Local Product Purchasing Behaviours of Consumers: DAP Region Products

Yıl 2019, , 97 - 108, 25.08.2019

Sertaç Dokuzlu , Batuhan Demir Bilal Ürüm Volkan Güler Yavuz Sarı Gül Yıldız Osman Aksoy

https://doi.org/10.24181/tarekoder.559056

Cited By: 3

Öz

It was aimed to determine the purchasing behaviours of the consumers and knowledge level about regional products of the Eastern Anatolia Region. Research was conducted in 2016 by applying a semi-structured questionnaire to 226 consumers. According to the results of the survey, about 70% of consumers willing to buy local products. 56% of consumers prefer to buy these products directly from the region. Local products that consumers wanted to buy are mostly; cheese, honey and butter. The consumers are positioning the local products as natural, delicious and healthy. It has been determined that the level of knowledge of the consumers' about geographical indications is as low as 5%. Consumers are willingness to pay an average of 20% more for local products. It is determined that consumers who prefer local products and ready to pay more are concentrated in the group of married male consumers in the middle age and middle and upper income group. Among the products of the DAP region, cheese, meat meals and kebabs, fruit and honey are the most popular. DAP region should be opened to large markets outside the region, starting with cheese and honey products under the umbrella of geographical indications.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Regional product, geographical indication, consumer preference, DAP Region

Tüketicilerin Yöresel Ürün Satın Alma Davranışları: DAP Bölgesi Ürünleri

Öz

Araştırmada
tüketicilerin yöresel ürün satın alma davranışları ve Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi
yöresel ürünleri hakkındaki bilgi düzeylerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır.
Araştırma 2016 yılında 226 tüketiciye yarı-yapılandırılmış anket uygulanarak
yapılmıştır. Araştırmanın sonuçlarına göre tüketicilerin yaklaşık %70’i yöresel
ürünleri satın almak istemektedir. %56 oranında tüketici bu ürünleri doğrudan
yöresinden almayı tercih etmektedir. Genel olarak yöresel olmasını istedikleri
ürünler; peynir çeşitleri, bal ve tereyağıdır. Tüketiciler yöresel ürünleri;
doğal, lezzetli ve sağlıklı olarak konumlandırmaktadır. Tüketicilerin coğrafi
işaretler konusundaki bilgi düzeyinin %5 gibi düşük bir oranda olduğu tespit
edilmiştir. Tüketiciler, yöresel ürünlere ortalama olarak %20 daha fazla bedel
ödemeye hazırdır. Yöresel ürünleri tercih eden ve daha fazla bedel ödemeye
hazır olan kişilerin orta ve üzeri gelir düzeyindeki orta yaş grubundaki evli
erkek tüketiciler grubunda yoğunlaştığı tespit edilmiştir. DAP Bölgesi ürünleri
içerisinde en fazla peynirler, etli yemekler ve kebaplar, meyveler ve bala ilgi
gösterilmektedir. DAP Bölgesi illerinin bölge dışındaki büyük pazarlara coğrafi
işaretler çatısı altında özellikle peynir ve bal ürünlerinden başlayarak
açılmaları gerekmektedir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

yöresel ürün, coğrafi işaret, tüketici tercihi, DAP Bölgesi

Kaynakça

• Agarwal, S. And M.J., Barone, 2005. Emerging Issues for Geographical Indication Branding Strategies, Matric Research Paper, Iowa State University, USA.
• Albayram, Z., Mattas, K., & Tsakiridou, E. (2014). Purchasing local and non-local products labeled with geographical indications (GIs). Oper Research International Journal (2014); 14,, 237 - 251.
• Albisu, L. M. and K. Corcoran, 2001. Agro-food Business Strategies for Origin Labelled Products, Agrarwirtschaft 50 (2001), Heft 6, pp. 362 – 367.
• Anonim 2003. Geographical Indications, Discussion Paper, International Food & Agricultural Trade, Policy Council, USA.
• Anonim 2004. Why do Geographical Indications Matter to Us? EU Background Note, February 2004, Brusells.
• Babcock, B. A., 2003. Geographical Indications, Property Rights, and Value-Added Agriculture, Iowa Ag Review: Vol. 9 : Issue 4, Article 1.
• Baizyldayeva, U.B., R.K. Uskenbayeva and S.T. Amanzholova, 2013. Decision Making Procedure: Applications of IBM SPSS Cluster Analysis and Decision Tree, World Applied Sciences Journal 21 (8): 1207-1212.
• Beşirli, H., 2010. Yemek, Kültür ve Kimlik, Milli Folklor Dergisi, Yıl: 22, Sayı: 87, 159 – 169.
• Broude T., 2005. Taking “Trade and Culture” Seriously: Geographical Indications and Cultural Protection in WTO Law, Journal of International Economic Law, University of Pennsylvania, Vo: 26:4, 623 – 692.
• Cei L., Defrancesco E., Stefani G., 2018. From geographical indications to rural development: A review of the economic effects of European Union policy, Sustainability (Switzerland), 10 (10) , art. no. 3745.
• Chever, T., C. Renault, S. Renault, and V. Romieu, 2012. Value of production of agricultural products and foodstuffs, wines, aromatised wines and spirits protected by a geographical indication (GI), European Commission, No: AGRI–2011–EVAL–04, Final Report.
• DAP, 2016. DAP Bölgesi Yöresel Ürünlerini Ticarileştirme Stratejilerinin Belirlenmesi Projesi, T.C. Kalkınma Bakanlığı Doğu Anadolu Projesi Bölge Kalkınma İdaresi Başkanlığı ve Tübitak – Tüsside, Yayınlanmamış Proje Raporu, Erzurum.
• Deselnicu O. C., M. Costanigro, D. M. Souza-Monteiro and D. T. McFadden, 2013. A Meta-Analysis of Geographical Indication Food Valuation Studies: What Drives the Premium for Origin-Based Labels?, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 38(2):204 – 219.
• Dokuzlu, S., J.C. Pons and M. Roggia, 2018. Support to the Development of Geographical Indications in the Bursa Region, Turkey and the Promotion of Local Exchange of Lessons Learned, Yayınlanmamış Proje Raporu, Bursa.
• Gracia, A. and Albisu, L.M., 2001. Food Consumption in the European Union: Main Determinants and Country Differences, Agribusiness: An International Journal, 17 (4).
• Gracia, A., 2014. Consumers’ preferences for a local food product: A real choice experiment. Empirical Economics, (47) 111 - 128.
• Green, P.E., D.S. Tull and G. Albaum, 1988. Research for Marketing Decisions. Fifth Edition, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 784 p.
• Jefferson-Moore, K. M., Robbins, R. D., Johnson, D., & Bradford, J., 2014. Consumer Preferences for Local Food Products in North Carolina. Journal of Food Distribution Research, Volume 45, Issue 1, 41 - 46.
• Kadanalı, E., S. Tercan ve V. Dağdemir, 2016. Tüketicilerin Yöresel Gıda Ürünleri Tercihi: Erzurum İli Örneği, XII. Ulusal Tarım Ekonomisi Kongresi, 25 – 27 Mayıs 2016, Bildiriler, s. 663 – 672.
• Karagölge, C. ve K. Peker, 2002. Tarım Ekonomisi Araştırmalarında Tabakalı Örnekleme Yönteminin Kullanılması, Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 33 (3), sf. 313-316, Erzurum.
• Kılıç, S., 2013. Örnekleme Yöntemleri, Journal of Mood Disorders Volume: 3, Number: 1, 2013 - www.jmood.org
• Knight, A. J., 2013. Evaluating local food programs: The case of Select Nova Scotia. Evaluation and Program Planning, 36, 29 - 39.
• Loureiro, M. L., & McCluskey, J. J. 2000. Assessing Consumer Response to Protected Geographical Identification Labeling. Agribusiness, Vol. 16, No. 3, 309 - 320.
• McFadden, D. T. (2015) What Do We Mean by “Local Foods”? The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, 30 (1), 1 - 6.
• Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E.M. and Martijn G. de Jong, 2010. A Global Investigation into the Constellation of Consumer Attitudes toward Global and Local Products, Journal of Marketing, 74 (November), 18-40.
• TPMK, 2018. Türk Patent ve Marka Kurumu, Coğrafi İşaret İstatistikleri http://www.turkpatent.gov.tr/TURKPATENT/
• Tregear, A., 2001. OLP Sector in United Kingdom, Development of Origin Labelled Products: Humanity, Innovation and Sustainability, University of Newcastle, Project Report, UK.
• Tregear, A., Arfini, F., Belletti, G. and Marescotti A., 2007. Regional Foods and Rural Development: the Role of Product Qualification, Journal of Rural Studies, 23, 12–22.
• Vandecandelaere, E. 2016. Geographical indications: a tool for supporting sustainable food systems”, in "Intellectual Property Rights for Geographical Indications: What is at stake in the TTIP? Arfini F., Mancini M.C., Veneziani M. and Donati M. eds.: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
• Vandecandelaere, E., Afrini, F., Belletti, G., & Marescotti, A. 2010. Linking People, Places and Products. A Guide for Promoting Quality Linked to Geographical Origin and Sustainable Geographical Indications. Rome, Italy: FAO & SINERGI.
• Vats, N.K., 2016. Geographical indication-the factors of rural development and strengthening economy, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights. (Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, September-November 2016, 21(5-6):347-354.
• Webb, J. R., 1992. Understanding & Designin Marketing Research, Academic Press Limited, 236 p. UK.
• WTO, 2014 Uruguay Round Agreement: TRIPS Part II — Standards concerning the availability, scope and use of Intellectual Property Rights http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips_04b_e.htm