The DOI matches its Crossref record; 81 of the 81 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Consumers' perceptions, purchase intention, and willingness to pay a premium price for safe vegetables: A case study of Beijing, China
Abstract
Abstract Safe food is healthy, nutritious and environmentally friendly by green, sustainable and clean production. The objectives of this study were to examine factors influencing the consumers' purchase intention and willingness to pay a premium price for safe vegetables. To achieve the objectives, this paper developed the model of consumers' purchase safe vegetables. Based on 840 valid questionnaires from Beijing of China, the model was confirmed by the logistic regression method. The results showed that food safety, strict production and processing, and healthy environment were the top three perceived advantages of safe vegetables for consumers. In addition, 93.0% and 87.1% of consumers were familiar with organic vegetables and green vegetables, respectively. Two-thirds of consumers identified safe vegetables via certification labels on vegetable packages. Furthermore, 67.6% of consumers were willing to buy safe vegetables and 65.8% would pay a premium price for safe vegetables. Meanwhile, consumers' purchase intentions for safe vegetables were positively affected by family food expenditure, children, familiarity, differential cognition, safety awareness, nutritional health, packaging, label trust, and online shopping experience but price level, safety status, and freshness had a negative effect. Consumers’ willingness to pay a premium price for safe vegetables was positively affected by family income, familiarity, differential cognition, safety awareness, nutritional health, packaging, label trust, and online shopping experience but family food expenditure, price level, price fluctuations, and safety status had a negative effect. The findings of this study have important implications to improve the consumption and guide cleaner production of safe vegetables. The findings obtained can also provide references for other similar studies in other areas.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method
(1989) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-0417 · Cited by 4,215
Deressa, T. T., Hassan, R. M., Ringler, C., Alemu, T., & Yesuf, M. (2009) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.01.002 · Cited by 1,939
Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review of why people purchase organic food
Hughner, R. S., McDonagh, P., Prothero, A., Shultz, C. J., & Stanton, J. (2007) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.210 · Cited by 1,754
Yadav, R., & Pathak, G. S. (2016) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.120 · Cited by 1,463
Yadav, R., & Pathak, G. S. (2017) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.12.019 · Cited by 1,318
Padel, S., & Foster, C. (2005) · British Food Journal · doi:10.1108/00070700510611002 · Cited by 1,214
Using surveys to value public goods: The contingent valuation method
(1990) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90067-4 · Cited by 1,067
The contingent valuation method: a review
Venkatachalam, L. (2004) · Environmental Impact Assessment Review · doi:10.1016/s0195-9255(03)00138-0 · Cited by 1,001
Arvola, A., Vassallo, M., Dean, M., Lampila, P., Saba, A., Lähteenmäki, L., & Shepherd, R. (2008) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2007.09.010 · Cited by 930
Cited by
Microbial spoilage of vegetables, fruits and cereals
Alegbeleye, O., Odeyemi, O. A., Strateva, M., & Stratev, D. (2022) · Applied Food Research · doi:10.1016/j.afres.2022.100122 · Cited by 389
Jiang, H., Cheng, Y., Yang, J., & Gao, S. (2022) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2022.107329 · Cited by 362
A systematic review of drivers influencing consumer willingness to pay for organic food
Katt, F., & Meixner, O. (2020) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2020.04.029 · Cited by 298
Qasim, H., Yan, L., Guo, R., Saeed, A., & Ashraf, B. N. (2019) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph16071106 · Cited by 177
Qi, X., Yu, H., & Ploeger, A. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17197106 · Cited by 141
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, B., Fu, Z., Huang, J., Wang, J., Xu, S., & Zhang, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Cleaner Production
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-10
- Volume
- 197
- Pages
- 1498-1507
- ISSN
- 0959-6526 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2811043562
- Cited by
- 257
- References
- 81
- FWCI
- 15.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Consumers' perceptions, purchase intention, and willingness to pay a premium price for safe vegetables: A case study of Beijing, China. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.273
- The paper
- Zhang, B., Fu, Z., Huang, J., Wang, J., Xu, S., & Zhang, L. (2018). Consumers' perceptions, purchase intention, and willingness to pay a premium price for safe vegetables: A case study of Beijing, China. Journal of Cleaner Production. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.273
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.