Evaluation of Consumers' Perceptions and Purchase Decisions Regarding Plant-Based Milk Alternatives in Turkey

Öz

In the global world, plant-based milk alternatives have taken an important place in the food industry and have attracted great interest from consumers. This study was conducted to determine the main reasons why individuals prefer plant-based milk alternatives and the driving factors affecting their purchasing behavior towards plant-based milk alternatives. For this purpose, the sociodemographic characteristics, and general nutritional habits of 895 participants were questioned. In addition, the status of consuming plant-based milk alternatives of the participants in the last year was questioned and the purchasing decisions of the participants who reported that they consume these products and the factors that drive them to buy these products were evaluated. 796 women (88.9%) and 99 men (11.1%) participated in the study. The mean age of the participants is 31.17±9.62. Most of the participants (36.4% of women and 72.7% of men) reported that they never consumed plant-based milk alternatives. The most consumed plant-based milk alternatives were determined as almond milk (80.9%), coconut milk (60.2%), and soy milk (51.2%). The most frequent reason why consumers choose plant-based milk alternatives is determined as "Non-dairy milk contains good fat". The participants reported that dieticians have the most influence on their choices (x̄=3.35±1.27) and these products were mostly purchased from supermarkets and online channels. In addition, considering that drinking plant-based milk is beneficial for health (OR=1.978) and exercising regularly (OR=1.337) increases the odds of being a regular consumer. In conclusion, it is determined that consumer acceptance of plant-based milk alternatives is affected by the consumer's perception of healthy food, marketing strategies, and consumer expectations.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Consumer perception
• Purchase decision
• Plant-based milk alternatives
• Plant-based beverages

Tüketicilerin Bitkisel Bazlı Süt Ürünlerine İlişkin Algı ve Satın Alma Kararlarının Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Globalleşen dünyada bitkisel bazlı süt ürünleri, gıda endüstrisinde önemli bir yer edinmiş ve tüketicilerden büyük ilgi görmüştür. Bu araştırma, yetişkinlerin bitkisel bazlı süt ürünlerini tercih etmelerindeki temel nedenleri ve bu ürünlere yönelik satın alma davranışlarını etkileyen itici faktörleri belirlemek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Bu amaçla 895 katılımcının sosyodemografik özellikleri ve genel beslenme alışkanlıkları, son bir yılda bitkisel bazlı süt ürünlerini tüketme durumları, bu ürünleri tükettiğini bildirenlerin satın alma kararlarını ve bu ürünleri almaya iten faktörler değerlendirilmiştir. Araştırmaya 796 kadın (%88.9), 99 erkek (%11.1) katılmıştır. Katılımcıların yaş ortalaması 31.17±9.62 yıldır. Katılımcıların çoğu (kadınların %36.4’ü ve erkeklerin %72.7’si) bitkisel bazlı süt ürünlerini hiç tüketmediklerini bildirmiştir. En sık tüketilen bitkisel bazlı süt ürünleri; badem sütü (%80.9), hindistancevizi sütü (%60.2) ve soya sütü (%51.2)’dür. Tüketiciler, en sık “yağ içeriğinin daha iyi olması” nedeniyle bitkisel bazlı süt ürünlerini tercih ettiklerini, tercihlerinde en çok diyetisyenlerin etkili olduğunu (x̄=3,35±1,27), bu ürünleri en sık süpermarketten ve çevrimiçi olarak satın aldıklarını belirtmişlerdir. Bitkisel bazlı süt ürünlerinin sağlığa yararlı olduğunu düşünenlerin (OR=1.978) ve düzenli egzersiz yapanların (OR=1.337), bu ürünleri düzenli olarak tüketme olasılığı artırmaktadır. Tüketicilerin bitkisel bazlı süt ürünlerini tercih etme durumunun, tüketicinin sağlıklı gıda algısından, pazarlama stratejilerinden ve tüketici beklentilerinden etkilendiği tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tüketici algısı
• Satın alma kararı
• Bitkisel bazlı süt ürünleri
• Bitkisel bazlı içecekler

Destekleyen Kurum

Bu çalışma herhangi bir kurum ya da kuruluş tarafından desteklenmemiştir.

Kaynakça

1. Ajie, W.N. & Chapman-Novakofski, K.M. Impact of computer-mediated, obesity-related nutrition education interventions for adolescents: a systematic review. J Adolesc Health. 2014;54(6):631-645.
2. Allen, M. (2019). Plant-based food retail sales are growing 5x total food sales. Çevrimiçi https://gfi.org/blog/spins-data-release-2019/#:~:text=The%20U.S.%20retail%20market%20for,data%20from%20GFI%20and%20PBFA.&text=New%20data%20show%20that%20the,market%20is%20worth%20%244.5%20billion
3. Aydar, E. F., Tutuncu, S., & Ozcelik, B. Plant-based milk substitutes: Bioactive compounds, conventional and novel processes, bioavailability studies, and health effects. J Funct Foods. 2020;70:103975.
4. Berkman, N.D., Davis, T.C. & McCormack, L. Health literacy: what is it? J Health Commun. 2010;15(2): 9-19.
5. Boaitey, A., & Minegishi, K. Determinants of household choice of dairy and plant-based milk alternatives: evidence from a field survey. Journal of Food Products Marketing. 2020;26(9):639-653.
6. Bridges, M. (2018). Moo-ove over, cow’s milk: the rise of plant-based dairy alternatives. Pract Gastroenterol, 21, 20-27. Çevrimiçi https://med.virginia.edu/ginutrition/wp-content/uploads/sites/199/2014/06/January-18-Milk-Alternatives.pdf
7. Büyükkaragöz, A., Bas, M., Sağlam, D., & Cengiz, Ş.E. Consumers' awareness, acceptance and attitudes towards functional foods in Turkey. Int J Consum Stud. 2014;38(6):628-635.
8. Chalupa-Krebzdak, S., Long, C.J., & Bohrer, B.M. Nutrient density and nutritional value of milk and plant-based milk alternatives. Int Dairy J. 2018;87:84-92.

9. Chapman, K.M., Chan, M.W., & Clark, C.D. Factors influencing dairy calcium intake in women. J Am Coll Nutr. 1995;14(4):336-340.
10. Chau, M.M., Burgermaster, M., & Mamykina, L. The use of social media in nutrition interventions for adolescents and young adults-A systematic review. Int J Med Inform. 2018;120:77-91.
11. Clark, M.A., Springmann, M., Hill, J., & Tilman, D. Multiple health and environmental impacts of foods. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2019;116(46):23357-23362.
12. Cornucopia Institute. (2019). “Pouring” Over Plant-Based Beverages. A Consumer’s Guide to Identifying the Best Non-Milk Alternatives. WI: Cornucopia Institute Cornucopia. Çevrimiçi https://www.cornucopia.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/PlantBasedBeverageReport1.pdf
13. Das, A., Raychaudhuri, U., & Chakraborty, R. Cereal based functional food of Indian subcontinent: a review. J Food Sci Technol. 2012;49(6):665-672.
14. DiFilippo, K.N., Huang, W.H., Andrade, J.E., & Chapman-Novakofski, K.M. The use of mobile apps to improve nutrition outcomes: A systematic literature review. J Telemed Telecare. 2015;21(5):243-253.
15. Dubey, M.R., & Patel, V.P. Probiotics: a promising tool for calcium absorption. Nutr J. 2018;12(1):59-69.
16. Fortune Business Insight. (2022). Dairy Alternatives Market Size, Share & COVID-19 Impact Analysis, By Source (Soy, Almond, Coconut, Rice, Oats, and Others), Product Type (Non-Dairy Milk, Butter, Cheeses, Yogurts, Ice Cream, and Others), Distribution Channel (Supermarkets/Hypermarkets, Convenience Stores, Online Retail, and Others), and Regional Forecats, 2022-2029. Çevrimiçi https://www.fortunebusinessinsights.com/industry-reports/dairy-alternatives-market-100221
17. Global Nutrition Report. (2022). 2021 Global Nutrition Report: The state of global nutrition. Bristol, UK: Development Initiatives. Çevrimiçi https://globalnutritionreport.org/reports/2021-global-nutrition-report/executive-summary/
18. Grand View Research. (2022). Dairy Alternatives Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report By Source (Soy, Almond, Coconut, Rice, Oats), By Product (Milk, Yogurt, Cheese, Ice-cream, Creamers), By Distribution Channel, And Segment Forecasts, 2022 – 2030. Çevrimiçi https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/dairy-alternatives-market
19. Haas, R., Schnepps, A., Pichler, A., & Meixner, O. (2019). Cow milk versus plant-based milk substitutes: A comparison of product image and motivational structure of consumption. Sustainability, 11(18), 5046.
20. Johns, T., & Sthapit, B.R. Biocultural diversity in the sustainability of developing-country food systems. Food Nutr Bull. 2004;25(2):143-155.
21. Kaur, S., & Das, M. Functional foods: An overview. Food Sci Biotechnol. 2011;20(4):861-875.
22. Kickbusch, I., Pelikan, J.M., Apfel, F., & Tsouros, A.D. (2013). Health literacy: the solid facts. Copenhagen: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. Çevrimiçi https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/326432
23. Kopf-Bolanz, K., & Sousa, A. Nutritional Implications of an Increasing Consumption of Non-Dairy Plant-Based Beverages Instead of Cow’s Milk in Switzerland. J Adv Dairy Res. 2017;5:197.
24. Krystallis, A., Maglaras, G., & Mamalis, S. Motivations and cognitive structures of consumers in their purchasing of functional foods. Food Qual Prefer. 2008;19:525-538.
25. Mäkinen, O.E., Wanhalinna, V., Zannini, E., & Arendt, E.K. Foods for special dietary needs: Non-dairy plant-based milk substitutes and fermented dairy-type products. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2016;56(3):339-349.
26. Markovina, J., Stewart-Knox, B.J., Rankin, A., Gibney, M., Almeida, M.D.V., Fischer, A.R.H., Kuznesof, S.A., Poinhos, R., Panzone, L., Frewer, L.J. Food4Me study: validity and reliability of Food Choice Questionnaire in 9 European countries. Food Qual Prefer. 2015;45:26-32.
27. Martins, I.M., Chen, Q., & Chen, C.Y.O. (2016), Emerging Functional Foods Derived from Almonds, Ferreira I.C.F.R, Morales, P. & Barros, L. (Eds.), In Wild Plants, Mushrooms and Nuts (445-469), UK: John Wiley & Sons.
28. Maxim, C., Farcas, A., Vodnar, D., Tofana, M. & Socaci, S. Consumers’ requirements for functional foods. Bulletin UASVM Food Sci Technol. 2019;76(2):138.
29. McCarthy, K., Parker, M., Ameerally, A., Drake, S., & Drake, M. Drivers of choice for fluid milk versus plant-based alternatives: What are consumer perceptions of fluid milk? J Dairy Sci. 2017;100(8):6125-6138.
30. Miller, V., Webb, P., Cudhea, F., Shi, P., Zhang, J., Reedy, J., Erndt-Marino, J., Coates, J. & Mozaffarian, D. Global dietary quality in 185 countries from 1990 to 2018 show wide differences by nation, age, education, and urbanicity. Nat Food. 2022;3(9):694-702.
31. Mintel Press Team. (2018a). US Non-Dairy Milk Sales Grow 61% Over the Last Five Years. Çevrimiçi https://www.mintel.com/press-centre/food-and-drink/us-non-dairy-milk-sales-grow-61-over-the-last-five-years
32. Mintel Press Team. (2018b). Taste is the Top Reason US Consumers Eat Plant-Based Proteins. Çevrimiçi https://www.mintel.com/press-centre/food-and-drink/taste-is-the-top-reason-us-consumers-eat-plant-based-proteins#:~:text=Mintel%20Press%20Team&text=However%2C%20new%20research%20from%20Mintel,even%20health%20(39%20percent
33. Mintel Press Team. (2019). Milking the Vegan Trend: A Quarter (23%) of Brits Use Plant-Based Milk. Çevrimiçi https://www.mintel.com/press-centre/food-and-drink/milking-the-vegan-trend-a-quarter-23-of-brits-use-plant-based-milk
34. Mordor Intelligence (2022). Asia-Pacific Dairy Alternatives Market - Growth, Trends, COVID-19 Impact, and Forecasts (2022 - 2027). Çevrimiçi https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/asia-pacific-dairy-alternatives-market
35. National Health Services. (2022). Lactose intolerance. Çevrimiçi https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/lactose-intolerance/
36. Özdemir, H., Alper, Z., Uncu, Y. & Bilgel, N. Health literacy among adults: a study from Turkey. Health Educ Res. 2010;25(3):464-477.
37. Palacios, O., Badran, J., Drake, M.A., Reisner, M. & Moskowitz, H. Consumer acceptance of cow's milk versus soy beverages: Impact of ethnicity, lactose tolerance and sensory preference segmentation. J Sens Stud. 2009;24(5):731-748.
38. Park, Y. W. The impact of plant-based non-dairy alternative milk on the dairy industry. Food science of animal resources. 2021;41(1):8.
39. Poore, J. & Nemecek, T. Reducing food's environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science (New York, N.Y.). 2018;360:987-992.
40. Poulsen, J. (1999). Danish consumers’ attitudes towards functional foods. MAPP Working Papers, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, The MAPP Centre, No 62, 1-44. Çevrimiçi https://pure.au.dk/ws/files/32297714/wp62.pdf
41. Sağlam, K. & Gümüş, T. Yazılı, Görsel ve Sosyal Medyada Gıda ile İlgili Bilgi Kirliliğinin Halkın Gıda Tercihi Üzerine Etkisi. Gıda. 2019;44(1):153-162.
42. Schyver, T. & Smith, C. Reported attitudes and beliefs toward soy food consumption of soy consumers versus nonconsumers in natural foods or mainstream grocery stores. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2005;37(6):292-299.
43. Sethi, S., Tyagi, S. K. & Anurag, R.K. Plant-based milk alternatives an emerging segment of functional beverages: a review. J Food Sci Technol. 2016;53(9): 3408-3423.
44. Sexton, A.E., Garnett, T. & Lorimer, J. Vegan food geographies and the rise of Big Veganism. Prog Hum Geogr. 2022;46(2):605–628.
45. Singhal, S., Baker, R.D. & Baker, S.S. A Comparison of the Nutritional Value of Cow's Milk and Nondairy Beverages. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2017;64(5):799-805.
46. Siró, I., Kápolna, E., Kápolna, B. & Lugasi, A. Functional food. Product development, marketing and consumer acceptance—A review. Appetite. 2008;51(3):456-467.
47. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health, General Directorate of Public Health. (2019). Turkey Nutrition and Health Survey 2017, 1132, Ankara. Çevrimiçi https://hsgm.saglik.gov.tr/depo/birimler/saglikli-beslenme-hareketli-hayat-db/TBSA_RAPOR_KITAP_2017_ENG_.pdf
48. The US National Library of Medicine. (2020). Lactose Intolerance. Çevrimiçi https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/lactose-intolerance/
49. Urala, N. (2005). Functional foods in Finland Consumers' views, attitudes and willingness to use. VTT Publications. Çevrimiçi https://www.vttresearch.com/sites/default/files/pdf/publications/2005/P581.pdf
50. Vainio, A., Niva, M., Jallinoja, P., & Latvala, T. From beef to beans: Eating motives and the replacement of animal proteins with plant proteins among Finnish consumers. Appetite. 2016;106:92-100.
51. Vandenplas, Y., Koletzko, S., Isolauri, E., Hill, D., Oranje, A.P., Brueton, M., Staiano, A. & Dupont, C. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of cow’s milk protein allergy in infants. Arch Dis Childh. 2007;92(10):902-908. Vegetarian Society. (2022). Going veggie for animals. Çevrimiçi https://vegsoc.org/
52. Verbeke, W. Consumer acceptance of functional foods: socio-demographic, cognitive and attitudinal determinants. Food Qual Prefer. 2005;16(1):45-57.
53. Vicentini, A., Liberatore, L. & Mastrocola, D. Functional foods: trends and development of the global market. Ital J Food Sci. 2016;28(2):338-351.
54. Westhoek, H., Lesschen, J.P., Rood, G., Wagner, S., De Marco, A., Murphy-Bokern, D., Leip, A., van Grinsven, H., Sutton, M.A. & Oenema, O. Food choices, health and environment: Effects of cutting Europe's meat and dairy intake. Glob Environ Change. 2014;26:196-205.
55. Wolf, C.A., Malone, T. & McFadden, B.R. Beverage milk consumption patterns in the United States: Who is substituting from dairy to plant-based beverages? J Dairy Sci. 2020;103(12):11209-11217.
56. World Health Organization. (2010). Body mass index - BMI. Çevrimiçi https://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/disease-prevention/nutrition/a-healthy-lifestyle/body-mass-index-bmi
57. Yadav, D.N., Bansal, S., Jaiswal, A.K. & Singh, R. Plant based dairy analogues: An emerging food. Agri Res & Tech. 2017;10(2):23-26.
58. Yılmaz Köse, B. & Ölmez, Y. Laktoz intoleransı ve diyet. Gastroentroloji. 2016;20(3): 245-252. Çevrimiçi https://guncel.tgv.org.tr/journal/67/pdf/100475.pdf