The role of the certificates on consumers chicken meat and egg choice in Antalya central districts

Öz

Purpose: The aim of this study is to determine whether food certificates, including organic, Good Agricultural Practices, and Halal labelled products, plus cooperative-owned brands for eggs, have an important role in consumer choice decisions and whether there exist different consumer segments. Design/Methodology/Approach: The data used in the research was collected via a face-to-face survey conducted with 282 respondents responsible for household food purchases in three central districts of Antalya in the autumn of 2021. The data obtained by the survey consist of behavioural, socio-economic, and demographic variables and were analysed with multivariate statistics. Findings: The results of factor analysis indicate that three factors account for 74% of the variance in chicken meat choice: certifications (36.3%), economy (23.1%), and freshness (14.7%). For eggs, three factors account for 73% of the variance: certifications (33.7%), freshness (24.2%), and economy (15.0%). The K-means cluster analysis with the factor score data resulted in three clusters for chicken meat and two clusters for eggs being adequate. This study revealed that certification is the primary major factor explaining variance in consumer choice decisions in both chicken and eggs. The segmentation result indicates that freshness and price are still primary discriminatory variables for about 90 per cent of consumers in both products. Originality/Value: This study attempts to contribute to the gap in the national literature with respect to broiler meat and eggs. The results can serve as a basis for strategy development by policymakers, producers and downstream value chain actors and enhance consumers’ knowledge about product labels, including the meaning of various certificates.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Chicken meat consumer
• egg consumer
• food consumer behaviour
• food market segmentation

Antalya merkez ilçelerinde tüketicilerin tavuk eti ve yumurta tercihinde sertifikaların rolü

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı; organik, iyi tarım uygulamaları ve helal etiketli ürünler ile yumurtada kooperatif markasının tüketici tavuk eti ve yumurta tercih kararında önemli bir rolü olup olmadığını ve farklı tüketici segmentlerinin olup olmadığını belirlemektir. Tasarım/Metodoloji /Yaklaşım: Araştırmada kullanılan veriler, 2021 sonbaharında Antalya'nın üç merkez ilçesinde hanehalkı gıda satın alımından sorumlu 282 katılımcıyla yapılan yüz yüze anket yoluyla toplanmıştır. Anket yoluyla elde edilen veriler davranışsal, sosyoekonomik ve demografik değişkenlerden oluşmakta olup çok değişkenli istatistiklerle analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular: Faktör analizi sonuçları, tavuk eti tercihindeki varyansın %74'ünün üç faktörden kaynaklandığını göstermektedir: sertifikalar (%36,3), ekonomi (%23,1) ve tazelik (%14,7). Yumurtalar için varyansın %73'ünü üç faktör oluşturmaktadır: sertifikalar (%33,7), tazelik (%24,2) ve ekonomi (%15,0). Faktör puanı verileriyle yapılan K-ortalamalar kümeleme analizi, tavuk eti için üç kümenin ve yumurta için iki kümenin yeterli olduğunu ortaya koydu. Bu çalışma, sertifikasyonun hem tavuk hem de yumurtada tüketici tercih kararındaki varyansı açıklayan en önemli faktör olduğunu ortaya koydu. Segmentasyon sonucu, tazelik ve fiyatın her iki üründe de tüketicilerin yaklaşık %90'ı için hala birincil ayırt edici değişkenler olduğunu gösteriyor. Özgünlük/Değer: Bu çalışma, piliç eti ve yumurta ile ilgili ulusal literatürdeki boşluğa katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. Sonuçlar, politika yapıcılar, üreticiler ve değer zinciri aktörleri tarafından strateji geliştirme ve tüketicilerin çeşitli sertifikaların anlamı dahil olmak üzere ürün etiketleri hakkındaki bilgilerini artırmada altlık olarak kullanılabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tavuk eti tüketicisi
• yumurta tüketicisi
• gıda tüketici davranışı
• gıda pazarı bölümlemesi

Kaynakça

1. Aral, Y., Aydin, E., Demir, P., Akin, A. C., Cevger, Y., Kuyululu, Ç. Y. K. and Arikan, M. S. (2013). “Consumer preferences and consumption situation of chicken meat in Ankara Province, Turkey”. Turkish Journal of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, 37(5), pp. 582-587.
2. Aytop, Y. (2019). “Chicken meat consumption behaviours of consumers living in central district of Gaziantep”. Journal Of Poultry Research, 16(1), pp. 14-18.
3. Aytop, Y. and Fikret, I. (2020). Gaziantep ilindeki tüketicilerin yumurta tüketim alışkanlıklarının belirlenmesi. Türk Tarım ve Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(1), pp. 269-275.
4. Berkhoff, J., Alvarado-Gilis, C., Keim, J. P., Alcalde, J. A., Vargas-Bello-Pérez, E. and Gandarillas, M. (2020). “Consumer preferences and sensory characteristics of eggs from family farms”. Poultry science, 99(11), pp. 6239-6246.
5. Bernués, A., Ripoll, G. and Panea, B. (2012). “Consumer segmentation based on convenience orientation and attitudes towards quality attributes of lamb meat”. Food Quality and Preference, 26(2), pp. 211-220.
6. Brouwer, I., van Liere, M., de Brauw, A., Dominguez-Salas, P., Herforth, A., Kennedy, G., Lachat, C., Omosa, E. B., Talsma, E. and Vandevijvere, S. (2021). “Reverse thinking: taking a healthy diet perspective towards food systems transformations”. Food Security, 13(6), pp. 1497-1523.
7. Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques. John Wiley & Sons.
8. Escobedo del Bosque, C. I., Spiller, A. and Risius, A. (2021). “Who wants chicken? uncovering consumer preferences for produce of alternative chicken product methods”. Sustainability, 13(5), pp. 2440-2440.

9. Font-i-Furnols, M. and Guerrero, L. (2014). “Consumer preference, behavior and perception about meat and meat products: An overview”. Meat science, 98(3), pp. 361-371.
10. Formplus. (2023). Market Segmentation Retrieved on 13 February 2023 from https://www.formpl.us/resources/market-segmentation/behavioral/
11. Gazdecki, M., Goryńska-Goldmann, E., Kiss, M. and Szakály, Z. (2021). “Segmentation of food consumers based on their sustainable attitude”. Energies, 14(11), pp. 3179-3179.
12. Gerini, F., Alfnes, F. and Schjøll, A. (2016). “Organic‐and animal welfare‐labelled eggs: competing for the same consumers?” Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67(2), pp. 471-490.
13. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Babin, B. J. and Black, W. C. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. (Vol. 7). In: Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
14. Haskaraca, G., Arslan, Y. and Ayhan, Z. (2022). Evaluation of Factors affecting consumers’ poultry meat consumption habits ad perceptions and poultry breeding processes”. Gıda, 47(6), pp. 1014-1031.
15. Hawkes, C., Harris, J., & Gillespie, S. (2017). “Urbanization and the nutrition transition” in Global food policy report, 4(41), pp 34-41.
16. Huang, Wan-Tran & Chien, Chun-Yu. (2006). Using Market Segmentation to Assess Consumers' Acceptance of Organic Eggs in Taiwan. European Association of Agricultural Economists, 99th Seminar, February 8-10, 2006, Bonn, Germany.
17. Huseynov, F., & Özkan Yıldırım, S. (2019). Online Consumer Typologies and Their Shopping Behaviors in B2C E-Commerce Platforms. SAGE Open, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019854639 (Original work published 2019)
18. Islam, M. J., Sayeed, M. A., Akhtar, S., Hossain, M. S. and Liza, A. A. (2018). “Consumers profile analysis towards chicken, beef, mutton, fish and egg consumption in Bangladesh”. British Food Journal, 120(12), pp. 2818-2831.
19. John, A., Horsefall, A. and Sunny, I. (2012). “Behavioral-based segmentation and marketing success: An empirical investigation of fast food industry”. European Journal of Business and Management, 4(15), pp. 56-65.
20. Kearney, J. (2010). “Food consumption trends and drivers. Philosophical transactions of the royal society B”. Biological Sciences, 365(1554), pp. 2793-2807.
21. Lappo, A., Bjørndal, T., Fernández-Polanco, J. and Lem, A. (2015). “Consumers ‘concerns and External Drivers In Food Markets.”. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular(C1102), I.
22. MoAF. (2025). Crops Statistics of General Directorate of Crops Production, . Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs Retrieved on on 20.02.2020 from https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/Konular/Bitkisel-Uretim
23. Mulaik, S. A. (2009). Foundations of factor analysis, (Second ed.). Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, Taylor&Francis Group.
24. Oğuz, C. and Karakayacı, Z. (2017). Tarım Ekonomisinde Araştırma ve Örnekleme Metodolojisi. Konya, Atlas Akademi, 183.
25. Onurlubaş, E., Gümüş, N. and Karaca, Ş. (2020). “Tüketicilerin Organik Yumurta Satın Alma Niyetini Etkileyen Faktörlerin Yapısal Eşitlik Modeli İle İncelenmesi”. Sosyal Bilimler Arastirmalari Dergisi, 10(1).
26. Onyango, B. M., Rimal, A., Miljkovic, D. and Hallman, W. K. (2009). “Food safety risk perceptions as a tool for market segmentation: The US poultry meat market”. Journal of Food Distribution Research, 40(856-2016-57817), pp. 79-90.
27. Parlakay, O., Faris, U., Merve, A., Gönül, E. and Şukuf, M. E. (2022). “Tüketicilerin tavuk eti satın alma ve tüketim tercihlerinin belirlenmesi: Hatay ili örneği”. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 27(3), pp. 556-564.
28. Puig, A. B., Montero, L., Pérez, C. E. and Vera, J. M. B. (2021). “Analysis of chicken and turkey meat consumption by segmentation of Spanish consumers using food-related lifestyle”. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 19(1), pp. 101-101.
29. Qazzafi, S. (2020). “Factor affecting consumer buying behavior: a conceptual study”. International Journal for Scientific Research & Development, 8(2), 1205-1208.
30. Raimundo, L. M. B. and Batalha, M. O. (2015). “Consumption of chicken meat in Sao Paulo: market segmentation and strategies”. CEP, 13565, pp. 905-905.
31. Ranganathan, J. Vennard, D., Waite, R., Lipinski, B., Searchinger, T., Dumas, P., Forslund, A., Guyomard, H., Manceron, S., Marajo Petitzon., E., Mouël, C., Havlik., P., Herrero, M., Zhang, X., Wirsenius, S., Ramos, F., Yan, X., Phillips, M. and Mungkung, R. (2016). Shifting Diets for a Sustainable Food Future. 10.13140/RG.2.1.3808.2961.
32. Ripoll, G., Alberti, P. and Panea, B. (2015). “Consumer segmentation based on food-related lifestyles and perception of chicken breast”. International Journal of Poultry Science. 14. pp. 262-275. 10.3923/ijps.2015.262.275.
33. Rizkina, F. D., Aulia, A. N., Muliasari, R. M. and Takenouchi, N. (2022). “Analysis of consumer behavior factors on willingness to buy chicken meat with halal labels at traditional markets in Jember area”. Jurnal Agrotek Ummat, 9(3), pp. 165-181.
34. Rondoni, A., Asioli, D. and Millan, E. (2020). “Consumer behaviour, perceptions, and preferences towards eggs: A review of the literature and discussion of industry implications”. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 106, pp. 391-401.
35. Sarti, S., Darnall, N. and Testa, F. (2018). “Market segmentation of consumers based on their actual sustainability and health-related purchases”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 192, pp. 270-280.
36. Špička, J. and Náglová, Z. (2022). “Consumer segmentation in the meat market - The case study of Czech Republic”. Agricultural Economics, 68(2), pp. 68-77. doi: 10.17221/334/2021-AGRICECON
37. Thies, Annika & Staudigel, Matthias & Weible, Daniela. (2023). A segmentation of fresh meat shoppers based on revealed preferences. Agribusiness. 1-25. 10.1002/agr.21828.
38. Topcu, Y., Uzundumlu, A. and Baran, D. (2015). “Tüketicilerin tavuk eti tüketimi ile ilgili tutum ve davranışlarını etkileyen faktörlerin analizi”. Türk Tarım–Gıda Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 3.
39. TurkStat. (2020). Household Consumption Expenditure Statistics. Turksih Statistical Institute Retrieved on December 20 from https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=gelir-yasam-tuketim-ve-yoksulluk-107&dil=1
40. TurkStat. (2022). Address Based Population Registration System Turksih Statistics Institute (TurkStat). Retrieved on 15.01.2024 from https://nip.tuik.gov.tr/Home/Adnks
41. TurkStat. (2024a). National Account Retrieved on 20.02.2025 from https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=ulusal-hesaplar-113&dil=1
42. TurkStat. (2024b). Household Consumption Expenditure Statistics. TurkStat Retrieved on 20.02.2025 from https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=gelir-yasam-tuketim-ve-yoksulluk-107&dil=1
43. TurkStat. (2025). Address Based Population Registration System. Retrieved on 20.02.2025 from https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=nufus-ve-demografi-109&dil=1
44. Van Loo, E. J., Minnens, F. and Verbeke, W. (2021). “Consumer preferences for private label brand vs. National brand organic juice and eggs: A latent class approach”. Sustainability, 13(13), pp. 7028-7028.
45. Vermeulen, S. J., Park, T., Khoury, C. K. and Béné, C. (2020). “Changing diets and the transformation of the global food system”. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1478(1), pp. 3-17.
46. Walley, K., Parrott, P., Custance, P., Meledo-Abraham, P. and Bourdin, A. (2014). “A review of UK consumers’ purchasing patterns, perceptions and decision making factors for poultry meat”. World's Poultry Science Journal, 70(3), pp. 493-502.
47. Yamane, T. (2001). Temel Örnekleme Yöntemleri,(1. Baskı). Çev. A. Esin, MA Bakır, C. Aydın ve E. Gürbüzsel), Literatür Yayıncılık, İstanbul.
48. Yang, S.-H. and Nugraha, W. S. (2021). “What Makes Consumers Purchase Fresh Eggs in Supermarkets: The Effect of Unrealistic Choice Set Matters”. Animals, 11(12), pp. 3542-3542.
49. Yeh, C.-H., Menozzi, D. and Török, Á. (2020). “Eliciting egg consumer preferences for organic labels and omega 3 claims in Italy and Hungary”. Foods, 9(9), pp. 1212-1212.
50. Żakowska-Biemans, S. and Tekień, A. (2017). “Free range, organic? Polish consumers preferences regarding information on farming system and nutritional enhancement of eggs: A discrete choice based experiment”. Sustainability, 9(11), pp. 1999-1999.