바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

  • P-ISSN1738-3110
  • E-ISSN2093-7717
  • SCOPUS, ESCI

Analysis of Purchasing Recognition and Purchasing Characteristics of a Plum Purchaser

The Journal of Distribution Science / The Journal of Distribution Science, (P)1738-3110; (E)2093-7717
2015, v.13 no.12, pp.33-40
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15722/jds.13.12.201512.33
Kim, Mi-OK
Cho, Sung-Ju
Cho, Yong-Been

Abstract

Purpose - Given an increase in the consumption of plums, prices have fluctuated in an unstable manner, making it difficult for farmhouses to sell the product. This study intends to provide information on the cultivation and sale of plums to consumers, thus enabling producers to utilize relevant information to analyze the types of plums that are preferred and consumed by users. Research design, data, and methodology - In this study, a survey was conducted on plum consumption by a consumer panel established and operated by the Rural Development Administration in December 2009. The objective was to identify the purchasing awareness of plums and to analyze panel data from 2010 to 2013 using a linear regression model, a Tobit model, and a panel regression model to derive the purchase characteristics. Results - The outcome of the survey on plums is as follows. Plums are purchased because they are good for the health (90.6%), which means that most customers purchase plums for their health benefits. When plums are in season, the purchase rate is 94.8%, indicating that most plums are purchased when they are in season and that selling plums when they are out of season is difficult. Therefore, we sell most plums in the correct season, and the rest of the plums need to be processed and then sent to markets. The strongest reason for not purchasing plums is that they are difficult to process for consumption (63.1%), followed by the reason that the fruit is unfamiliar (15.5%). Regarding solutions for increasing the consumption of plums, the answers were as follows: distribute a recipe for plums (36.9%), advertise its effect through TV or the press (31.1%), and develop various processed products (15.6%). When customers decide to pick out plums, the major considerations were freshness (4.43), safe to eat (4.16), price (3.96), size (3.87), brand (3.28), and discount event (2.62). Freshness is important for decision making and safe to eat was more important than price because plums are washed and processed into plum jam. According to the results of the linear regression model, a higher family income results in a higher purchasing amount. However, the amount of plums purchased by a person was reduced if his or her income increased. Compared with individuals who used other purchasing agents on weekdays, those who used the traditional market turned out to purchase a higher amount of plums on the weekdays. Conclusions - Considering that numerous people purchase plums for their health benefits, promoting the consumption of plums is anticipated as being successful if they can be produced safely for consumption and for inclusion in recipes and various processed foods, and to promote eco-friendly agricultural practices.

keywords
Plum, Purchasing Consciousness, Purchasing Recognition, Panel Data

Reference

1.

Baek, Jong-Hi, & Choi, Jeong-Im (2010). Analysis of Consumer Behavior toward and Preferences for Prunus mume (Maesil), the Chinese Plum. Korea j. Food Preserv, 17(5), 571-580.

2.

Choi, Woong, Choi Jnng-Yeon, & Yon, Hyung-Sin (2013). A Study on Purchasing Characteristics on Health Functional Beverage according to Food-related Lifestyle. Journal of Hotel Resort, 12(1), 179-196.

3.

Hwang, Lae-Hwang, Kim, Ae-Kyeong, Park, Kyoung-Ai, Kim, Ji-Young, Hwang, In-Sook, & Chae, Young-Zoo (2009). The Effect of Raw Material, Alcohol Content, and trans-Resveratrol on the Formation of Ethyl Carbamate in Plum Wine. Journal of Food Hygiene and Safety, 24(3), 194-199.

4.

Kim, Eun-Hee (2012). Research on Practical Shopping Value and Consumer Attitudes on PB Products According to Perceived Quality. Journal of Distribution Science, 10(10), 35-43.

5.

Kim, Gyu-Ran, Park, La-Young, & Lee, Shin-Ho (2010). Fermentation and Quality Characteristics of Kimchi Prepared Using Various Types of Maesil(Prumus mume Sieb. et; Zucc). Korea j. Food Preserv, 17(2), 214-222.

6.

Kim, Seong-Yong, Shin, Jae-Min, Jeon, Sang-Gon, & Kim, Yoon-Sik (2011). An Analysis of Purchasing Characteristics and Preference of Foreigners Living in Korea for Domestically Produced Fruit. Korea Journal of Agricultural Management and Policy, 38(3), 503-528.

7.

Kim, Tae-Hoon, & Kim, Bo-Yong (2015). Choice-based Conjoint Analysis of Consumer Preferences for Health Food Attributes Focused on Vitamin C Supplements. Journal of Distribution Science, 13(3), 79-91.

8.

Korean Society for Horticultural Science (2013), A History of Korea Horticultural Science, Seoul, Korea: C·I·R.

9.

Kwon, Oh-Sang, Kang, Hye-Jung, Seo, Jong-Seok, & Cho, Yong-Been (2014). A Count-Discrete-Continuous Model Analysis of Pork Purchasing Behavior of Korean Consumers. Korea Journal of Agricultural Economics, 55(3), 47-74.

10.

Lim, Jeom-Hee, Jeong, Soon-Young, & Kim, Jae-Hwan (2010). Quality Characteristics of Sulgidduk by the Addition of Maesil(Prunus Mume) Cocentrate. Korea J. Food Cookery SCI, 26(6), 761-771.

11.

Lim, Qing-Long, Cho, Young-Been, & Cho, Jae-Hwan (2014). An Estimation of Apple, Pear, Tangerine, Orange Demand System with Panel Data. Korea Journal of Food Marketing, 31(3), 67-84.

12.

Nam, Sang-Ho (2011). A Research Methodology Using Panel Data, 2011 Annual Spring Conference of The Korean Social Security Association (pp.13-52). Korea University, Korea: The Korean Social Security Association.

13.

Min, In-Sik, & Choi, Pil-Seon (2012). Panel Data Analysis. Seoul, Korea: Jiphil Media.

14.

Min, In-Sik, & Choi, Pil-Seon (2012). Advanced Panel Data Analysis. Seoul, Korea: Jiphil Media.

The Journal of Distribution Science