As EU legislation recently changed, another obstacle for introducing entomophagy on a larger scale in the EU is identified and described by Jansson and Berggren (2015) and van Huis (2012).
Consumer attitudes, and their skepticism is described as barriers for commercialization of entomophagy. The following part will summarize the current literature on food decisions in Europe with the focus on why insects haven’t been introduced before. Customer attitudes and their recent development will build the basis for this paper and the marketing aspects discussed.
When humans began to domesticate wild animal species, the focus was not only amount of meat per animal, but milk products, fur, wool and the means of using the animal as a transportation and farming tool. The utility of larger animals outperformed the insects comparing the benefits and their availability in Europe (FAO, 2013). DeFoliart (1999) argues that the shift towards farming, the use of land as resources for food combined with the “uncertain nature of insects as staple food”
was responsible for the lack of interest in breeding, harvesting and adopting insects as food in western countries. Although western interest in insects has been low and limited by the previous EU regulations, Durst et al. (2008) reported that France imports close to five tons and Belgium imports three tons of dried caterpillars from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) which are intended for unspecified consumption. Durst et al. (2008) also comments that the capturing, processing, transportation and marketing of edible insects can potentially provide income and livelihood opportunities for people with prior knowledge on this, given an increase in demand from the western world. This perspective is supported by Gahukar (2011), but he remarks that existing technologies on farming and processing of insects need to be modernized and improved before they are disseminated to local communities. This would be needed in order to create commercial value and availability to consumers.
18
3.1 Customer acceptance
When it comes to introducing entomophagy to the western food-culture, customer acceptance and skepticism might be the biggest obstacle for success (van Huis, 2012; House 2016; Gahukar, 2011;
Durst et.al, 2008). The major research in Europe has focused on people’s reluctance towards eating insect-based food, willingness to substitute meat for insects and profiling people who are willing to try insect-based food (Hartmann et al., 2015; Ruby et al., 2015; Schösler et al., 2015;
Vanonhacker et. al, 2012; Verbeke, 2014). Although the customer acceptance for insect-based food is low, (Vanonhacker et. al, 2012), research suggests that people with high “sensation seeking”
traits and having a high convenience orientation also have a more sympathetic view towards insects in food products (Verbeke, 2014). Non-vegetarians are also reported to be more likely to eat insect-based food, compared to individuals that identify themselves as vegetarians (Hamerman, 2015; Verbeke, 2014). Verbeke (2014) has also identified external motivations and altruistic motives for eating insect-based food. An expressed intention to reduce meat consumption and a belief that insects are good for the environment are the key findings, while health aspects and curiosity also mentioned as arguments towards an insect-based food diet (Sogari, 2015). While the studies vary with countries being investigated and motivational focus being different for individual people, the results are coinciding towards an increased focus on and interest for insect-based food from the end consumer perspective.
3.2 Food neophobia
A central aspect closely linked to the acceptance of novelty food is the term food neophobia, which is the description of the skepticism of novelty food or the reluctance to eat specific food (Dovey et al., 2007). Verbeke (2014) measured food neophobia in her research sample as a large and significant factor to estimate the readiness of consuming insects. This is consistent with findings of Tuorila et al. (2001), where respondents described food neophobia towards novelty food which
19
they are not familiar with. New food or unfamiliar food can either be introduced from other cultures or invented to suit a specific need or taste. However, as the conversion of customers can be a difficult task for companies or producers, the example of sushi illustrates that time and careful marketing can change consumers attitudes on a large scale. (Bestor, 2000). Verbeke (2014) notes that food neophobia is of grave importance and must be tackled for entomophagy to gain a foothold in Western markets. With regards to customers perceptions, Yen (2009) finds the main attitude towards insect-based food in the westernized countries to be either food neophobia (fear) or curiosity.
3.3 Insect-based food
A factor that is found to be influential towards the willingness to try and purchase insect-based food is whether the insects itself are visible or not. As the new EU regulation (2015/2283) addresses “insect-based” food and not insects as a separate product, this study is focusing on the insect-based food which can be classified as insect concealed products. Schouteten et. al (2015) has found the appearance of prepared insect-based food to be of importance for the consumer, and the similarity towards existing products and appearances give a positive contribution towards likability. The common western view on insect-based food is found to have a negative relationship between disgust and the degree of concealment or incorporation of insects in the food (Gmuer et al., 2016; Hartmann et al., 2015; Lensvelt & Steenbekkers, 2014; Schösler et al., 2012). This finding proposes an argument towards manipulating likability by modifying the appearance of insect-based food to reduce consumer reluctance. The prediction of consumer acceptance for insect food increases when insects are incorporated as a processed rather than as a whole ingredient (Hartmann et al., 2015).This finding is further supported by the findings in Tan et al. (2015) research where the degree of cultural exposure through visibility of insects in food was negatively correlated with liking of the product. Although the theory is consistent on this matter, factors such
20
as level of information, exposure over time and cultural influences might account for the effects in the previous research.
3.4 Categorizing insect-based food as product
While products can be defined broadly with few constraints, this part will explore the marketing aspects of insect-based food as a consumer product with the relevant classifications, ramifications and concerns. Consumer products, being a narrower definition of products, have traditionally been categorized in three groups: convenience products, shopping products and specialty products (Murphy & Enis, 1986; Winzar,1992). Kotler and Keller introduced in their book a fourth consumer product classification, “unsought goods” being identified as products “(..) consumers do not know about or normally think of buying” (Kotler & Keller, 2012, p.327). Claessens (2017) further argues that these are products which initially are of low interest to the customer or the customer has little knowledge about. Regardless of the classification, consumer products are usually subject to marketing in one form or another, either through commercials, advertisement or similar forms of mass communication. Claessens (2017) argues that the four different consumer categories have distinctive differences that proposes different purchasing behavior for the product, implicitly also different marketing communication tools.
Through legislation from EU and other governmental institutions in Europe, insect-based food has been labeled “novelty-food” as it has not been consumed to a significant degree within EU before 15. May 1997 (European Commission, 2018). Low demand for, and little interest in insect-based food can be explanatory reasons for why the product has yet to receive an acknowledged categorization of the previous mentioned consumer product categories, but this paper will in the following part argue the case towards a categorization in an unsought good category.
21
3.5 Food attitudes in Europe
Europe is a developed region of the world where EU is the biggest importer and exporter of food (EC, 2018). Previous studies have been carried out on European customers and their attitudes towards food have been measured and studied. European food attitudes have changed with factors such as government guidelines4, trends and information availability (Urala & Lähteenmäki, 2005;
Bestor, 2000). Although different food products, such as healthy, functional and environmentally sustainable food has been subject of governmental guidelines or promotion in order to be accepted or used on a daily basis, it is likely that trends and individual motivation factors together with marketing are contributing factors for the change of food attitudes (Margetts et al., 1997). To understand different food choices, culture is often a component that is considered. With culture being defined as shared attitudes, beliefs, values and practices, culture becomes a complex entity with measurable on different parameters. By disentangling the components of culture, specific aspects can be measured more concretely. Motivation is the focus in the further analyses of this thesis. Looy et al. (2014) describes culture as a factor for shaping the acceptance versus the reluctance of insect-based food, however the specifications of influence or measured effect have yet to be academically established. Several cross-cultural studies involving non-insect consumers from European countries and insect consumers from south Asian countries find food neophobia, disgust thresholds and perceived risk to be psychological factors inhibited in the European culture and mindset (Hamerman, 2015; Megido et al., 2013; House, 2016; Hartmann & Siegrist, 2016).
However, as past practices of Entomophagy in Europe can be found (Bodenheimer, 1951), Tan (2017) suggests that there is nothing inherent that precludes the acceptance of insects as food. Tan
4 Government guidelines towards food consumption is different among the various in Europe although similar characteristics towards healthy food is expressed (Margetts et al, 1997)
22
(2017) further argues that the availability and norms of food production are influential factors for shaping the acceptance of insects as food from a cultural perspective.
In the EU, food security is found to be of a relatively high concern in the population of the member states, with the highest concern towards the food security on a worldwide basis, but also a concern within the European Union itself (EC Barometer, 2012). A majority of the population within the EU are also of the opinion that the EU should produce more food to be an independent food supplier, but also with regards to meet external demand for food in the future (EC Barometer, 2012). Attitudes towards what kind of food should be produced have yet to be specified and conducted, however the EU has mentioned the focus on algae production, cultured meat and entomophagy as described in the introduction.
3.6 Sushi in Europe
Another example of a novelty but seemingly ugly food being introduced to European markets was sushi. This example shows how changes in food attitude have change over time with regards to a specific product category, in some classification, similar to insect-based food. Introduced to the American markets after the second world war, mainly to satisfy Japanese businessmen and curious Americans, sushi was soon perceived as a healthy alternative to fast food and became a growing trend in the big American cities (Bestor, 2000). According to Theodore C. Bestor, the trend was picked up by Europeans visiting America and thereby grew into the popular dish it is today offered by high-end stores to kiosks and grocery stores. While the dish eventually grew into a popular trend, some customers were skeptical and reluctant to try the raw fish (van Huis, 2012). With a view of eating raw fish as barbaric and unhygienic and potentially health inflicting, the consumer acceptance came only after extensive information communication and being lead or persuaded by the curious early adopters. The introduction of sushi and the conversion of previously skeptical
23
customers is often referred to as one of the big changes in customer attitude and preference in recent years. Whether this phenomenon is replicable and applicable to insect-based food will remain to be seen and decided by the customers. However, the example of sushi shows how a novel food can turn into a commonly consumed dish worldwide.
3.7 Market entry strategies
The introduction of insect-based food in European countries is a process that has already begun as described in section 2.5. However, with regards to the legislation change and the number of new entrants, the market seems to be in an early phase. In terms of market creation, the new legislation has removed the barriers for entry opening up for a previously untapped market which can also resemble the definition of being a blue ocean market where no previous company operated, creating a new marketplace for companies targeting this market (Chan & Mauborgne, 2005). As multiple startups and renowned companies have identified this potential market, several different products have been introduced, with a range of products from protein bars to candy and snacks.
The introduction of such novel food by multiple companies in Europe can indicate a trend towards this and be a factor when it comes to creating awareness, however, whether this categorizes as a trend or a smaller change in the European food assortment is too early to conclude upon. In terms of marketing insect-based food, van Huis (2017) comments on two possible focus points for strategies. Firstly, the positive environmental impact compared to traditional consumption of meat and secondly the health benefits linked to the nutrition values. These two strategies target different customer segments as they emphasize on different benefits. By psychographic segmentation, individuals with similar values, personality traits or mindset can be grouped together, making the basis for a product made to serve their needs or desires (Kotler & Keller, 2012). This thesis explores a similar approach where the hypothesis is that motivational attitudes can be a segmentation factor for marketing insect-based food.
24
3.8 Hedonic vs utilitarian motivation
To predict the behavior and decompile the elements weighted in a purchasing decision a classification of the motivational factors is carried out. The division of motivational factors is done similar to the research by Mikalef et al. (2012) although the motivational focus was different.
Holbrook & Hirschman (1982) defines hedonic motivation or hedonic consumer behavior as an evaluation of esthetic products, emotive aspects, and product experience. Furthermore, the authors states that hedonic consumption would involve emotional arousal and the feelings of joy, fear and rapture, which is amongst the targeted measured variables. Utilitarian motivation or consumption behavior on the other hand, involves the attitude towards usefulness, value and prudence of the product (Ahtola, 1985). In marketing theory, goods can also be classified in hedonic and utilitarian goods, where hedonic goods often are classified as luxury items or desirable objects that gives the consumer a pleasure or enjoyment from purchasing the product. In contrast, a utilitarian good is purchased for the practicality and the consumer’s needs (Wertenbroch et al., 2004). It is evident that the classification of motivation into hedonic and utilitarian coincides to some extent with the classification of the product, however the scope of this thesis is limited to the measuring of hedonic and utilitarian motivation as components of the total attitude towards insect-based food. This coincides also with how the terminology is used in marketing when determining the purchasing motives and consumer choices (Dhar & Wertenbroch, 2000).
25