journal of macromarketing … · 2011. 10. 14. · 172 journal of macromarketing 30(2) 172...

http://jmk.sagepub.com/Journal of Macromarketing

http://jmk.sagepub.com/content/30/2/171The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0276146710361926

2010 30: 171Journal of MacromarketingJohn Thøgersen

Country Differences in Sustainable Consumption: The Case of Organic Food

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Macromarketing Society

can be found at:Journal of MacromarketingAdditional services and information for

http://jmk.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jmk.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jmk.sagepub.com/content/30/2/171.refs.htmlCitations:

at Avans Hogeschool on September 16, 2011jmk.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://jmk.sagepub.com/http://jmk.sagepub.com/content/30/2/171http://www.sagepublications.comhttp://www.macromarketing.orghttp://jmk.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://jmk.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://jmk.sagepub.com/content/30/2/171.refs.htmlhttp://jmk.sagepub.com/

Country Differences in SustainableConsumption: The Case of Organic Food

John Thøgersen1

AbstractIn a sustainability perspective, consumption research has an unfortunate individualizing bias, which means that macro andstructural causes of unsustainable consumption tend to be ignored. Hence, a comprehensive model of determinants of thesustainability of consumption is developed and applied on a specific case: organic food consumption. The analyzed data are pub-lished research on why consumer purchase of organic food products differs between countries. As expected, organic food’s shareof total food consumption depends heavily on political regulation, including legal definitions and standards, financial support tofarmers, and a national labeling system. Other important structural factors are soil conditions, an effective and efficient distribu-tion system, and the size of the premium price demanded for organic food products. Macro factors such as the food culture andthe culture’s level of postmaterialism and environmental concern play an additional role. The evidence suggests that, together,macro and structural factors such as these are more, and probably considerably more, important for the sustainability of foodconsumption than are individual-level attitudinal variables.

Keywordssustainable consumption, organic food consumption, country differences, Europe

There is a growing consensus in society that, ‘‘altering

consumption patterns’’ is ‘‘one of humanity’s greatest chal-

lenges in the quest for environmentally sound and sustainable

development’’ (Agenda 21, the action document from the Rio

Summit in 1992, see Sitarz 1994). ‘‘Sustainable’’ here refers

to a level and pattern of consumption, which meets the needs

of the present without compromising the ability of future

generations to meet their own needs (World Commission on

Environment Development 1987). Some of the most serious

environmental challenges currently facing humanity are related

to our unsustainable consumption patterns and lifestyles

(Durning 1992; European Environment Agency 2005; Sitarz

1994; Stern 1992; United Nations 2002). The problem is not

limited to marginal areas of consumption (e.g., the consump-

tion of luxuries), but extends to the way industrial and emer-

ging societies provide basic necessities, such as food, shelter,

and transportation to its citizens (Durning 1992; European

Environment Agency 2005).

Despite the broad international consensus about the need for

action, progress toward sustainable consumption is disappoint-

ingly slow. For instance, in a report issued by United Nations

Secretary-General Kofi Annan in preparation for the 2002

Johannesburg Summit, it was concluded that ‘‘Progress toward

the goals established at Rio has been slower than anticipated

and in some respects conditions are worse than they were

10 years ago.’’ Apparently, consumer-citizens, the business

community, and their elected governments in industrial and

emerging countries strive less hard at achieving sustainable

lifestyles than is desired by the global community and than is

in their collective long-term interest.

When discussing the problem of unsustainable consump-

tion, there is a perhaps natural tendency to focus on individual

consumers’ decision making and behavior. However, it has

been convincingly argued that the attitudes, preferences, and

choices of individual consumers are less important for the

sustainability of private consumption than are the macro and

structural conditions that frame and constrain individual

choices (e.g., Etzioni 2009; Kilbourne, McDonagh, and

Prothero 1997; Thøgersen 2005b). Still, perhaps, because the

activities and motivations of individual consumers are more

obtrusive than the effects of macro and structural factors, both

research and policy in the area of sustainable consumption have

an unfortunate individualistic and individualizing bias (e.g.,

Alfredsson 2004; Schaefer and Crane 2005).

To capture the importance of macro and sociostructural fac-

tors for sustainable consumption, the research focus needs to be

broad enough to capture variation in relevant macro and/or

1 Aarhus School of Business, University of Aarhus, Denmark

Corresponding Author:

John Thøgersen, Aarhus School of Business, University of Aarhus, Department

of Marketing and Statistics, Haslegaardsvej 10, DK-8210 Aarhus, Denmark.

Email: [email protected]

Journal of Macromarketing30(2) 171-185ª The Author(s) 2010Reprints and permission:sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navDOI: 10.1177/0276146710361926http://jmk.sagepub.com

171 at Avans Hogeschool on September 16, 2011jmk.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://jmk.sagepub.com/

sociostructural factors. In practice, this usually means a cross-

national focus (although large and heterogeneous nation states

may sometimes contain sufficient heterogeneity within

national borders). When attempting to explain differences and

similarities between countries, macro- and structural- rather

than individual-level factors become salient. In single-

country studies, these factors tend to be ignored because they

constitute the shared context and therefore cannot account for

variation in (individual-level) behavior.

In this article, a comparative, cross-national perspective is

used as a means to focus attention to macro and sociostructural

factors influencing the sustainability of the consumption

pattern. By shifting the focus from individual-level factors to

important macro and structural factors, a better foundation for

effective sustainable consumption strategies can be created.

The objective of the article is to demonstrate the crucial

importance of macro and structural factors for (international)

variations in the sustainability of private consumption. For this

purpose, a comprehensive conceptual model for organizing and

integrating important micro and macro determinants of the

environmental sustainability of private consumption is (1)

developed and (2) applied on an environmentally important

area of consumption: private food consumption.

Food Consumption

Food consumption is obviously an important and unavoidable

part of everyday consumption. In addition, it is one of the areas

of private consumption that are most important for environ-

mental sustainability (European Environment Agency 2005).

It has been estimated that approximately one third of house-

holds’ total environmental impact is related to food and drink

consumption (Danish Environmental Protection Agency 2002).

Food consumption is a broad and diverse field and the envi-

ronmental sustainability of private food consumption depends

on several variables, such as the amount of beef in the diet, the

production system (e.g., organic vs. conventional), and how

and how far the food products are transported. Extant research

suggests that currently the most effective ways that affluent

consumers can increase the sustainability of their food con-

sumption are to (1) reduce the amount of meat, especially beef,

in their diet, (2) buy organic instead of conventionally

produced food products, and (3) avoid food products trans-

ported by airplane (e.g., Carlsson-Kanyama and Gonzalez

2009; Dabbert, Haring, Zanoli 2004).1 Due to space limita-

tions, this article focuses on only one of these important ways

to increase the sustainability of food consumption: choosing

organic instead of conventional food. To illustrate the

importance of macro and structural factors for the environmen-

tal sustainability of private consumption, research on the

causes of international variations in organic food consumption

is reviewed.

From its beginning, organic farming has rejected the

chemical-based farming techniques of mainstream agriculture

(Niggli 2007). This placed it in opposition to the dominant

paradigm of agricultural policy in industrialized countries

(Michelsen 2001a), which ‘‘emphasized technological progress

as a means of improving farm incomes and securing food

supplies’’ (Padel and Lampkin 2007, 95). The change in attitudes

toward organic farming at the political level, first in Europe and

later in North America and Japan, came in response to growing

consumer interest in organic products combined with serious

problems caused by the dominant technological paradigm, such

as overproduction, environmental pollution, food scares, and the

depopulation of rural areas (e.g., Lockeretz 2007a; Padel and

Lampkin 2007). Hence, organic farming challenges consumers

to consider not only the private utility of the food they buy but

also whether it is produced in an acceptable way.

Certified organic food products are produced with consider-

ation for the environment and for animal welfare, controlled

and certified by independent control organizations and usually

labeled with an organic label to assist consumers in the super-

market.2 Certified organic food products have experienced a

remarkable increase in market shares in most industrialized

countries in the last three decades (Aschemann et al. 2007;

Richter et al. 2007). However, organic food has been much

more successful in some than in other countries (see figure 1).

Why is that?

To answer why much more organic food is consumed in

some than in other countries, cross-national research on the

purchase of organic food products is compiled and reviewed.

Because there are few comparative studies on organic food

consumption involving countries outside Europe, the

geographical coverage of the analyzed evidence is, by and

large, limited to Europe. This reduces the complexity of the dis-

cussion but also the variation in macro and structural factors.

Hence, it is likely that the currently available evidence tends

to underestimate (rather than overestimate) the impact of

macro and structural factors on organic food consumption.

In the following, the author will first give a brief status

regarding organic food consumption (primarily) in Europe.

Next, the author will present a comprehensive conceptual

model to organize the factors and influences, which can explain

global differences in consumption patterns and specifically in

Figure 1. Market shares of organic food as percentage of the totalfood market in selected European countries in 2006. Source: Padelet al. (2008).

172 Journal of Macromarketing 30(2)



organic food consumption. This model is then used to structure

the review of research on international differences in organic

food consumption. Finally, the discussion of the evidence is

summarized and possible avenues for future research are

suggested.

Organic Food Consumption in Europe

Overall, the organic trend is weaker in the east and south of

Europe (with the partial exception of Italy) than in the north-

west. However, organic food consumption cannot be reduced

to a northwest phenomenon. According to the best available

international statistics, the per capita consumption of organic

food in Italy is higher than in many countries in the northwest

(Dabbert, Haring, Zanoli 2004; Padel et al. 2008), and the mar-

ket shares of organic food as percentage of the total food mar-

ket differ substantively between countries in the northwest as

well (see figure 1).3

There is a large and growing literature on the demand for

organic (e.g., Fotopoulos and Krystallis 2002; Harper and

Makatouni 2002; Hughner et al. 2007; Thøgersen 2009; Ver-

meir and Verbeke 2006) and other types of ethical food prod-

ucts (e.g., de Ferran and Grunert 2007; De Pelsmacker,

Driesen, Rayp 2005; Doran 2009; Steinrücken and Jaenichen

2007). However, there has been little research aiming to sys-

tematically figure out why the tendency to buy organic (or

other types of ethical) food products is stronger in some than

in other countries (Daugbjerg and Halpin 2008). As previously

mentioned, the individualizing bias in this research area is

unfortunate, because it is likely to lead to underestimating the

importance of macro and structural factors and, hence, to erro-

neous inferences about the causes of unsustainable consump-

tion patterns (individual choices vs. structural characteristics

of the context) and about the most effective ways of intervening

to promote more sustainable consumption (appealing to indi-

vidual responsibility vs. structural changes). The problem is

illustrated by a survey study of consumer acceptance of organic

food in eight European countries (Thøgersen 2009). The study

found little difference in what motivates consumers to buy

organic food between countries, but the relationship between

consumers’ intention to buy and actual (self-reported) buying

of organic food was significantly weaker in the Mediterranean

countries than in the northern European countries in the sam-

ple. It is generally realized in social psychological research that

the relationship between behavioral intentions and behavior

depends on consumers having the requested abilities and

resources and on the absence of unforeseen events blocking the

act (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980; Fishbein and Ajzen 1975), but

since abilities and opportunities, to a large extent, are situation

specific (Belk 1975), they are often not or only vaguely speci-

fied in individual-level research (such as Thøgersen 2009).

The relatively few multicountry studies or reports that pro-

pose possible pieces to the puzzle, to be reviewed in more detail

in the following, are summarized in table 1. These main sources

were supplemented by other available sources, including a cou-

ple of excellent overview books on the historical development

in organic farming worldwide, including the development in

political regulation and the development of the organic market,

written by groups of researchers with many years of experience

in this field (Dabbert, Haring, Zanoli 2004; Lockeretz 2007b).

For the comparative statistics, all of these sources rely on a

mixture of national statistics, sales data, data from experts in

the various countries, and survey data (Willer 2008a). As men-

tioned in footnote 3, all of these data sources are fallible, so

caution is warranted when interpreting the results.

Among the possible reasons for the differences in the

organic market, or in the consumption of organic food, between

countries, these sources point at national differences in political

regulation as well as differences at the level of the civil society

or market forces. Of the latter, some emphasize differences at

the supply-side (e.g., soil conditions, organic farmers organiza-

tions, and distribution channels) while others focus more on

demand-side factors (e.g., consumer disposable incomes, pre-

ferences, and values). Furthermore, some point at general char-

acteristics of the country (e.g., climate, culture, and level of

economic development) as possible causes of differences in the

size of the organic markets while others discuss sector-specific

characteristics (e.g., the structure and organization of and con-

flicts within the agricultural sector) or events (e.g., specific

food scandals or scares).

Hence a number of possible explanations for the differences

in organic food consumption between countries have been sug-

gested in the literature. Still, the overall picture is rather frag-

mented (Daugbjerg and Halpin 2008). As concluded in an

early study, ‘‘in each country, individual factors were found

that appeared to have some impact on national growth’’

(Michelsen 2001a, 16). Along the same lines, a more recent

review of the literature on organic farming concluded that, ‘‘for

the time being . . . the factors determining the regional distri-bution . . . are not yet fully understood’’ (Dabbert, Haring,Zanoli 2004, 16). This is equally true when turning to the

demand side and trying to explain why the tendency to buy

organic food products is stronger in some than in other

countries.

A Comprehensive Conceptual Model forSustainable Food Consumption

A comprehensive understanding of the causes of unsustainable

consumption, with regard to food and in general, requires a sys-

tematic and cross-disciplinary approach to mapping potential

causes. At the most abstract level, variations in consumption

patterns can be attributed to political and market factors (Arndt

1981). As discussed in the following, political intervention in

the form of creating a legal basis for organic food production

and marketing and various forms of direct and indirect subsi-

dies as well as independent control, certification, and labeling

schemes have played a key role in the creation and develop-

ment of a market for organic food products. However, the

available evidence strongly suggests that variation in govern-

ment regulation is not the only reason why the consumption

Thøgersen 173



Table 1. Research on Differences and Similarities in Organic Food Consumption Across Countries

References Countries Covered Method and Findings

Sønderskov (2009) Twenty European countries A consumption index based on data from Willer and Yussefi(2005) and Hamm and Gronefeld (2004) is regressed on gener-alized social trust, generalized institutional trust (both based onthe first round of the European Social Survey [ESS], 2003), post-material values (the share of the respondents labeled ‘‘postma-terialist’’ by four-item Materialist/Postmaterialist battery ofInglehart et al. [2004], from European and World Values Survey2006), an estimate of the average price premium for organic food(from Hamm and Gronefeld 2004) and various descriptors of thedemographic composition from World Bank and Eurostatsources. Variables were national averages or shares. The level of‘‘postmaterialism’’ was the only significant predictor of organicfood consumption

Daugbjerg and Sønderskov(2009)

Denmark, Sweden, UK and USA Comparative policy analysis plus surveys with representativesamples of consumers from the four countries. Regressing self-reported organic consumption on country of residence, postma-terialism, perceptions regarding organic food and agriculture anddemographic variables. Some of the differences in aggregatedemand between Denmark and the other three countries cannotbe explained by the included control variables and are attributedto differences in policy. Besides policy, country differences can beexplained by differences in postmaterialism (higher in Denmarkand Sweden) and trust in organic labels (higher in Denmark)

Willer (2008) and previouseditionsa

Differ between editions, but in principle allorganic food producing and consumingcountries of the world

Current statistics and market info collected by the ResearchInstitute of Organic Agriculture, the International Federation ofOrganic Agriculture Movements and the Foundation Ecology &Agriculture from national and international statistical bureaus,market research companies and experts. A basic source con-cerning developments and cross-national differences in organicfarming and the organic market

Dimitri and Oberholtzer(2007)

United States and European Union (EU) Market statistics and politics for the two areas are comparedsupplemented by a review of other material. It is assessed thatconsumers have become the driving market force in both regions.European consumers have faced more serious food scares thanhave American consumers. The stronger opposition againstgenetically modified organisms (GMOs) among European consu-mers has also favored organic food in Europe relative to America.The more proactive policy in Europe has led to organic having ahigher share of the food market and of agricultural land but due tostronger demand the market is currently growing faster in theUnited States. This suggests that the divergent policy directionsdo not matter in terms of meeting consumer demand, althoughthey may matter for other reasons

Padel and Midmore (2005) Eighteen European countries The Delphi method, using experts of the organic food market ineighteen countries, is used to explore factors influencing thedevelopment of the organic market, future market prospects, andthe role of governments in future market development. It is foundthat short supply chains and focus on regional organic shops maybe an indication of an earlier stage of market development, likelyto be followed by integration into mainstream outlets andinvolvement of multiple retailers. It is concluded that the mutualbut mismatched interdependence of demand and supply acts as aconstraint to the overall development

(continued)


at Avans Hogeschool on September 16, 2011jmk.sagepub.comDownloaded from


of organic food differs between countries (Padel, Lampkin, and

Foster 1999). Various market factors also play a role.

It is common to divide market factors into supply-side and

demand-side factors. Both supply-side and demand-side factors

influence consumer choices, including the consumption of

organic food, but in different ways. In consumer research, a

popular distinction is between factors determining consumers’

motivation, ability, and opportunity to buy (in this case)

organic food, as operationalized in the motivation–ability–

opportunity model (e.g., Hoyer and MacInnis 2006; Ölander

and Thøgersen 1995). These two distinctions are viewed as

complementary in the current framework.

Supply-side factors include a wide range of primary produc-

tion, industry, and distribution-related characteristics, which

might theoretically influence the consumption of organic food

products in different ways, but which in practice primarily

exert their influence through the availability and relative prices

of the products (e.g., Magnusson et al. 2001; Zanoli and

Naspetti 2002), that is, through influencing consumer opportu-

nities for buying organic food. Demand-side factors include

consumer beliefs, attitudes, and values (e.g., Magnusson

et al. 2001; Thøgersen 2009), that is, factors influencing con-

sumer motivation to buy organic food, as well as factors influ-

encing their ability to do so, such as income, task-relevant

knowledge, and habits (e.g., Thøgersen 2005a; Thøgersen and

Ölander 2006).

The proposed model for explaining variations in organic

food consumption in a cross-national perspective is illustrated

Table 1 (continued)

References Countries Covered Method and Findings

Hamm and Gronefeld (2004) Nineteen European countries Detailed data on organic production and consumption collectedby means of a questionnaire sent to a number of market experts ineach of the nineteen countries. Responses were cross-checkedand validated and supplemented by means of data from theInternet and other sources. Data were collected twice, in 2000and 2001 with the same questionnaire. Among the main resultsregarding cross-country differences were that (1) countries with ahigh organic share of total food sales also had a high percentage oforganic food sold through general food shops, such as multipleretailers, (2) in countries where general food shops were veryactive in the marketing of organic food, consumer price premiumswere usually lower, (3) most countries with high organic marketshares had a common national label and consumer recognition ofthis label was usually high, (4) to obtain an efficiently functioningmarket, both the supply side and the demand side must bedeveloped equally

Michelsen et al. (1999) Eighteen European countries Data collected by national experts by contacting the most signif-icant marketing agents in each country. The information coversthe situation in 1997. The report is about market impacts ofpolicies and the contribution of organic food and feed markets tothe general policy objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy(CAP). The analysis focuses on market supply rather than onconsumer demand. It shows that adaptation of supply to demandrepresents a larger problem for the development of organic foodmarkets than does the development of sufficient demand

Padel, Lampkin, and Foster(1999)

Fifteen EU countries National experts in each country filled out standardized ques-tionnaires, supplemented with various published and unpublisheddata sources, and consultations with key individuals in specificfields. The influence of policy support on the development of theorganic sector is explored. Policies include the agri-environmentprogram (EU Regulation 2078/92), the EU regulation 2092/91defining organic crop production in statutory terms and policiesto support market and regional development and the informationprovision of organic farming. Policy makers have been interestedin organic farming for its environmental and health benefits andthe potential to contribute to the goals of regional developmentprograms. The evaluation suggests that the variation in supportpolicies alone cannot explain the different rates of conversion toorganic farming in the EU

a ‘‘The world of organic agriculture’’ is a yearly publication since 2000, which uses national statistics and surveys with key persons to gather as precise a picture ofthe status of organic food production and consumption worldwide as possible. Hence, it mainly contains descriptive data and the judgments of differences andsimilarities are mainly presented as brief statements of facts rather than analyses.

Thøgersen 175



in figure 2. Within the broader framework outlined above, the

model includes a specification of the political and market

factors that are most important in the case of organic food con-

sumption, with the latter divided into supply-side/opportunity

and demand-side/motivation and ability factors and the former

into political regulation and government-sponsored market

development activities. The specific factors mentioned under

each of these headlines are derived from the reviewed

literature.

In the following, this conceptual framework is used to

structure the review of extant research on country differences

in organic food consumption. The comprehensive framework

makes it possible to effectively synthesize the evidence and

to identify important knowledge gaps that call for further

research.

Political

Regulation and Subsidies

As is true for other factors, discussed below, there is a lack of

systematic comparative research investigating the relationship

between national policies and the development of the organic

sector and market (Daugbjerg and Halpin 2008). However, the

scattered evidence—supported by a few systematic empirical

studies cited below—strongly suggests that differences in polit-

ical regulation are among the factors explaining the differences

in the success of organic farming between countries. Specifi-

cally, in a thorough comparative analysis of European national

politics in this area, it was concluded that ‘‘the leading

countries in the development of organic farming (in terms of

the percentage of organic to total land area) have most certainly

experienced strong policy support for organic farming. In most

cases, this has included special support for the markets for

organic foodstuffs’’ (Dabbert, Haring, Zanoli 2004, 13).

Switzerland and some countries in the European Union (EU)

began subsidizing organic farmers, especially during the transi-

tion period, in the late 1980s, and since 1994 all EU member

states have been obliged to support the conversion to organic

farming financially (Padel and Lampkin 2007). Although the

national policies within the EU have been gradually harmo-

nized over time, there is, and especially has been, quite a bit

of variation between countries in the implementation of this

policy. Some countries have been much more ambitious than

others and implemented a variety of policies aimed at support-

ing the growth of the organic food sector, both from the supply

Figure 2. Determinants of organic food consumption.




and the demand sides (Daugbjerg and Sønderskov 2009;

Dimitri and Oberholtzer 2007; Hamm and Gronefeld 2004;

Padel and Lampkin 2007).

Denmark, one of the top three organic countries in Europe,

is often mentioned in this connection. The Danish law on

organic farming from 1987 has been called ‘‘groundbreaking’’

(Aschemann et al. 2007, 132). It was the first national law to

define organic farming and support it financially (Padel,

Lampkin, and Foster 1999). Later, when facing oversupply in

some organic product groups, Denmark was also the first

country to adjust its policy to focus more on demand strength-

ening, instead of just using production subsidies to support the

organic sector, with its national action plans of 1995 and 1999

(Aschemann et al. 2007; Dabbert, Haring, Zanoli 2004). A sys-

tematic, comparative study confirmed that the relatively ambi-

tious Danish policy, with its emphasis on both supply- and

demand-side instruments, is a significant contributing reason

why organic food consumption is substantially higher in

Denmark than in most other countries (Daugbjerg and

Sønderskov 2009). Demand-side instruments will be discussed

in more detail in the next section.

Germany, the largest organic market in Europe in absolute

terms (Padel et al. 2008), was the second to introduce a scheme

to support conversion to organic farming financially, in 1989,

in the context of the EU’s so-called extensification scheme

(EC Reg. 4115/88; Padel, Lampkin, and Foster 1999).

Germany was the first country to support the conversion to

organic farming within this scheme.

EC Regulation 2078/92 provided an even bigger boost to the

development of organic farming than EC Regulation 4115/88

(Aschemann et al. 2007). This regulation was intended as an

agri-environmental program, and although it is in principle a

common framework across the EU, its measures were

implemented differently and with different degree of focus

on environmental versus other objectives in different member

countries. This is probably a contributing reason why the

organic sector took different paths of development in the

various countries (Aschemann et al. 2007).

Especially, the EU’s agricultural policy was implemented

with a different focus in northern Europe and in the Mediterra-

nean countries. Although it led to the promotion of organic

agriculture in northern Europe, it led to supporting traditional

small-scale production of regional specialties in the Mediterra-

nean countries (Kurzer and Cooper 2007). The latter was based

on the EU Commission’s support of the promotion and protec-

tion of regional specialties by introducing, in 1992, a system

known as Protected Designation of Origin (PDO), Protected

Geographical Indication (PGI), and Traditional Specialty

Guaranteed (TSG). The purpose of these designations is to

protect traditional products’ reputations from competition by

cheaper imitations that assume the same name as the original.

In the domestic market, the protection of traditional

products tends to favor local relative to imported products,

which benefits the environment due to the reduced transport.

However, the protection and promotion of regional specialties

is as much an export-oriented strategy, which leads to increased

international trade within product categories and therefore to

an increase in the transportation of products overall. Hence,

it is dubious that this strategy promotes environmental

sustainability.

France, Italy, Greece, Spain, and Portugal have been granted

the largest number of designations for geographically protected

food products (Kurzer and Cooper 2007). In northern Europe,

however, there are relatively few traditional, regional specialty

foods produced. Hence, a contributing reason why Mediterra-

nean countries have focused less on promoting organic farming

than northern European countries seems to be that the national

governments and most likely the countries’ farmers have per-

ceived revitalizing and protecting traditional food specialties

as a more attractive business strategy.

Based on the cited studies, it is not possible to quantify the

importance of differences in national political emphasis and

regulation for the variation in organic food production and con-

sumption between countries, but the evidence strongly suggests

that variations in national political emphasis and regulation are

the important contributing factors. It would be difficult to

explain the substantial growth in (especially) the European

organic sector since the 1980s without reference to its growing

recognition by policy makers (Dabbert, Haring, Zanoli 2004;

Dimitri and Oberholtzer 2007; Padel and Lampkin 2007).

However, there is a lot of between-country variation in the

development of organic farming and the organic market, which

cannot be explained by variation in support policies alone

(Aschemann et al. 2007; Dabbert, Haring, Zanoli 2004; Padel,

Lampkin, and Foster 1999). As discussed in the following, in

addition to political regulation, various market factors have

contributed to the different development of the organic

markets, in Europe and elsewhere.

Demand-Side Instruments: Control, Certification, andLabeling

Market development activities regarding the organic food mar-

ket can be, and have been, carried out with or without political

support. However, like other infant industries, emerging

organic food sectors lack resources, reputation, and credibility,

which the political system can provide. Hence, in practice,

political support for market development activities for the

national organic food market has made a lot of difference

(Daugbjerg and Sønderskov 2009; Hamm and Gronefeld

2004; Padel and Lampkin 2007).

Next to the legal definition of organic farming, the most

important market development activities are the establishment

of credible control, certification, and labeling systems for

organic food products (Michelsen 2001a). In different coun-

tries, such systems have been organized by producer organiza-

tions (e.g., the Soil Association in the UK), nongovernmental

organizations (e.g., the Swedish KRAV labeling system), or

governmental organizations (e.g., the Danish state-controlled

organic label, the Ø label). A clearly defined production system

guaranteed by control and certification systems is a prerequisite

for the segmentation of the market into organic products and

Thøgersen 177



conventional products and thereby for the establishment of a

market for organic food products (Aschemann et al. 2007;

Dabbert, Haring, Zanoli 2004). The control and certification

is communicated to consumers by means of a label or logo,

which is essential for consumers to be able to recognize a

product as organic, at least in a supermarket (Hamm and

Gronefeld 2004). The credibility of the certifying body, both

in terms of commitment and ability, is essential for consumer

trust in the organic label and in organic food products (Eden

1994; Howard and Allen 2006; Thøgersen 2002). In general,

consumers seem to have more confidence in labels that are

government backed than in labels that are not (Roosen, Lusk,

and Fox 2003).

A common EU organic logo exists, but until now it has had

no practical relevance. Consumers have used national labeling

schemes as guidance when buying organic food products. In

addition, whereas there is only one organic label in some coun-

tries, in others there is a range of logos, labels, and brands. Ger-

many now has one national public organic logo (Bio-Siegel),

but up until 2000 each of the nine producer associations used

its own logo (Dabbert, Haring, Zanoli 2004). The evidence sug-

gests that when there are several certifying bodies and labels in

a country, it creates consumer confusion and undermines con-

sumer confidence (Aschemann et al. 2007; Hamm and Grone-

feld 2004).

It seems likely that differences between countries with

respect to the control, certification, and labeling systems is a

contributing factor explaining differences in the development

of the organic market (Hamm and Gronefeld 2004). Denmark

seems to have benefitted most from a well-known and

established organic label. A national, state-controlled organic

certification and labeling scheme, introduced in the 1987, was

part of the ‘‘package’’ that made the Danish organic market one

of the most successful in the world (Aschemann et al. 2007;

Daugbjerg and Sønderskov 2009; Hamm and Gronefeld

2004). However, a national organic label alone is not sufficient

to boost the organic market. For example, France lags behind

most other western European countries in terms of organic mar-

ket share (see figure 1), although it introduced its national label

for organic food products, Agriculture Biologique, as early as

in 1984 (Padel and Lampkin 2007).

What happens if a national standard and label is introduced

in an organic market that has already reached a certain level of

maturity, in spite of the lack of these features? Here, the evi-

dence is also mixed. Whereas the implementation of the

National Organic Program and the United States Department

of Agriculture (USDA) label in the United States in 2002 gave

the organic sector a boost, Germany’s introduction of the

national logo in 2001 did not seem to benefit the sector partic-

ularly, at least in the short run (Aschemann et al. 2007).4 Of

course, each case is unique, which means that the effects of a

specific intervention, such as a national organic label, may be

hidden by the (possibly larger) impact of other events, such

as the economic recession in the first years of the millennium

or the Nitrofen scandal in Germany in 2002, where a banned

herbicide was found in organic feed.

Hence, in spite of the indisputable importance of a credible

control, certification, and labeling system for building con-

sumer confidence and ability to choose organic food products

in the supermarket, national differences in these systems can

only explain a limited amount of the cross-national variation

in the consumption of organic food. In particular, the positive

impact of a credible control, certification, and labeling system

depends on organic products being both desired by consumers

and available and affordable. Thus, it also depends on random

events as well as on policies to support conversion and contin-

ued production and on a range of market factors to be discussed

in the following (cf., Dabbert, Haring, Zanoli 2004; Michelsen

et al. 1999; Padel and Midmore 2005).

Market Factors

Supply-Side Factors (Opportunity)

It appears from the previous sections that differences between

countries in the development of the organic food market can to

a high extent, but not completely, be attributed to variations in

political regulation and politically supported market develop-

ment activities. A key mediating factor is farmers’ decisions

to convert to organic agriculture. The economic position of

organic farmers relative to nonorganic farmers, and thereby the

incentive to convert (Michelsen 2001a), is obviously influ-

enced by both political regulation and market factors (Dimitri

and Oberholtzer 2007). Farmers are more inclined to look for

supportive arrangements, such as support for organic farming,

in periods of general agricultural recession than in periods of

prosperity (Michelsen 2001a), which illustrates the importance

of the incentive to convert for the development of national

organic markets.

Supply-side factors, such as the quality of soils and climate,

have played an important role for the speed of conversion to

organic production in different countries (e.g., Dabbert,

Haring, Zanoli 2004). For example, in countries such as

Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, organic farming is espe-

cially prevalent in disadvantaged rural areas where extensive

agriculture predominates. In disadvantaged regions, grasslands

tend to be more important than arable land, and less fertilizer is

used on agricultural lands in general. Extensive forms of ani-

mal production tend to play a major role in these regions, both

in organic and in conventional farming. Among other things,

this means that the changes a farm has to undergo to convert

to organic farming are relatively small. According to Dabbert,

Haring, Zanoli (2004, 13):

‘‘Even if no additional price premium for organic produce is

received and no policy-related payments are made for organic

farming, the loss a farmer undergoes when converting to

organic agriculture is fairly small. If, in such a situation, price

premiums can be achieved or agri-environmental payments are

made for being organic, organic farming tends to be more

profitable than conventional farming.’’




Although there is clearly no one-to-one relationship between

the share of agricultural land being managed organically and

organic food’s share of the total food market, a large domestic

production provide a ‘‘push’’ to organic consumption in a coun-

try (Hamm and Gronefeld 2004). For example, at the change of

the millennium, Italy’s organically cultivated agricultural land

area was by far the largest in Europe in absolute terms and

among the largest in terms of share of total agricultural land,

but the per capita consumption of organic food products was

much more modest (Hamm and Gronefeld 2004). This apparent

discrepancy was the result of a combination of extensive

organic agriculture (especially large areas used for sheep pro-

duction) in some Italian regions and the fact that Italy exports

a large share of its organic products (Dabbert, Haring, Zanoli

2004). However, the early conversion of large areas of farm-

land to organic production had a positive influence on the avail-

ability and affordability of organic food products on the Italian

market (Hamm and Gronefeld 2004). It seems likely that this is

a contributing reason why Italy’s organic food consumption per

capita is now substantively larger than in other Mediterranean

countries (Padel et al. 2008).

Another, important supply-side factor is the development of

effective distribution channels (Hamm and Gronefeld 2004).

Initially, organic food products were mostly sold directly by

farmers to consumers, at the farm, through producer–consumer

associations, or at farmers markets. Later, specialty (health

food) stores played an increasing role in many countries, but

now most organic food products in Europe are sold through

conventional supermarkets, including discount stores (Asche-

mann et al. 2007; Richter 2008). Conventional retail chains

have been especially dominating in the most successful organic

markets, Switzerland, Austria, and Denmark (Dabbert, Haring,

Zanoli 2004; Michelsen et al. 1999; Richter 2008), which is

probably a contributing reason for organic food’s relatively

high market share in these countries (Hamm and Gronefeld

2004). It is a general observation that after conventional super-

markets start offering organic products, sales increase substan-

tively (Aschemann et al. 2007). The major reason for this is

higher availability for consumers, but as noted by Aschemann

et al. (2007), a big company’s involvement in organic food is

also normally accompanied by advertising and public relations

campaigns, which are likely to increase the public’s interest in

organic food in general.

In parallel with conventional retailers increasing their

assortments, and sale, of organic food products, the specialized

organic retailing sector has gone through a restructuring and

concentration process in many countries. For example, the Ita-

lian organic supermarket chain Natura Si had 60 outlets in 2006

(Richter 2008). A related trend has been for smaller regional

organic wholesalers to merge into consolidated national whole-

salers (Richter 2008). Among other things, the large organic

wholesalers initiate joint marketing programs for the specialist

retailers such as the German and Swiss (ECHT BIO.) program

and the Italian ‘‘b’io’’ program (Richter 2008).5 In contrast to

what one might expect, the sale of organic food products

through conventional supermarket chains has not hurt the sale

through specialized shops and direct sales by farmers, on the

contrary (Aschemann et al. 2007). A likely reason, suggested

by Aschemann et al. (2007), is that most conventional super-

market chains have a rather narrow assortment of organic food

products, so when their advertising and public relations cam-

paigns increase interest in organic food, new consumers go to

specialist retailers for their wider assortment, including

regional organic food specialties.

The effectiveness of the distribution channels also has

important implications for total costs and therefore consumer

prices (Aschemann et al. 2007; Hamm and Gronefeld 2004).

In countries where most of the organic food products are sold

through conventional supermarkets, lower price premiums

tend to be charged for organic food products (Hamm and

Gronefeld 2004; Michelsen et al. 1999). Although it has been

suggested that ‘‘the significance of price premiums is declin-

ing’’ (Aschemann et al. 2007, 137), extant research strongly

suggests that high product prices are still one of the most

important barriers to growth in the demand for organic food

products (Dimitri and Oberholtzer 2007; Hughner et al. 2007;

Padel and Midmore 2005).

Due to the expansion of the organic market and the

consolidation of its distribution channels, prices of organic

food products have become more competitive in Europe

(Aschemann et al. 2007). However, price premiums tend to

be higher in countries with a low turnover of organic food prod-

ucts compared with conventional products (Dabbert, Haring,

Zanoli 2004). Hence, the relationship between organic con-

sumption and prices is a two-way street: In markets with a low

organic turnover, premium prices are high due to high costs,

which impedes the expansion of the organic market. When the

sale of organic food goes up, economies of scale in production

and distribution allow more competitive prices and lowering of

the price barrier. Hence, as in most other consumption areas,

growth in organic food consumption is self-reinforcing.

Demand-Side FactorsAbility. In the early days, the organic sector was mostly

supply driven. Farmers introduced organic food products for

various reasons. However, it has been suggested that more

recently consumers have become the driving market force

(Dimitri and Oberholtzer 2007).

It is common to refer to average disposable incomes when

commenting on differences between countries with respect to

purchasing organic food products (Sahota, Willer, and Yussefi

2007). Because consumers usually pay a premium price for this

kind of product, it seems likely that consumers in richer

countries will be more willing to do so. Reflecting this, the

consumer market for organic products is mostly in the indus-

trialized countries, whereas Oceania and Latin America

account for a major part of the production area (Aschemann

et al. 2007; Willer 2008b). However, a recent study of twenty

European countries found that the variation in organic con-

sumption across countries in Europe is not currently related

to average national income (Sønderskov 2009).

Thøgersen 179



Others have linked the slowdown in the growth rate of the

organic markets in some countries in the first years of the

new millennium to the economic recession in this period

(Aschemann et al. 2007). This assessment is supported by the

repetition of this pattern during the recession at the end of the

decade (Clarke 2009). It seems that the demand for organic

food products is more sensitive to the general economic climate

of the country than food in general. In this respect, organic food

products share a characteristic of luxury goods, which are in

general more sensitive to economic upturns and downturns

than everyday necessities (Campbell and Li 2003).

The income effect naturally depends on the price premiums

charged for organic food products. As mentioned in the former

section, organic food prices have become more competitive in

Europe during the last two decades. Together with the rela-

tively narrow variation in national incomes in Western Europe,

the decrease in the premium prices charged for organic food

could explain why variations in organic food consumption

between European countries no longer seem related to average

national incomes. Therefore, it is unlikely that the lack of an

income effect on organic food consumption can be generalized

outside Western Europe or the group of affluent, industrialized

countries.

Motivation. Another factor, possibly contributing to thevariation in organic food consumption between countries is

motivational. Buying these kinds of products may be more con-

sistent with the cultural values and norms of some than of other

countries (Usunier and Lee 2009). National cultures differ in

many ways that might have implications for the weight given

to environmental and ethical concerns in food choice. General

traits of the national culture may play a role, such as cultural

value emphasis and religion (Schwartz 2009). However, it

seems likely that cultural traits that are related to this specific

area, such as environmentalism and food culture, are even more

important (Askegaard and Madsen 1998; Thøgersen In

press-d).

Askegaard and Madsen (1998) found that food cultures to a

high extent follow language and (therefore also) national bor-

ders. For example, they identified unique food cultures in each

of the Mediterranean countries (rather than a common Mediter-

ranean food culture) as well as in each of the Nordic countries

(rather than a common Nordic food culture). Hence, variations

in national food cultures could account for some of the diver-

sity in consumers’ preferences for organic food products across

countries, in Europe and globally.

Differences in national food cultures are, for example,

reflected in the previously mentioned considerably larger num-

ber of designations for geographically protected food products

being granted in the Mediterranean countries than in northern

European countries. It has been suggested that citizens in

Mediterranean countries share an emotional attachment to

small-scale traditional farming, regional produce, and regional

gastronomic traditions (Torjusen et al. 2004) and that their

designated geographically protected food products are ‘‘con-

sidered part of the national patrimony or identity’’ (Kurzer and

Cooper 2007, 1038). Research has also found that many

consumers do not distinguish between local and organic food

products (Roininen, Arvola, and Lähteenmäki 2006). A high

involvement with traditional, local, or regional food products,

especially if combined with a widespread belief that traditional

domestic food production is virtually the same as organic, may

create a mental ‘‘barrier to entry’’ for organic food. This seems

to be the case in, but is not necessarily limited to, some

Mediterranean countries.

As regard, other specific value differences, it has been noted

that animal welfare plays an important role in northern

European countries whereas it is almost an unknown value to

Italian or Greek consumers (Zanoli and Naspetti 2001). In addi-

tion, reviews of consumer studies show that environmental

concerns are central for many consumers with regard to organic

food (Hughner et al. 2007; Torjusen et al. 2004). Pan-European

opinion polls suggest that environmental concern—reflected in

how much attention is paid to protecting the environment rela-

tive to other issues—is higher in northern Europe than, for

example, in Mediterranean countries (see figure 3), and envi-

ronmental concern also seems to play a more important role

in motivating consumer action in the north than in the south

(European Commission 2008). In line with these data, it has

been suggested that ‘‘interest in organic farming (in northern

Europe, JT) grew out of strong popular environmental con-

sciousness’’ (Kurzer and Cooper 2007, 1039). This assessment

is backed by a recent comparative study of 20 European coun-

tries, which found that cross-national variation in organic food

Figure 3. Environmental concern measured as attention towardprotecting the environment in selected northern European andMediterranean countries, 2003–2008. Note: The graphs show thepercentage of large random samples of the population picking‘‘protecting the environment’’ as one of the two most importantissues (among fifteen issues) facing their country at the moment.Source: Eurobarometer 59 to Eurobarometer 70, The EuropeanCommission.




consumption is significantly related to the population’s

postmaterialistic value orientation (Sønderskov 2009).

Attitudes in the general population do not necessarily only

influence the development of the organic food sectors via the

market. In a thorough comparative analysis of the development

of European policy in this area, it was suggested that ‘‘growing

public interest in environmental matters led to greater sympa-

thy for organic farming, which translated into a desire to give

it political support for environmental reasons’’ (Dabbert,

Haring, Zanoli 2004, 5). Others have speculated that attitudes

in the general population influence farmers and that some have

converted to organic production in an attempt to avoid the

general criticism of agriculture’s environmental problems

(Michelsen 2001a).

However, differences in environmental concern obviously

cannot explain the huge differences in organic food’s market

shares between the Nordic countries (see figure 1) nor the fact

that the organic food consumption per capita is considerably

higher in Italy than in, for example, Finland (Padel et al.

2008). Hence, differences in cultural values and concerns can

only account for a limited share of the cross-country variation

in organic food consumption.

Discussion

The sustainability of final consumption depends on individual

consumer choices, but individual choices are severely

constrained by a range of macro and structural factors. In this

article, the importance of macro and structural factors for sus-

tainable consumption is demonstrated in an environmentally

important field: food consumption. Macro factors have been

identified that contribute to explaining the level of sustainabil-

ity of food consumption, specifically organic food consump-

tion, based on a review of extant research on differences

between, especially, European countries.

With the existing evidence, a precise quantification of the

relative importance of macro and structural factors is not

possible. However, the quality of the reviewed research is suf-

ficiently high to document without any reasonable doubt that

macro and structural factors, both determined by policy and

market actors, play a key role for the level of organic (and

therefore also sustainable) consumption in a country.

As reported in the reviewed literature, some countries have

supported organic agriculture, and the development of an

organic market, earlier, more persistently, and with a broader

range of means than others. This has led to a range of impedi-

ments to consumer organic choices being removed or substan-

tially reduced, especially those related to availability, price,

and consumer uncertainty. Generally, northern European coun-

tries have supported organic food production and consumption

more than the Mediterranean countries, and Denmark stands

out in this respect. Denmark is one of the few countries where

the government from the outset has intervened both at the sup-

ply side and the demand side (‘‘push’’ and ‘‘pull’’, cf. Padel

et al. 2002) to facilitate the development of an organic food

sector, and this is one of the reasons why Denmark is one of the

three countries in the world with the highest organic food

market share (Daugbjerg and Sønderskov 2009).

It has been suggested that the relatively weak political sup-

port for organic food in Mediterranean countries is at least

partly due to a stronger focus on regional and local specialties.

More research is needed to document the veracity of this claim.

However, it is obvious that, from a business strategy point of

view, protected trade names based on systems of local and

regional origin has many of the same merits as organic produc-

tion, and they may even command a higher premium price. In

addition, there is evidence suggesting that many consumers do

not distinguish between local and organic food production.

Future research should investigate the proposition made in this

article that such beliefs, especially when combined with strong

consumer attachment to local and regional products, create

barriers to entry for new organic food products.

Both the organic strategy in northern Europe and the

regional and local specialties strategy in Mediterranean coun-

tries have benefited from popular support. In Mediterranean

countries, regional and local specialties are considered part of

the national patrimony or identity (Kurzer and Cooper 2007).

In northern Europe, organic food production has fit consumers’

environmental concern (which has been focused in the direc-

tion of agriculture and food production by various high-

profile food scandals). The difference in agricultural focus

between the north and south of Europe might partly be attrib-

uted to these popular sentiments. Most likely, there are other

contributing factors, however, including different opportunities

(i.e., the fact that the southern European countries have a much

larger richness of renowned local and regional specialties than

northern European countries).

The available evidence suggests that differences in political

regulation are important, but not the only factors that have con-

tributed to the variation in the consumption of organic food

across European countries, however. It seems likely that a

whole range of market factors, both on the supply and the

demand side, have also played a role. For example, everything

else being equal, the conversion of land to organic production

has gone faster under conditions that favor extensive agricul-

ture, most likely because the costs of converting are smaller

under these conditions. This seems to have been a contributing

factor for the relative success of organic farming in countries

such as Austria and Switzerland, and perhaps also in countries

such as Sweden, Italy, and Germany.

Another supply condition that seems to have played an even

bigger role for the development of the organic market in differ-

ent countries is the maturity of the distribution channels (sale

through conventional supermarkets vs. more extensive chan-

nels such as farm sale, farmers’ markets, and health food

stores). It differs substantively between countries how early

and to which extent conventional retail chains have taken in

and promoted organic food products. The available evidence

suggests that when they have done so, this has boosted the

consumption of organic food, both because of increased

accessibility and lower prices and because of the increased pro-

motion of organic food. Hence, it would be useful with more

Thøgersen 181



systematic research to clarify why countries differ in this

respect and what hampers the evolution of efficient distribution

channels for organic food products in some countries.

The, related, size of the premiums charged for organic food

products is another important supply condition. According to

most consumer surveys, high price is one of the most important

reasons for not buying organic food (Hughner et al. 2007),

which suggests that differences between countries in this

respect have contributed to the differences in aggregate

demand. A study in Germany found that the prices of organic

food products are equivalent to the 25 percent top conventional

food brands in many product categories (Hamm Aschemann,

and Riefer 2007). This means that the price premium for

organic food products is not a problem as long as they only

compete in the premium market. However, such a positioning

also sets quite narrow limits to the reachable market share for

organic food products and for organic food production’s contri-

bution to a more sustainable consumption pattern. There is a

need for more and more comparative research on the position-

ing of organic food products and its implications for their price

sensitivity.

Another factor that seems to account for some of the differ-

ences in organic demand between countries is the different

ways control, certification, and labeling systems are organized.

As mentioned above, the optimal way of organizing and

implementing these systems is still not unequivocally settled.

Hence, there is a need for detailed, comparative analyses of the

approaches taken in different countries and their implications.

How do particularly successful and unsuccessful national

programs compare to one another and to approaches in other

countries? Which other variables discussed in the current arti-

cle (e.g., policy, culture, distribution system, and premium

price) play a role in the development or acceptance of organic

labels for food products? Which policy recommendations can

be derived from a thorough comparative analysis of successful

and unsuccessful certification, control, and labeling programs?

There is strong evidence that also demand-side factors have

contributed to the differences in organic food consumption

between European countries. Especially, the development of

the organic food market seems to have benefited from environ-

mental concern and a postmaterialistic value orientation, both

of which differ between European countries. Food scandals,

which have created mistrust in conventional agriculture and

food production, have also benefited the organic food market,

especially in northern Europe (Aschemann et al. 2007; Hugh-

ner et al. 2007). Furthermore, these demand-side factors may

not only have benefited organic food production directly

through the market, but perhaps also indirectly through paving

the way for political support and putting pressure on farmers to

convert to organic production. Hence, this article also illus-

trates the practical relevance of research attempting to explain

differences in environmental concern and values between

countries (e.g., Inglehart 1995; Schultz et al. 2005). Because

organic food production obviously challenges the technologi-

cal dimension of the dominant social paradigm (DSP), the

study also links into and informs research on differences and

changes in the DSP (e.g., Dunlap and Van Liere 1978; Dunlap

et al. 2000; Kilbourne et al. 2001; Kilbourne, Beckmann, and

Thelen 2002).

The factors covered in this review go some way toward

explaining the main difference between the north and the south

of Europe (primarily interacting differences in environmental

concern, in the importance attributed to regional and local spe-

cialties, in distribution channels, and in national policies) and

some of the exceptional cases. In addition to relatively high

environmental concern, the three countries with the highest

organic market shares in Europe, and in the World, Switzer-

land, Austria, and Denmark, all benefited from large retailers

making organic food available and affordable to broad seg-

ments of consumers early in the development of the organic

market. In addition, the development of the organic sector in

some countries has benefited from soil conditions that made

organic agriculture relatively more profitable. Visionary polit-

ical support was also a major contributing factor, including the

implementation of a successful state-controlled organic label-

ing system. That Italy is a positive outlier in the Mediterranean

region seems to be partly attributable to early, large-scale

conversion to organic agriculture due to a mixture of favorable

soil conditions and a large organic export. It may also be part of

the explanation that most of the organic food is sold in the big

cities in northern Italy, which is more similar to northern

Europe both in terms of incomes and values than southern Italy

(Richter et al. 2007). A better understanding of the Italian case

may be the key to identifying effective strategies for increasing

the organic market in other Mediterranean countries. More

research is needed in this area.

However, there are other important holes in our understand-

ing of the differences between countries in organic food

consumption. Notably, the reviewed literature revealed no

explanation for negative outliers in northern Europe, including

Norway and Finland. Future research should investigate what

has suppressed the demand for organic food in countries such

as these.

As mentioned several times, and as illustrated in the model

in figure 2, the various factors influencing the development of

the organic sector, and the demand for organic food, are not

mutually exclusive or independent, but interact in a complex

pattern. The consumer sentiments that created demand for

organic food in some countries also influenced the political

system and paved the way for political support to organic pro-

ducers and production. Furthermore, the political system is

obviously influenced by the economic interests of farmers,

which means that the political regulation tends to become more

favorable when organic agriculture has reached a size that

makes it a political factor in the country. There are some early

studies of the interaction between the political system, farmers’

associations, and environmental and consumer interests (e.g.,

Michelsen 2001a, 2001b), but this is an area where more

research is needed (Daugbjerg and Halpin 2008).

There is also a need for more research on the importance of

national food cultures for the development of the organic sec-

tor. The emphasis on traditional, local, and regional specialties




seems to have been a barrier for organic food in some Mediter-

ranean countries. However, this barrier seems to have been

overcome in Italy. Why is that? Is it because organic farming

for export has become significant enough to be a political factor

to Italian farmers to a greater extent than farmers in other Med-

iterranean countries combining the organic and the designation

of origin strategy. Or, perhaps is it because consumer-citizens

in northern Italy are influenced by the same postmaterialist

value tendencies found in countries in northern Europe? Future

research should investigate this.

In addition, it is a weakness of the approach used in this

article that it does not allow a quantification of the relative

importance of individual-level versus macro and structural

factors. There are a few attempts in this direction in the

reviewed research, but more systematic research is needed

here. Furthermore, organic food is only one aspect of a sustain-

able food consumption, and not even the most important

(which is the amount of meat, and especially beef, in the diet),

and food is only one among several areas that are important for

the sustainability of private consumption (notably private

transportation, home energy consumption). The environmental

benefits of buying organic food may be partly or fully negated,

for example, if the products are transported by airplane or if

consumers buy more meat and/or dairy products because it is

organic (the rebound effect, cf. Hertwich 2005). Hence, to

strengthen the case of the importance of macro and structural

factors for sustainable consumption, there is a need for

extending this research to other consumption areas and to the

interaction between consumption areas.

Notes

1. For a consumer-directed campaign promoting these changes in pri-

vate food consumption, see www.sierraclub.org/truecostoffood/.

2. See www.ifoam.org. Although it is not supported by scientific evi-

dence, many consumers seem to believe that organic food products

are also healthier and taste better than their conventional counter-

parts. A number of empirical studies conclude that these beliefs are

the main reasons why consumers buy organic food (cf., Renée

Shaw Hughner et al. 2007 ‘‘Who are organic food consumers? A

compilation and review of why people purchase organic food.’’

Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 6). However, the basis for this

conclusion has been questioned on methodological grounds and a

recent study strongly suggests that the mentioned health and taste

beliefs are products rather than antecedents of buying organic food

(John Thøgersen In press-a, ‘‘Green shopping: For selfish reasons

or the common good?’’ American Behavioral Scientist).

3. The per capita consumption of organic food depends on food

prices, which vary between countries. When expressed in a com-

mon currency, it also depends on the exchange rate. Market shares

are independent of the general price level and exchange rates, but

they are not available from all countries. In addition, the market

share of organic food depends on the price of organic relative to

conventional food products and, not least, on how ‘‘the food sec-

tor’’ is defined (e.g., just food or food and drinks), which may vary

between countries. For these reasons, and because all of the

measures are fallible, even the best available comparative statistics

should be interpreted with caution.

4. The researchers making these assessment have revised their assess-

ment of the German national logo and believe that now seven to

eight years after its introduction, it plays a major role for consumer

awareness and trust and consequently for the current development of

the German organic market (professor Ulrich Hamm and Dr. Jessica

Aschemann-Witzel, personal communication).

5. ‘‘[ECHT BIO.]’’ and ‘‘‘b’io’’’ are trademarks.

Acknowledgments

The author is grateful to Jessica Aschemann-Witzel, William

Kilbourne, and three anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on

an earlier version.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to

the authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research and/or

authorship of this article.

References

Ajzen, I., and M. Fishbein. 1980. Understanding attitudes and

predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Alfredsson, E. C. 2004. ‘‘Green’’ consumption—No solution for

climate change. Energy 29:513-24.

Arndt, J. 1981. The political economy of marketing systems: Reviving

the institutional approach. Journal of Macromarketing 1:36-47.

Aschemann, J., U. Hamm, S. Naspetti, and R. Zanoli. 2007. The

organic market. In Organic farming: An international history,

ed. W. Lockeretz, 123-51. Wallingford, England: CABI.

Askegaard, S., and T. K. Madsen. 1998. The local and the global:

Patterns of homogeneity and heterogeneity in European food cul-

tures. International Business Review 7:549-68.

Belk, R. W. 1975. Situational variables and consumer behavior.

Journal of Consumer Research 2:157-64.

Campbell, S., and C. Li. 2003. Per capita consumption, luxury

consumption and the presidential puzzle: A partial resolution.

Providence, RI: Brown University, Department of Economics.

Carlsson-Kanyama, A., and A. D. Gonzalez. 2009. Potential contribu-

tions of food consumption patterns to climate change. American

Journal of Clinical Nutrition 89:1704S-09-04S-09.

Clarke, R. 2009. Organic gravy train runs out of steam? New Nutrition

Business 14:22-6.

Dabbert, S., A. M. Haring, and R. Zanoli. 2004. Organic farming:

Policies and prospects. London: Zed Books.

Danish Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Danske husholdnin-

gers miljøbelastning. Copenhagen, Denmark: Danish Environmen-

tal Protection Agency.

Daugbjerg, C., and D. Halpin. 2008. Sharpening up research on organ-

ics: Why we need to integrate sectoral policy research into main-

stream policy analysis. Policy Studies 29:393-93.

Daugbjerg, C., and K. M. Sønderskov. 2009. Environmental policy

performance revisited: Organic food policies and sustainable

Thøgersen 183



consumption in Denmark, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the

United States. Aarhus, Denmark: Department of Political Science,

Aarhus University.

de Ferran, F., and K. G. Grunert. 2007. French fair trade coffee buyers’

purchasing motives: An exploratory study using means-end chains

analysis. Food Quality and Preference 18:218-29.

De Pelsmacker, P., L. Driesen, and G. Rayp. 2005. Do consumers care

about ethics? Willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee. Journal of

Consumer Affairs 39:363-85.

Dimitri, C., and L. Oberholtzer. 2007. Market-led versus government-

facilitated growth. Development of the US and EU organic agricul-

tural sectors. In Organic Agriculture in the US, ed. A. J. Wellson,

97-127. New York: Nova Science Publishers.

Doran, C. 2009. The role of personal values in fair trade consumption.

Journal of Business Ethics 84:549-63.

Dunlap, R. E., and K. D. Van Liere. 1978. The ‘‘new environmental

paradigm’’: A proposed measuring instrument and preliminary

results. Journal of Environmental Education 9:10-9.

Dunlap, R. E., K. D. Van Liere, A. G. Mertig, and R. E. Jones. 2000.

New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: Measuring

endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale.

Journal of Social Issues 56:425-42.

Durning, A. T. 1992. How much is enough? The consumer society and

the future of the earth. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.

Eden, S. 1994. Business, trust and environmental information:

Perceptions from consumers and retailers. Business Strategy and

the Environment 3:1-7.

Etzioni, A. 2009. Spent. America after consumerism. The New

Republic, June.

European Commission. 2008. Attitudes of European citizens towards

the environment, Special Eurobarometer 295/ EB 68.2. Brussels,

Belgium: European Commission.

European Environment Agency. 2005. Household consumption and the

environment. Copenhagen, Denmark: European Environment Agency.

Fishbein, M., and I. Ajzen. 1975. Belief, attitude, intention, and

behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Fotopoulos, C., and A. Krystallis. 2002. Purshasing motives and pro-

file of the Greek organic consumer: A countrywide survey. British

Food Journal 104:730-65.

Hamm, U., J. Aschemann, and A. Riefer. 2007. Sind die hohen Preise

für Öko-Lebensmittel wirklich das zentrale Problem für den

Absatz? Zeitschrift für Agrarpolitik und Landwirtschaft 85:252-71.

Hamm, U., and F. Gronefeld. 2004. The European market for organic

food: Revised and updated analysis. Aberystwyth, Wales: School

of Management and Business.

Harper, G. C., and A. Makatouni. 2002. Consumer perception of

organic food production and farm animal welfare. British Food

Journal 104:287-99.

Hertwich, E. G. 2005. Consumption and the rebound effect: An

industrial ecology perspective. Journal of Industrial Ecology

9:85-98.

Howard, P. H., and P. Allen. 2006. Beyond organic: Consumer interest

in new labelling schemes in the Central Coast of California. Inter-

national Journal of Consumer Studies 30:439-51.

Hoyer, W. D., and D. J. MacInnis. 2006. Consumer behavior. 4th ed.

Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Hughner, R. S., P. McDonagh, A. Prothero, C. Shultz, and J. Stanton.

2007. Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review

of why people purchase organic food. Journal of Consumer Beha-

viour 6:94-110.

Inglehart, R. 1995. Public support for environmental protection:

Objective problems and subjective values in 43 societies. PS:

Political Science and Politics 28:57-72.

Kilbourne, W. E., S. C. Beckmann, A. Lewis, and Y. V. Dam. 2001. A

multinational examination of the role of the dominant social para-

digm in environmental attitudes of university students. Environ-

ment & Behavior 33:209-28.

Kilbourne, W. E., S. C. Beckmann, and E. Thelen. 2002. The role of

the dominant social paradigm in environmental attitudes: A multi-

national examination. Journal of Business Research 55:193-204.

Kilbourne, W., P. McDonagh, and A. Prothero. 1997. Sustainable

consumption and the quality of life: A macromarketing challenge

to the dominant social paradigm. Journal of Macromarketing

17:4-24.

Kurzer, P., and A. Cooper. 2007. What’s for dinner?: European farm-

ing and food traditions confront American biotechnology. Com-

parative Political Studies 40:1035-58.

Lockeretz, W. 2007a. What explains the rise of organic farming?

In Organic farming: An international history, ed.

W. Lockeretz, 1-8. Wallingford: CABI.

———. ed. 2007b. Organic farming: An international history. Wall-

ingford: CABI.

Magnusson, M. K., A. Arvola, U. K. Hursti, L. Åberg, and

P. O. Sjöden. 2001. Attitudes towards organic foods among Swed-

ish consumers. British Food Journal 103:209-26.

Michelsen, J. 2001a. Recent development and political acceptance of

organic farming in Europe. Sociologia Ruralis 41:3-20.

———. 2001b. The diffusion and institutionalization of organic farm-

ing. Organic farming in a regulatory perspective. The Danish case.

Sociologia Ruralis 41:62-84.

Michelsen, J., U. Hamm, E. Wynen, and E. Roth. 1999. The European

market for organic products: growth and development. In Organic

farming in Europe: Economics and policy, ed., S. Dabbert, N.

Lampkin, J. Michelsen, H. Nieberg, and R. Zanoli. Stuttgart-

Hohenheim: Universität Hohenheim.

Niggli, U. 2007. The evolution of organic practice. In Organic farm-

ing: An international history, ed. W. Lockeretz, 73-92. Walling-

ford: CABI.

Ölander, F., and J. Thøgersen. 1995. Understanding of consumer beha-

viour as a prerequisite for environmental protection. Journal of

Consumer Policy 18:317-57.

Padel, S., A. Jasinska, M. Rippin, and D. Schaack. 2008. The Eur-

opean market for organic food in 2006. In The world of organic

agriculture—Statistics and emerging trends 2008, eds.,

H. Willer, M. Yussefi-Menzler, and N. Sorensen, 131-39. London:

Earthscan.

Padel, S., and N. H. Lampkin. 2007. The development of governmen-

tal support for organic farming in Europe. In Organic farming: An

international history, ed. W. Lockeretz, 93-122. Wallingford:

CABI.

Padel, S., N. H. Lampkin, S. Dabbert, and C. Foster. 2002. Organic

farming policy in the European Union. In Economics of pesticides,




sustainable food production and organic food markets, eds.,

D. C. Hall and L. J. Moffitt, 169-94. Oxford: Elsevier Science.

Padel, S., N. Lampkin, and C. Foster. 1999. Influence of policy

support on the development of organic farming in the European

Union. International Planning Studies 4:303-15.

Padel, S., and P. Midmore. 2005. The development of the European

market for organic products: Insights from a Delphi study. British

Food Journal 107:626-47.

Richter, T. 2008. Trends in the organic retailing sector in Europe

2007. In The world of organic agriculture—Statistics and

emerging trends 2008, eds., H. Willer, M. Yussefi-Menzler, and

N. Sorensen, 140-47. London: Earthscan.

Richter, T., S. Padel, H. Willer, and M. Yussefi. 2007. The

European market for organic food. In The world of organic

agriculture—Statistics and emerging trends 2007. 143-54. Bonn,

Germany: International Federation of Organic Agriculture Move-

ments IFOAM and Frick, Switzerland: Research Institute of

Organic Agriculture FiBL.

Roininen, K., A. Arvola, and L. Lähteenmäki. 2006. Exploring

consumers’ perceptions of local food with two different qualitative

techniques: Laddering and word association. Food Quality and

Preference 17:20-30.

Roosen, J., J. L. Lusk, and J. A. Fox. 2003. Consumer demand for and

attitudes toward alternative beef labeling strategies in France,

Germany, and the UK. Agribusiness 19:77-90.

Sahota, A., H. Willer, and M. Yussefi. 2007. Overview of the global

market for organic food and drink. In The world of organic agricul-

ture—Statistics and emerging trends 2007. 52-55. Bonn, Germany:

International Federation of Organic Agriculture Moveme

journal of macromarketing … · 2011. 10. 14. · 172 journal of macromarketing 30(2) 172...

Documents