Page 1 of 15
Archives of Business Research – Vol. 9, No. 6
Publication Date: June 25, 2021
DOI:10.14738/abr.96.10347. Pathmananathan, P. R., Aseh, K., & Kenny, K. (2021). Consumer Behavior and Purchase Intention of Organic Meat: An Overview.
Archives of Business Research, 9(6). 103-117.
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
Consumer Behavior and Purchase Intention of Organic Meat: An
Overview
P. Ravindran Pathmananathan
Unies Group
Khairi Aseh
Unies Group
Kamal Kenny
Unies Group
ABSTRACT
The increase of interest in organic meat throughout the world is in response to
concerns about the intensive agricultural practices and their effects on consumers’
health and the environment. Several researches have demonstrated that consumers
have become increasingly concerned by the health risks posed by food consumption
and this is reflected in the growth of organic food market in recent years across all
regions, including Malaysia. However, the organic meat sector in Malaysia is still at
its “infancy stage”, whereby more supports are needed to create consumer
awareness in order to enhance the acceptance and stimulate the organic meat
purchase in the country. The purpose of the study was to analyze the Malaysian’s
consumer behavior on their purchase intention towards organic meat from various
economic and marketing aspects. The overall results of this study reveal the organic
meat choice motives of consumers as well as the purchasing pattern of organic meat
among consumers in Klang Valley, Malaysia. This study was carried out via a
structured survey throughout Klang Valley areas involving 300 respondents. Future
research should focus on a similar study with the extended scope to all states in
Malaysia so that the findings could be compared and generalized to the entire
population in Malaysia.
Keywords: Purchase intention, Consumer attitude, Organic meat, Choice motive, Consumers
INTRODUCTION
The organic food market has grown substantially over the recent years across the regions.
There are several reasons such as health consciousness; consumer attitude and lifestyle have
been cited in the studies from United Kingdom (UK), Europe, Australia and North America
regarding the purchase of organic products (Michaelidou and Hassan, 2008).According to
Angood (2008), niche market in the UK retail sales of organically produced food have increased
in value from £100 million in 1993/94 to almost £1600 million in 2005 (Soil Association, 2006).
Continuity of supply has improved and a wide range of organically produced food is now readily
available through the major multiples. It was estimated that the European organic meat market
was worth €700 million in year 2000. Approximately seven percent of UK consumers purchase
Page 2 of 15
104
Archives of Business Research (ABR) Vol. 9, Issue 6, June-2021
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
organic food regularly. This means the trend of organic meat market is growing too in UK
(Angood et al., 2008).
Organic food is one of the alternative choices chosen by most of the people staying in the urban
areas. This is because of the living trend among the parents and the family members who are
more caring about the family healthy diet.According to the Center for Research in
Biotechnology for Agriculture, University Malaya, the local food organic industry is relatively
still small, with more than 60 percent of natural food products imported. Over the past decades,
the government has taken several initiatives to encourage people to a healthy lifestyle and it
has appeared to have been successful as demand for organically grown foods has increased
significantly due to their possible health benefits and food safety assurance. In the article by
Kamarulzaman, F. (2020) stated that organic food is also proven safe for public health because
the manufacturing process is natural and chemical-free. The only concern is that the availability
of local organic foods cannot satisfy the increased demand, hence limiting the selection of local
organic foods.
According to Ong (2000), the organic product market growth in Malaysia had drawn the
Malaysia government to expand this industry. The government has planned to increase the
organic production area by 250 hectares in the period 2001 to 2005. It shows that Malaysia
government will provide additional assistance of up to RM5,000 per hectare (US$1,300), a once
only provision, for infrastructure development, such as farm roads, irrigation, drainage,
electricity and water. Organic producers will also be eligible for existing credit schemes. The
government also plans to introduce an accreditation scheme for producers to promote and
develop markets including the organic meat markets (Ong, 2000).
Besides, there are also many government policies and regulations has been revised aimed at
fostering further development and promoting the organic food industry, including the National
Agro-Food Policy (NAP), Third National Agriculture Policy (DPN 3), and Tenth Malaysia Plans
(10MP). In the past few years, an increase in the acceptance of organic food concepts is reflected
in the rapid growth of the organic food chains in Malaysia especially in the big cities like Kuala
Lumpur, Pulau Pinang and Johor Bahru. The high growth of organic food chains in many urban
areas of the Malaysia states is due to the rapid increase of the population in the urban areas.
Similarly, the rapid development of organic food industry has indirectly encouraged the growth
of organic meat demand in Malaysia market. However, since the organic meat sector is still at
its infancy stage, in which the demands grow slowly,a lot of supports need to be doneto enhance
the consumer awareness, particularly to educate the consumer about the organic meat benefits
and to stimulate organic meat purchase in the retail sides.
According to Tey (2010),the meat demand in Malaysia has shown a positive growth from 1965-
2005 despite the fact that it is growing at a slow pace. Generally, the meat industry is a very
dynamic market where different religions influence the meat consumption in Malaysia. The
meat category refers to mutton, beef, poultry and pork.Tey (2009) indicated that the increasing
consumption of beef, mutton and poultry had shown a strong demand of the meat in the future.
Meanwhile, the decreasing of pork consumption observed as due to the food safety and
disease.Thus, extra efforts have to be done to ensure the production of meat supply is
environmentally sustainable and socially responsible for the growth of meat consumption in
Page 3 of 15
105
Pathmananathan, P. R., Aseh, K., & Kenny, K. (2021). Consumer Behavior and Purchase Intention of Organic Meat: An Overview. Archives of Business
Research, 9(6). 103-117.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/abr.96.10347
Malaysia (Tey, 2009). In the normal practice, organic meats must endorse to the strict
standards as set out by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
The biggest difference between organic meat and conventional meat is the hormone content.
Usually, meat manufacturers will pump steroids and hormones into their livestock so that they
will get big and produce a lot of meat. These hormones are harmful to the human body and have
many negative effects (Keisuke, 2010; Lusk, Norwood& Pruitt, 2006). According to Mohd
Rizaimy (2010), organic meat is different from the conventional meat as the breeding and
growth require a‘natural way’ technique rather than the use of hormones, vaccine and chemical
to reduce the animal’s maturity age. The conventional meat growth and breeding is in jeopardy
to the use of unsafe and non-halal vaccine. Furthermore, it is also typically unhygienic and
unsafe for human consumption. In fact, organic meat can cost more than conventional meat at
the market place. This is mainly because of the labor-intensive attention, care and management
of the farms. Moreover, the organic farms are inspected yearly to ensure that the animals are
kept according to the organic status guidelines (Julie, 2008)
From the Malaysia researchers’ context, the environmental awareness and consciousness has
become very important to every people in the world. This can be seen with the growth of green
product market at a positive rate (Siti Nor Bayaah& Nurita, 2010). According to the World
Organic Outlook Report 2006-2011, the latent demand for organic foods is estimated to be
US363.87 million in year 2010 and expected to be growing up to US397.70 million in year 2011
in Malaysia.One distinct change in Malaysia’s food consumption has been the preference
towards meat products especially organic meat. Economists have determined that the main
factor associated with the change is the increased per capita income that makes meats more
affordable. Other extrinsic factors attributed to the change of the function of meats are due to
its ability in satisfying calories and protein intakes, culinary preferences, and greater
availability of good quality livestock such as organic chicken.
Despite the outbreak of Nipah disease in 1998 and 1999 and the continuous challenge of bird
flu (avian influenza), swine flu (H1N1 influenza), and the targets to self-sufficiency in pork and
poultry have been well attained over the years except the beef and mutton. Before the middle
of 1970s, less than 20% of the total beef consumed in Malaysia was imported. However, this
number increased to more than 70% in 2007. The self-sufficiency levels of mutton have been
vulnerable over the years which recorded less than 10% self-sufficiency level in 2007. The
unavailability of domestic farming to meet the local demands for beef and mutton is a direct
business opportunity for domestic and foreign meat producers. On top on that, the imported
meat is relatively high quality. Thus, it is the right opportunity to gain insight of the meat
consumption patterns particularly organic meat consumption. As the market is more
increasingly market-led, information on current organic meat consumption patterns is
required to assess the consumers’ behavior change, needs, purchases and choices. (Tey et al,
2010).
From the perspective of social culture and norms context, as Malaysia is a multi-racial country,
there are different religions and believes. The social norms and food consumptions also
significantly differ among each race and religion. Findings by Hoek et al, 2010 showed that one’s
religion influence consumer attitude and behavior in general food choice or food purchasing
decisions and eating habits in particular. Similarly, Muslim consumers are like any other
Page 4 of 15
106
Archives of Business Research (ABR) Vol. 9, Issue 6, June-2021
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
consumer segments: they demand for healthy and quality products, which must also conform
to Shariah requirements (Al-Harran and Low, 2008). No doubt in many societies, religion plays
one of the most influential roles in food choice and this included meat consumption.Some
religions forbid certain foods, for example pork and not ritually slaughtered meat in Judaism
and Islam; Hinduism prohibits the Hindu devotee to consume beef; Mahayana Buddhism does
not encourage the devotee to consume meat, except for Christianity that has no food forbidden.
It is estimated that approximately 90% of Buddhist and Hindus, 75% of Muslims versus only
16% of Jews in the US strictly follow their religious dietary laws (Mohd Rizaimy et al.,
2010).Muslims are the largest population in Malaysia and there are only a small number of
Buddhists and Hindus in Malaysia avoid consuming meat for their own religious practices
(Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2010).
Organic Meat Choice Motives
Several studies on organic food have considered factors that assist or limit organic food
consumption. These include health concern, environmental concern, food safety, sensory
variables, and ethical concerns or value structure (Tregear, Dent & Mcgregor, 1994; Chinnici,
Amico & Pecorino, 2002; Magnusson, Arvola, Hursti, Aberg & Sjoden, 2003; Baker, Thompson
& Engelken, 2004). Less attention was given to the relationship between attitudes and food
choice in previous studies (Squires, Juric & Cornwell, 2001; Lockie, Lyons, Lawrence& Grice,
2004). In this study, several motives will be facilitated to understand the organic meat choice
motives and attitudes among Malaysian in Klang Valley.
Food Safety
According to Riccardo, food safety and the way it affects health have become a growing concern
in most of the world (Riccardo et al, 2011). Similarly, there was an international survey showed
that the majority of people in 19 out of 35 countries feel their food is less safe than it was 10
years ago (Ipsos-Reid, 2000). Furthermore, the recent intimidating events as the Bovine
Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) epidemic highly enhanced the risk perception (Setbon et al,
2005). In the food safety context, pesticides residues in food and contamination of foods have
been found to cause the highest level of perceived risk (Tucker et al, 2006).
Organic meat can face challenges with respect to food safety, due to the use of not yet approved
compounds, higher product prices, due to increased processing, or require major changes in
food choice behaviour of consumers (Borzelleca, 1996). Nowadays, consumers demand more
reliable information about the food they purchase. In particular, concerning the validity of
meats are believed primary to the assurance of food safety, quality and animal welfare (Verbeke
& Viaene, 1999).
Health Consciousness
According to several previous study, the intention to buy was mainly explained by habitual
consumption of foods, availability and labeling information. The labeling information could
ensure the products safety and generate health consciousness (Roitner-Schobesberger,
Darnhofer, Somsook & Christian, 2008). Besides, pesticides and hormones residue found in the
fresh meat are also the health concerns of consumers (Lacaze, 2009). There are views that
organic foods are ‘healthier’ than conventional foods appear to be based on the perception that
organic foods have better sensory attributes, contain lower levels of pesticides or synthetic
fertilizers and have higher levels of nutrients and protective phytochemicals (Christine, 2002).
Page 5 of 15
107
Pathmananathan, P. R., Aseh, K., & Kenny, K. (2021). Consumer Behavior and Purchase Intention of Organic Meat: An Overview. Archives of Business
Research, 9(6). 103-117.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/abr.96.10347
However, according to Hwang (2005), the majority of consumers are probably unaware from
the health perspective that growth hormones, one of the top perceived food risks in the United
States are prohibited in meat and poultry production (Hwang et al. 2005).
The presence of food additives, preservatives, and price also influence an individual’s decision
making in their daily food choice. The increasingly importance of health and the impact the food
production has on the environment in food consumption trends indicate that consumers today
require not only healthy but also environmentally sustainable food products. It is believed that
consumers that are concern about their health and environmental protection will be more
likely to have a positive attitude to organic foods. A previously reported study described that
one of the most common reason for purchasing organic products was health concern and it was
perceived that organic products are healthier than conventional products (Chinnici et al, 2002).
There were findings of Schifferstein (1998), mentioned that health related issues are important
determinants of the consumption of organic products (Schifferstein et al, 1998). According to
study done by Musdiana (2010), health consciousness factor have more impact on customer
purchase intention of organic food ( Musdiana et al, 2010)
Economic Factors
In general, economic factors mainly will relate with the price and value of a product which
depends on the purchase expenditure. According to Sven (2008), price and expenditure impact
the decision on organic meat choice (Sven et al, 2008). There are findings showed that there
was a willingness to pay a premium price for organic products inclusive organic meat among
the middle- and higher-income consumers in Buenos Aires, Argentine (Lacaze, 2009).
Attitude towards organic meat
The construct of attitude towards the purchase of one product is similar to the perceptions of
the personal desirability of performing a particular behaviour. Organic meats are perceived as
much more healthy, natural, nutritious, and sustainable than conventional meat. Thus, the
consumer’s attitude towards organic meat purchase is naturally believed to be positively
related to the attitude towards organic meat.
Several studies have related organic food consumption with behavioral attitudes such as health
consciousness, environmental consciousness, trust of organic food claims and desirability of
organic food attributes such as taste, texture, freshness (Hughner et al. 2007; Gil and Soder
2006; Thogersen 2006; Aryal et al. 2009). These were quite relevant to refer the above studies
to analyze the attitude towards organic meat.
Attitude towards organic meat depends on the personal perception and values. Product value
and environmental concern are among the main factors examined (Grunert and Juhl, 1995)
Besides, others researchers have considered the importance of personal and social norms,
personal costs and benefits of environmentally friendly behavior as the other factors in the
attitude context (Osterhuis, 1997). According to Verhoef (2005), most of consumers might
consistently behave in an environmentally concerned manner in different types of situations
(Verhoef, 2005). Study done by Siti Nor Bayaah Ahmad (2010) showed that consumers have
high awareness on preserving environment and concerned about the environmental friendly
farming practice through government’s Skim Akreditasi Ladang Malaysia (SALM) and Skim
Organik Malaysia (SOM). However, Thogersen (1999) argued that a consumer’s experience
Page 6 of 15
108
Archives of Business Research (ABR) Vol. 9, Issue 6, June-2021
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
with an environmentally friendly behavior may lead to learning about the environmental
consequences of other consumer behaviors, which may result in behavior changes in other
circumstances (Thogersen, 1999).
Subjective Norm
For a certain extent, subjective norms concern the perceived social pressures to undertake or
not undertake a behavior (Ajzen 1991; O’Neal 2007). Normally, individuals’ subjective norms
reflect their beliefs about how others, who are important to them, what are important to them,
would view them engaging in a particular behavior. According to Childers and Rao
(1992),individuals who comply with norms can expect to create a good impression or receive
praise for their actions, whereas those who do not can expect negative verbal or visual
expressions of disappointment (Fisher and Ackerman, 1998). Thus, strong norms regarding the
consumption of organic meat in one’s reference group affect the consumers’ purchase intention
(Verhoef, 2005). Chen (2007) explained that individuals’ intention to consume organic food are
likely to be strengthened if they believe that their loved ones expect them to do so, or they wish
to be identified with other individuals who are consuming organic food. On the contrary, if
consumers believe that those people important to them think organic meats are not so good,
then they will have lower intention of purchasing organic meat.
Perceived behavioral control
A consumer may have a positive attitude towards performing a behaviour, but may not intend
to perform it when faced with a perceived impediment. Perceived behavioral control refers to
the consumer’s perceptions of personal control over what to buy and eat, which he or she
believes to influence the judgment of risks and benefits of organic meat in a purchase
situation.In keeping with Ajzen (1991), it is expected that those who perceive more behavior
control have more intention of performing that behavior. Therefore, it is hypothesized that if a
consumer perceives more behaviour control of purchasing organic meat, then the intention to
purchase organic meat is higher. By contrast, if a consumer perceives more difficulty in
identifying organic meat labels, then the intention to purchase organic meat is lower (Chen,
2007).
Intention to purchase organic meat
Purchase intention refers to the probability that a user makes a purchase from a retail shop,
similar to its usage by many consumers as an alternative for actual behavior, because purchase
intention relates closely to actual behaviour (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1973). According to Liang, the
study mentioned that consumers have positive attitude towards purchasing specialty food
experienced a higher intention to purchase a specialty food (Liang et al, 2011). In additional,
the study by Hansen (2004) found that perceived behavioral control, subjective norm and
buying attitude have a positive influence on individual buying intention (Hansen et al, 2004).
In the same way, Lam’s study also proved that there was a positive relationship between
attitudes, subjective norms and behavioral intention (Lam et al, 2007).
Study Objectives
The key objectives of the study are primarily:
1) To describe the purchasing pattern of organic meat
2) To identify and investigatethe organic meat choice motives of consumers
3) To explore the attitude towards organic meat
Page 7 of 15
109
Pathmananathan, P. R., Aseh, K., & Kenny, K. (2021). Consumer Behavior and Purchase Intention of Organic Meat: An Overview. Archives of Business
Research, 9(6). 103-117.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/abr.96.10347
4) To identify the subjective norm of organic meat
5) To explore the factors that influences the purchase intention of organic meat from
economic and marketing variables
SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
In this study, the researcher is aiming to investigate the Malaysian’s purchase intention towards
organic meat from various aspects such as organic meat choice motives, perceived behavioral
control, attitude and subjective norm. There were several studies’ results show that consumers'
purchase of organic meat is based on both ‘rational’ economic motives and emotional motives
(ERAE, 2005). Generally, the Malaysia consumer purchase intentions in many aspects have
been taking places in the amount of the food expenditure. This is the result of the economic
growth and the increase of consumer purchasing power. These changes have a deep impact
towards every forms of retail industry such as hypermarkets, supermarkets, minimarkets,
convenient stores, restaurants and so on. Therefore, it is significant now to identify the present
relationships between such expenditure and selected socio-economic variables that might help
in organic meat consumption among Malaysian. Other than that, the most important concern is
the motivation that could make one to decide on certain purchase decision from various factors.
Study methodology
The study adopted a descriptive design utilizing cross sectional survey approach to
comprehend consumer’s behavior and perception of organic meat consumption. The
researcher had carried the research process through questionnaire administration.
Population & sampling procedure
The location selected for this study was Klang Valley which is located in the hub of the Kuala
Lumpur city whereby it is adjoining with few cities and towns in Selangor state.Data collected
were based on cluster sampling since the respondents were selected mainly from Kuala
Lumpur, Petaling, Klang, Gombak and Hulu Langat. According to Department of Statistics
Malaysia (2010), Selangor’s population for 2019 is6.53million meanwhile Kuala Lumpur’s
population is 1.79million. The Klang Valley population is 7.2million in 2016. The reason Klang
Valley was been chosen because it is an urban agglomeration area with a high population
density and meat consumption (Kuala Lumpur Population 2021). Pre-testing of the
questionnaire was made during the pilot study. The scale was piloted amongst a sample of
seven retail organic shops and their customers whom consume organic meat for quite some
times.
According to the table for determining sample size from a given population by Krejcie and
Morgan (1970), the sample size for more than 1 million population size is 384 (Krejcie and
Morgan, 1970). A total sample of 400 consumers from five main towns in Klang Valley (Kuala
Lumpur, Cheras, Kajang, Klang and Subang) was used in this study. The five towns were chosen
because they have a high number of organic food establishments and also due to the availability
of high demand for organic meat. These areas are places where most of minimarket,
supermarket, hypermarket and organic retail shops are located.
Instrumentation
A questionnairewhich included measure of key variables was designed. All instruments were
translated, back translated and pre-tested prior to use to identify any problem areas. Back-
Page 8 of 15
110
Archives of Business Research (ABR) Vol. 9, Issue 6, June-2021
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
translation of the instruments preserved the content validity of the items. The questionnaire
was translated into Bahasa Malaysia for the convenience of the respondents.
The Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ) developed by Steptoe et al. (1995), was adopted and
adapted by adding some items, deleting some of the original items; resulting in a questionnaire
with a total of 23 items. In fact, the Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ) (Steptoe et al, 1995) was
developed in England. Thus, in order to evaluate if consumers in Malaysia, a developing country,
considered all the items of the original FCQ while selecting their meat food as beginning of the
study was performed.
For the purpose of this study, there are two parts in the questionnaire. In the first part of the
questionnaire the study has also included questions in relation to respondents’ demographic
and social background. This part entail questions in regards to respondents age, sex, marital
status, educational background i.e primary, secondary, diploma/certificate, degree;
employment status i.e part-time, fulltime, retired, housewife, student; personal monthly income
i.e range of salary; household monthly income, household size and lastly number of children in
the household.
The second part of the questionnaire is questions in relations to the seven independent
variables and one dependent variable in this study. The independent variables are attitude
towards organic meat, economic factors, food safety, health conscious, intention to purchase,
perceived behavior control and meat characteristics. The dependent variable is intention to
purchase organic meat. The scales used to measure them are discussed.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Socio demographic background
Descriptive analysis was used to describe the population and the results of the demographic
profile of the respondents of this study. The results show that majority of the respondents are
between the age of 26 to 40 years old (60.3%). This is followed by 20.5% of the respondents
are between the age of 41 and 55 years old. A total of 60 respondents (15.2%) are 25 years old
and below. There are only about 3.7% of respondents who are above 55 of age. The youngest
respondent is 17 years old and the oldest respondent is 72 years old.In terms of sex ratio, a total
of 193 respondents (48.2%) are males and the balance of 207 respondents (51.8%) is females.
As for ethnicity, most the respondents were Chinese (49.8%) followed by Malays (42.2%) and
lastly, Indians with a total of 8%.
Purchasing Behavior of Organic Meat
In reference Table 1, the categorical analysis of purchase of organic food reveals that there is
significantly higher number of respondents who purchase organic fruits and vegetables (78%)
as compared to other categories. The other categories that show a high level of purchase as
compared to non-purchase are organic meat product (45.5%), organic supplements, vitamins
and medicinal herbs (40%), organic drinks or beverage (34%); followed by 31% of respondents
who would purchase organic bread and baking products as compared to otherwise. The
category that shows a significantly low level of purchase is organic milk with a percentage of
25.5 only.
Page 9 of 15
111
Pathmananathan, P. R., Aseh, K., & Kenny, K. (2021). Consumer Behavior and Purchase Intention of Organic Meat: An Overview. Archives of Business
Research, 9(6). 103-117.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/abr.96.10347
Table 1: Types of Organic Food Purchased
Items Yes
n (%)
No
n (%)
Organic meat product 182 (45.5) 218 (54.5)
Organic drinks or beverages 136 (34.0) 264 (66.0)
Organic supplements, vitamins and
medicinal herbs
160 (40.0) 240 (60.0)
Organic fruits and vegetables 312 (78.0) 88 (22.0)
Organic seafood 42 (10.5) 358 (89.5)
Organic bread and baking products 124 (31.0) 276 (69.0)
Organic milk 102 (25.5) 298 (74.5)
A deeper analysis of purchase of organic meat reveals that that for chicken, a high number of
respondents eat chicken less than once a month (40.1%). This is followed by 25.1% of
respondents who eat chicken 2 to 3 times a month. There is only a total of 2.9% respondents
who consume chicken 5 to 7 times a week. As for other organic meat, a higher number of
respondents have them less than once a month (40%) followed by respondents who have 2 to
3 times a month (23.4%). The lowest percentage is respondents who consume 5 to 7 times a
week (4%). As for place of purchase, most of the respondents purchase it at the
supermarket/hypermarket (39.5%) followed by special store or organic shop (36.2%). This is
followed by respondents who purchase it from wet market (20.9%) and lastly, from sundry
shop (3.4%).
When respondents were asked on their monthly expenses in purchasing organic meat, majority
of the respondents (58.2%) stated they spend less than RM100. A total of 29.4% respondents
stated they spend between RM101 to RM300 on organic meat every month. This is followed by
7.9% of respondents who stated they spend between RM301 to RM500, and lastly 4.5% of
respondents stated they spend RM500 and over for their monthly purchase of organic meat. As
for the source of information in purchasing organic meat, it is varying from word of mouth,
printed media (newspaper, magazine and book) as well as mass media (TV, radio, internet).
Word of mouth particularly from friends (19.2%) and family members (14.5%) appeared to be
a popular source of information on organic meat. A total of 31.9% stated that they get it from
print media, whereas a total of 25.9% stated they get it from electronic media.
Organic Choice Motives
The descriptive statistics for the dependent and independent variables are shown in Table
2.For the purpose of the study, the researcher has used 8 variables to measure the objective of
the study. Each variable is then categorized into lower and higher level based on the cut-points
of the median scores as shown in Table 3.
Page 10 of 15
112
Archives of Business Research (ABR) Vol. 9, Issue 6, June-2021
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
Table 2: Descriptive Statistics of Variables
Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Food safety 10 25 20.3 2.7
Meat characteristic 15 35 26.0 4.2
Health consciousness 15 35 28.3 3.3
Economic factors 7 20 13.4 2.6
Attitudetowards
organic meat 15 30 22.8 3.2
Subjective norm 7 25 16.6 3.3
Perceived behavioral
control 10 25 18.3 3.1
Intention to purchase 6 30 20.2 4.6
As reflected percentage level of scoring for variables, the respondents seemed to be conscious
about food safety (m=20.3) when buying organic meat. Similarly, more than half of the
respondents are in higher level category (m=26.0). As for health consciousness, the mean score
is 28.3 with a standard deviation of 3.3. Most of the respondents had higher level of scoring
with 88.7% as compared to 11.3% of them having a lower level of scoring. A high score also
indicates that the respondents are conscious about the meat characteristic and health
consciousness when choosing to purchasing organic meat. On the other hand, slightly more
than half of the respondents are in lower-level category (55.5%) when it comes to economic
factors. This indicates that more than half of the respondents were less particular about
economic factors when considering to purchasing organic meat.
The other independent variables which are attitude towards organic meat, subjective norm and
perceived behavioral control. The attitude (m=22.8) and subjective norms (m=16.6) towards
organic meat is fairly positive as about more than half of the respondents are in higher level
with percentage of 56.4% and 58% respectively. As for perceived behavioral control, the mean
score is 18.3 with a standard deviation of 3.1. Most of the respondents had higher level of
scoring with 62% as compared to 38% of them having a lower level of scoring, indicates a
positive relation towards organic meat. Lastly, as for the variable of intention to purchase, the
mean score is 20.2 and the standard deviation is 4.6. The majority of the respondents also
scored higher (75%) for this variable as compared to lower scoring with a score of 25%. This
shows the intention to purchase organic meat is high.
Page 11 of 15
113
Pathmananathan, P. R., Aseh, K., & Kenny, K. (2021). Consumer Behavior and Purchase Intention of Organic Meat: An Overview. Archives of Business
Research, 9(6). 103-117.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/abr.96.10347
Table 3: Level of Scoring for Variables
Variables Number of
Respondent
s
Percentage
(%)
Food safety (n=400)
Low (<18) 58 14.5
High (≥18) 342 85.5
Meat characteristic (n=400)
Low (<25) 156 39.0
High (≥25) 244 61.0
Health consciousness (n=400)
Low (<25) 45 11.3
High (≥25) 355 88.7
Economic factor (n=400)
Low (<14) 222 55.5
High (≥14) 178 45.5
Attitude towards organic meat (n=397)
Low (<23) 173 43.6
High (≥23) 224 56.4
Subjective norm (n=400)
Low (<16) 168 42.0
High (≥16) 232 58.0
Perceived behavioral control (n=400)
Low (<18) 152 38.0
High(≥18) 248 62.0
Intention to purchase (n=400)
Low (<18) 100 25.0
High (≥18) 300 75.0
Relationship between independent and dependent variables
Table 4: Correlation Coefficients Between Selected Variables and Intention to Purchase
Variables r p
Food safety .417* .0001
Meat characteristic .577* .0001
Health consciousness .488* .0001
Economic factors .681* .0001
Attitude towards organic meat .602* .0001
Subjective norm .653* .0001
Perceived behavioral control .751* .0001
*Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
A Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to test the relationship among the independent
and dependent variables. As shown in the table 4, data indicates that all the seven independent
variables had significant positive relationship (at 0.0001 significant levels) with the dependent
variables. The strength of relationship varies from 0.751 to 0.417.
Based on the findings, food safety and health consciousness are moderately correlated with the
intention to purchase of organic meat. Meanwhile, meat characteristics, attitude towards
organic meat, subjective norm and economic factors have strong relationship with the
Page 12 of 15
114
Archives of Business Research (ABR) Vol. 9, Issue 6, June-2021
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
dependent variables. The strongest relationship is between perceived behavioral control and
intention to purchase. Therefore, these findings indicated that an individual’s perceptions of
personal control over what to purchase, relative ease of performing the behavior is the biggest
influence on the intention to purchase organic meat as compared to the other six dependent
variables.
In details, the findings indicate that independently, all the food choice motives significantly
influence the intention to purchase organic meat rather strongly. Among the four motives,
economic factors variable was found as the highest correlation. In particular, it is well-known
that the price of organic meat in Malaysia is substantially expensive, taking for example, the
price of organic chicken typically found to be almost double that or inorganic chicken. The
findings support the Probit model which mentioned by Verhoef (2005) that consumers’
purchase of organic meat is based on a rational economic motive. Subjective norm which
reflects the influence of people around them was found to correlate relatively strong with
intention to purchase organic meat. Ho et.al, (2008) explained that subjective norms were
highly associated with the frequency of consumption of the common products like organic
products. Moreover, meat characteristics also have a positive correlation in influencing the
purchase intention. This finding supported statement made by Angood (2008) which
mentioned that meat quality in terms of juiciness and flavor always will be given consideration
before consumers make the purchase intention. In addition, health consciousness and food
safety concerns among consumers would also contribute in influencing the organic meat
consumption as per explained by Michaelidou (2010) in his research that consumers of organic
product always aware on health consciousness.
Limitation & Recommendation for Future Study
The study provides a valuable insight into consumer behaviour regarding organic meat by
examining the factors that influence consumers’ purchase intention on organic meat. Results of
this study could be served as a foundation for further research about organic meat supply and
demand in the future. Take as an example, it would be interest for future research to go deeper
into each factor and explain about their positive impact on consumer attitude and behaviour
towards organic meat. On the other hand, the relationship between consumer attitude and
purchase intention could be in depth investigated by using qualitative method such as face-to- face interviews or focus group discussion.
However, the study alsohas several important limitations. Firstly, since the survey was
conducted among a group of organic food consumers in Klang Valley, the result should be
interpreted with caution, particularly with respect to the generalization of the research findings
to that of Malaysians consumers as a whole. It is proposed that the researchers apply this
instrument to variant consumers group or non-organic consumers in the future study.
This research has mainly concentrating on purchasing behaviour among consumers in organic
retail shops, rather than public responses towards organic meat. It is important to take into
consideration that organic shop has different level of education with huge segment of people.
Besides due to the time and resources constraints, the study has only concentrated on organic
consumers. It should consider on a public retail in Malaysia. This study is also limited in the
extent to which the results can be generalized to other states as well in Malaysia as a whole.
Although the data exploited is from Klang Valley, other states are excluded. A more complete
Page 13 of 15
115
Pathmananathan, P. R., Aseh, K., & Kenny, K. (2021). Consumer Behavior and Purchase Intention of Organic Meat: An Overview. Archives of Business
Research, 9(6). 103-117.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/abr.96.10347
picture of Malaysia would have been given if other states had been included in the data.
Nonetheless, Klang Valley includes quite a diverse group of people and such implications of
knowledge and purchase behaviour are assumed to be sufficiently same to those of other states
in Malaysia. Thus, a large sample of consumers should be allowed for more accurate result and
increase the confidence and generalization. However, it is necessary to increase the sample size
of the respondents from different background and environment in any future study to
generalize the result to the general population of organic consumers.As a result, this study is
possible to provide a rational representation of the range of consumers’ patterns across the
whole Malaysia.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behaviorand Human Decision Processes. 50:179–
211.
Al-Harran, S., and Low, P. (2008). Marketing of halal products: the wayforward. Halal Journal. [Online]. Retrieved
fromwww.halaljournal.comon December 3rd, 2009.
Angood K.M., J.D. Wood, G.R. Nute, F.M. Whittington, S.I. Hughes, P.R. Sheard (2008). A comparison of organic and
conventionally-produced lamb purchased from three major UK supermarkets: Price, eating quality and fatty acid
composition *Meat Science. 78: 176–184.
Baker S, Thompson KE, Engelken J. (2004). Mapping the values drivingorganic food choice. European Journal of
Marketing. 38(8): 995–1012.
Borzelleca, J.F. (1996). A proposed model for safety assessment ofmacronutrient substitutes. Regulatory
Toxicology and Pharmacology.23(1 II): 15–18.
Chinnici, G, D’ Amico, M& Pecorino. (2002). A multivariate statisticalanalysis on the consumers of organic
products. British Food Journal. 187-1999
Christine M. Williams (2002).Nutritional quality of organic food: shades ofgrey or shades of green?Proceedings of
the Nutrition Society. 61: 19–24
ERAE (European Review of Agricultural Economics 2005) 32(2): 245-267;doi:10.1093/eurrag/jbi008
Farah, G. A., Ahmad, M., Muqarrab, H., Turi, J. A., & Bashir, S. (2018). Online Shopping Behavior Among University
Students: Case Study Of Must University. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol.5, No.4, 228-241
Grunert, S. C. and Juhl, H. J. (1995). Values, environmental Attitude towardsorganic meats, and buying of organic
foods. Journal of Economic Psychology. 16: 39–62.
Hansen, T., Jensen, J.M., Solgaard, H.S.(2004). Predicting online grocerybuying intention: a comparison of the
theory of reasoned action andthe theory of planned behavior. International Journal of InformationManagement.
24(6): 539–550.
Hoek Annet C, Pieternel A. Luning, PascalleWeijzen, Wim Engels, Frans J.
Hwang, Y., B. Roe, and M.F. Teisl. (2005). An empirical analysis of United States consumers’ concerns about eight
food production and processing technologies. AgBioForum. 8: 40–49.
Ipsos-Reid. (2000). Food safety a growing concern in most of the world. Retrieved from http://www.ipsos- na.com/news/pressrelease.cfm?id=1195.
Keisuke Sasaki, Hideo Aizaki, MichiyoMotoyama, Hideyuki Ohmori and Tomoyuki Kawashima (2011),
Impression and purchasing intentions of Japanese counsumers regarding pork produced by ‘Ecofeed’, a
trademark of food-waste or food co-product animal feed certified by Japanese government. Animal Science
Journal. 82: 175-180.
Kok, Cees de Graaf. (2011). Replacement of meat-by-meat substitutes. A survey on person-and-product-related
factors in consumer acceptance. Appetite. 56: 662-673.
Page 14 of 15
116
Archives of Business Research (ABR) Vol. 9, Issue 6, June-2021
Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom
Kuala Lumpur Population 2021 (Demographics, Maps, Graphs). (2021). World Population Review. Retrieved from
https://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities/kuala-lumpur-population
Lacaze,V. (2009). Sustainable food consumption in Argentine: An estimationof willingness to pay for fresh and
processed organic food for consumers in the case Buenos Aires’s consumers. Food Science and Technology
Abstracts Revista Agroalimentaria.15(29): 87-100.
Lam, T., Cho, V., Qu, H. (2007). A study of hotel employee behavioral intentions towards adoption oftechnology.
InternationalJournal of Hospitality Management. 26: 49–65.
Liang, A.R.-D., Lim, W.M. (2011). Exploring the online buying behavior ofSpecialty food shoppers. International
Journal of Hospitality Management. 30: 855-865.
Lockie S, Lyons K, Lawrence G, Grice J. (2004). Choosing organics: a pathanalysis of factors underlying the
selection of organic food amongconsumers. Appetite. 43(2): 135–146.
Lusk JL, Norwood FB, Pruitt JR. (2006). Consumer demand for a ban onantibiotic drug use in porkproduction.
AmericanJournal of AgriculturalEconomics. 88:1015–1033.
Magnusson MK, Arvola A, Hursti UKK, Aberg L, Sjoden PO. (2003). Choiceof organic food is related to perceived
consequences for human healthand to environmentally friendly behaviour. Appetite. 40(2): 109–117.
Michaelidou Nina and Louise M. Hassan (2008).The role of healthconsciousness, food safety concern and ethical
identity on Attitude towards organic meats and intentions towards organic food. International Journal of
Consumer Studies. 32: 163-170.
Mohd RizaimyShaharudin, Abdul Sabur Ismail, Suhardi Wan Mansor, Shamsul Jamel Elias, Muna Abdul Jalil,
Maznah Wan Omar (2011).Innovative Food and Its Effects towards Consumers’ PurchaseIntention of Fast Food
Products. Canadian Social Science. 7(1): 110-118.
Mohd RizaimyShaharudin, Jacqueline JunikaPani, Suhardi WanMansor, Shamsul Jamel Elias, DaingMaruakSadek
(2010).Purchase Intention of Organic Food in Kedah, Malaysia; A Religious Overview. International Journal of
Marketing Studies. 2(1).
O’Neal, P.W. ed. (2007). Motivation of Health Behavior. New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc.
Ong Kung Wai.(2000). “Organic Asia”, regional market survey report and directory, IFOAM.
Osterhuis, T. L. (1997). Pro-social consumer influence strategies: when andhow do they work? Journal of
Marketing. 61: 16–29.
R.Vogl (2008). Consumer perceptions of organic foods in Bangkok, Thailand. Food Policy. 33: 112-121.
Riccardo. Scarpa, M. Thiene. (2011). Organic food choices and ProtectionMotivation Theory: Addressing the
psychological sources ofheterogeneity. Food Quality and Preference. 22: 532–541.
Roitner-Schobesberger, IkaDarnhofer, SuthichaiSomsook, Christian
Setbon, M., Raude, J., Fischler, C., &Flahault, A. (2005). Risk perception ofthe Mad Cow Disease. Risk Analysis. 4:
813–826.
Siti Nor Bayaah Ahmad&NuritaJuhdi (2010) Organic Food: A Study onDemographic Characteristics and Factors
Influencing Purchase Intentions among Consumers in Klang Valley, Malaysia. International Journal of Business
and Management. 5(2): 105-118.
Squires L, Juric B, Cornwell TB. 2001. Level of market development andintensity of organic food consumption:
cross-cultural study of Danish and New Zealand consumers. The Journal of Consumer Marketing. 18(4/5): 392–
409.
Sven Anders and AnkeMoeser. (2008). Assessing the demand for value-based organic meats in Canada: a
combined retail and household scanner-data approach. International Journal of Consumer Studies. 32:
Tey (John) Yeong-Sheng (2009). A Managerial Economist Forecast For MeatConsumption in Malaysia:
Implications To Farmers And Investors, MPRA (Munich Personal RePEc Archive) Paper No.14810. Retrieved form
http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/14810/
Page 15 of 15
117
Pathmananathan, P. R., Aseh, K., & Kenny, K. (2021). Consumer Behavior and Purchase Intention of Organic Meat: An Overview. Archives of Business
Research, 9(6). 103-117.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/abr.96.10347
Tey.Y.Sheng, Mad Nasir Shamsudin, Zainalabidin Mohamed, Amin MahirAbdullah, and Alias Radam (2010).
Demand Analysis of Meat in Malaysia. Journal of Food Products Marketing. 16:199-211
Thogersen, J. (1999). Spill over processes in the development of asustainable consumption pattern. Journal of
Economic Psychology. 20: 53–81.
Tregear A, Dent JB, Mcgregor MJ. 1994. The demand for organically grownproduce. British Food Journal. 94(4):
21–25.
Ullah, H., Wang, Z., Bashir, S., Khan, A. R., Riaz, M., & Syed, N. (2021). Nexus between IT Capability, and Green
Intellectual Capital on Sustainable Businesses: Evidence from Emerging Economies. Environmental Science and
Pollution Research, 29, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-12245-2
Verbeke, W., &Viaene, J. (1999). Consumer Attitude towards organic meatto beef quality labeling and
associations with beef quality labels. Journal of International Food and Agribusiness Marketing. 10: 45–65.
Voon Jan P, Ngui Kwang Sing and Agrawal Anand (2011).Determinantsof Willingness to Purchase Organic Food:
An Exploratory Study Using Structural Equation Modeling.International Food and Agribusiness Management
Review.14(2).
World Outlook Report 2006-2011: Organic Meat, April 1, 2005, pp16
Turi, J. A., Basheer, H., Sorooshian, S., & Shaikh, S. (2018). CIVIL SOCIETY STRATEGIES AND PROJECTS IN FLOOD
HIT AREA: A CASE OF PAKISTAN FLOOD AFFECTED AREAS. Journal of Governance and Integrity, 2(1), 49-58.