take second place. We all know that smart marketers and retailers do much more sophisticated breakdowns of their target and potential target markets than I have above and certainly more than was involved in this study.
The survey easily shows the results of a lack of education and knowledge. Today’s consumer is totally confused. Organic or not, local or not, safer or not.
Local is just as deceiving as all the rest. I spend many hours visiting road side stands, farmers markets, grocery stores, and wholesalers. Most of the so called local produce is not local at all. It looks and seems that way but during the night when most of us are sleeping, huge produce trucks deliver from central warehouses. Don’t get me wrong. There are many local farmers who do sell their produce. But most do not.
While looking for potential suppliers, I found that most of our organic beef comes from South America which has very little control over organic standards. Most of our organic produce comes from other countries. It is impossible for America to supply enough organics from its own land. Find a reputable supplier for your food and stick with them.
Truth in labeling and origin is needed. Even local markets should be accountable. The bottom line is the need for further education and action by our government which has historically done a bad job. Retailers and markets should also be responsible for building trust and educating their customers. They are the fine line between the grower and the consumer.
If you want to eat safe and know where your foods come from, do your research and homework. Your life depends on it.
Those clamoring for greater transparency and clarity of meaning in terms of disclosure for food products are absolutely on target. There is currently great skepticism on the part of most consumers on whether whatever “organic” and even “locally grown” means, is really worth the additional cost. For some, that skepticism has evolved even into outright distrust. The type of polling used for this article may show interesting results but do they really mean anything?
The issue not mentioned in the survey is safety. After huge beef recalls, vegetable scares and the like, consumers are concerned about food safety. Rightly or wrongly, they perceive locally grown foods to be safer.
As Ryan points out, being “organic” does not mean being healthier or better for you.
The entire food industry needs to better educate consumers about their options, with an eye towards healthier and safer eating.
Is there truly a link between Organic and Locally Grown? At the end of the day, it’s really about WHY the consumer is buying either. Organic is touted to be a healthier option for you, where as locally grown is just a geographical perspective. If you were following a “macrobiotic” diet, you would opt for locally grown foods to reflect the status of nature around you at different times of year. If you then choose an organic product, that’s second in the choice hierarchy, not interchangeable.
Having said that, not all shoppers are involved in any particular diet and are often confused as to why exactly certain products command a premium. It is truly up to the brilliant shopper marketeers to devise the right POS communication that convinces the shopper to spend those extra cents on what they then perceive to be the better-for-them choice.
Locally grown with pesticides. Locally grown without pesticides.
That is a filter I use, but it takes diligence to get answers in a store environment. That’s why, seasons permitting, I go to the farmer’s market and buy from the people I can talk to and have known for fifteen years. IF you ask, the farmers will tell you what they use and why, and you can make well informed choices.
I am an advocate of more stringent requirements in labeling on fresh food as a result of the variety of surprising information I still get when I ask. Most surprising is that, aside from dealing directly with the grower, most of my questions go unanswered.
Another case of confusion over what “organic” means. There is no reason to believe, as the article implies, that organic is fresher than locally grown. Indeed, one would probably [naively] expect locally grown in Atlanta, where I live, to be fresher than organic from California, if only for shipping time.
Locally grown produce will take off for multiple reasons– but primarily, price!
It is impossible to ship fruits or vegetables 1,000 miles and have them stay fresh and tasty. Unfortunately, some locally grown fruits and vegetables are organic but once they are sent to the distributor a chemical is sprayed on them to keep them from ripening as fast. Locally grown organic fruit and vegetables are better still!
Labeling laws in the US are far too lax for either term to mean anything. For the average Joe, “local” sounds like you will keep money in the community rather than ship it out of the country and “organic” can mean almost anything. In the end, consumers will just be confused.
Local has growing appeal to consumers. Smart retailers will focus on that.
More Discussions
Is Legislation the Answer on Visa, Mastercard Swipe Fees as ~$200 Billion Record Is Set?
Is lawmaking the way forward on swipe fees?Are Gas Price Spikes a Blow to Retail Spending?
Are gas prices spiking a huge blow to retail spending? What portion is psychological?How Much Untapped Opportunity Remains in Cruise Retail?
Are brands and retailers missing out on an opportunity on cruise ships?
It’s a hypefest for foodies!
All the phrase “locally grown” insures is that the product hasn’t traveled too far. It could be old, the product of a hot house or irrigated with questionable water for all the consumer knows. Ditto with organics. You can apply some pretty nasty things to produce and still call it organic.
The “battle” between organics and locally grown shows how confused advocacy eaters are. And, no wonder, the industry hasn’t helped much.
Most consumers assume certain product attributes are present in “local” and “organic” product that may or may not be there. If we really care about consumers we will do a better–and more complete–job of educating them.
The numbers show that consumers are most interested in price. Take price out of the equation and by and large, they will choose local whenever they have the chance, even if the label said “produced locally with conventional methods.” I like this maxim: If you put the product in your mouth, you will be inclined to buy local. If not (a shirt, for instance), people are less likely to care.
What happens when some TV station bothers to test some food labeled organic, and finds hormones, pesticides, and other chemicals, anyway? Sooner or later, TV stations will see their ratings soar when they find some scandals to exploit. The testing fees are very reasonable compared to the ad rates gained when viewership soars.
The local vs. organic data seems to simply illustrate the greater organic vs. non-organic issue. That only 28% would choose organic probably mirrors the intention to buy for organics as a whole. And 28% is a very significant portion. Local has a freshness belief system inherent in it, and would motivate intention for those customers not in the organic camp.
Organic is still perceived by many as a lifestyle choice, while local simply is a common sense belief about freshness (not necessarily true). Price is and will be the primary inhibitor to organic, in the absence of widely accepted health benefits or poor health findings associated with non-organics.
The consumer is being asked to go against decades of trust in making the organic switch. It isn’t just that organics are better for you…the arguments are that non-organics are bad for you. And the commonly accepted “science” in support of this isn’t there. There’s a lot of psychobabble that applies in this marketing challenge. Suffice it to state that changing this particular buying pattern will require time…time for the generations to shift and for previously held beliefs and opinions to be no longer relevant.
The study involved “consumers…,” in other words, it was not very targeted. If the goal is to get upscale, educated consumers, this is a group that wants local and organic and fresh, pretty clearly (they want it all, in other words). However, if it is to get middle class or lower middle class target customers, price by necessity becomes more important than local and organic and I think fresh would take second place. We all know that smart marketers and retailers do much more sophisticated breakdowns of their target and potential target markets than I have above and certainly more than was involved in this study.
The survey easily shows the results of a lack of education and knowledge. Today’s consumer is totally confused. Organic or not, local or not, safer or not.
Local is just as deceiving as all the rest. I spend many hours visiting road side stands, farmers markets, grocery stores, and wholesalers. Most of the so called local produce is not local at all. It looks and seems that way but during the night when most of us are sleeping, huge produce trucks deliver from central warehouses. Don’t get me wrong. There are many local farmers who do sell their produce. But most do not.
While looking for potential suppliers, I found that most of our organic beef comes from South America which has very little control over organic standards. Most of our organic produce comes from other countries. It is impossible for America to supply enough organics from its own land. Find a reputable supplier for your food and stick with them.
Truth in labeling and origin is needed. Even local markets should be accountable. The bottom line is the need for further education and action by our government which has historically done a bad job. Retailers and markets should also be responsible for building trust and educating their customers. They are the fine line between the grower and the consumer.
If you want to eat safe and know where your foods come from, do your research and homework. Your life depends on it.
Those clamoring for greater transparency and clarity of meaning in terms of disclosure for food products are absolutely on target. There is currently great skepticism on the part of most consumers on whether whatever “organic” and even “locally grown” means, is really worth the additional cost. For some, that skepticism has evolved even into outright distrust. The type of polling used for this article may show interesting results but do they really mean anything?
The issue not mentioned in the survey is safety. After huge beef recalls, vegetable scares and the like, consumers are concerned about food safety. Rightly or wrongly, they perceive locally grown foods to be safer.
As Ryan points out, being “organic” does not mean being healthier or better for you.
The entire food industry needs to better educate consumers about their options, with an eye towards healthier and safer eating.
Is there truly a link between Organic and Locally Grown? At the end of the day, it’s really about WHY the consumer is buying either. Organic is touted to be a healthier option for you, where as locally grown is just a geographical perspective. If you were following a “macrobiotic” diet, you would opt for locally grown foods to reflect the status of nature around you at different times of year. If you then choose an organic product, that’s second in the choice hierarchy, not interchangeable.
Having said that, not all shoppers are involved in any particular diet and are often confused as to why exactly certain products command a premium. It is truly up to the brilliant shopper marketeers to devise the right POS communication that convinces the shopper to spend those extra cents on what they then perceive to be the better-for-them choice.
Locally grown with pesticides. Locally grown without pesticides.
That is a filter I use, but it takes diligence to get answers in a store environment. That’s why, seasons permitting, I go to the farmer’s market and buy from the people I can talk to and have known for fifteen years. IF you ask, the farmers will tell you what they use and why, and you can make well informed choices.
I am an advocate of more stringent requirements in labeling on fresh food as a result of the variety of surprising information I still get when I ask. Most surprising is that, aside from dealing directly with the grower, most of my questions go unanswered.
Another case of confusion over what “organic” means. There is no reason to believe, as the article implies, that organic is fresher than locally grown. Indeed, one would probably [naively] expect locally grown in Atlanta, where I live, to be fresher than organic from California, if only for shipping time.
Locally grown produce will take off for multiple reasons– but primarily, price!
It is impossible to ship fruits or vegetables 1,000 miles and have them stay fresh and tasty. Unfortunately, some locally grown fruits and vegetables are organic but once they are sent to the distributor a chemical is sprayed on them to keep them from ripening as fast. Locally grown organic fruit and vegetables are better still!
Labeling laws in the US are far too lax for either term to mean anything. For the average Joe, “local” sounds like you will keep money in the community rather than ship it out of the country and “organic” can mean almost anything. In the end, consumers will just be confused.
Local has growing appeal to consumers. Smart retailers will focus on that.