Livestock Research for Rural Development 24 (3) 2012 | Guide for preparation of papers | LRRD Newsletter | Citation of this paper |
Goat milk kefir consumers were found to be mostly females (59.6%) and only 40.4%. Buyers were mostly represented in the 41-50 age group (32.7%) with the youngest cohort in the 17-21 year grouping only 2.88%. The major consumers of this product had an income between Rp 1,500,000 and 2,999,999 (39.4%) and were mainly high school graduates (35.7%). One of the most important factors was the belief that kefir was a functional food and beneficial for the health. Factors which affected the decision to buy goat milk kefir which could be used as a marketing development strategy were: habit, halal, nutritive value, natural product, ingredients, and health benefits.
It can be concluded that a goat milk kefir developmental strategy can be carried out by improving consumer confidence in the belief that goat milk kefir is a functional drink conferring beneficial health attributes. .
Keywords: Food, halal, health, nutritive value
Traditionally kefir is prepared using cows’ milk but in some areas milk from sheep and goats has been used as an alternative (Otles and Cagindi 2003). Hosono et al (1990) noted that kefir has been claimed to be a therapeutic food, and this issue has been discussed extensively by Otles and Cagindi (2003) and represents one important factor influencing consumer consistency in their decisions to buy food products. Essael (1987) has identified three factors that influence consumer buying decisions; namely income and education, and enviromental and marketing factors. The factors affecting East Java consumers in their buying choices have not been evaluated and there is scarce published material on this subject. Therefore, the aims of this study were to understand the development issues relating to consumption of goat milk kefir in East Java.
A 2-step protocol was used to select goat milk kefir consumers: identification of location using purposeful sampling; respondents who consumed goat milk kefir were chosen using accidental sampling.The research data consisted of primary data from interviewing goat milk kefir consumers and secondary data from statistical demographic data of East Java.
A Likert scale with five score levels in form of a questionnaire was used as study instrument. The factors that affected buying decision of goat milk kefir were : Habit, Halal, Nutritive value, Natural product, ingredients, Health attributes and Buying consideration.
Data were analysed using multiple linear regression with the
mathematical formula as follows:
Y = a+β1X1+
β2X2+
β3X3+
β4X4+ ......+
βnXn+e.
Consumers of goat milk kefir in East Java were mainly women (59.6%). It was found that their age was in the range of 41-50 years (32.7%). For the younger age of 17-21 years there were only 2.88% of respondents .From the point of view of their income, most goat milk kefir consumers in East Java had montly income of Rp 1,500,000 up to Rp 2,999,999 (39.4%). The major consumers were private business people (46.0%), whilst students represented only 0.96%. Goat milk kefir consumers in East Java were in the majority high school graduates (35.6%).
According to Aktas and Cebirbay (2010), demographic factors such as gender, age, job and education significantly affected functional food acceptability. Hassler (2002) stated that health beneficial foods have already become an important consideration for food purchasers. However, Ettenson et al (1988) noted that high acceptance of consumers on new products was influenced by level of income and education. In the case of goat milk kefir in East Java, which is a relatively new product in the market, it was found that the price of this product had a significant effect on consumer preference.
In this study it was found that there were six factors affecting consumers’ behavior in the decision of buying goat milk kefir, i.e: habit, halal, nutritional value, natural product, ingredients, and health benefits. The multiple regression analysis of these factors (Table 1) applied to buying of goat milk kefir was as follows:
Y=22.3 - 0.59X1 + 0.53X2 + 0.96X3 + 1.04X4 - 0.43X5 - 0.90X6
Table 1. Description of coefficients used in the regression equation |
||||||
|
Unstandardized |
Standardized Coefficients |
t |
Sig. |
||
B |
Std. Error |
Beta |
||||
|
Constant |
22.29 |
3.98 |
|
5.60 |
0.00 |
Habit, X1 |
-0.59 |
0.29 |
-0.27 |
-2.00 |
0.05 |
|
Halal, X2 |
0.54 |
0.59 |
0.11 |
0.91 |
0.37 |
|
Nutritive- value, X3 |
0.96 |
0.58 |
0.20 |
1.65 |
0.10 |
|
Natural product, X4 |
1.04 |
0.52 |
0.23 |
1.99 |
0.05 |
|
Ingredient, X5 |
0.43 |
0.55 |
0.10 |
0.78 |
0.44 |
|
Health, X6 |
-0.90 |
0.53 |
-0.21 |
-1.71 |
0.09 |
The natural product coefficient showed the highest Beta value compared to other factors (Table 1). Analysis of variance with predictors as the independent variables (habit, halal, nutritional value, nature product, ingredients, and health benefit) showed that all six factors together significantly affected consumers’ preference.
One of the consumers behaviour issues was the belief that kefir was a functional food which was beneficial for their health and motivated them to consume goat milk kefir. It was thought to correct health disturbances such as cholesterol (29.8%), uric acid (22.1%), high blood pressure (11.5%), diabetis (10.6%), gastrointestinal problems (8.65%), lung problems (5.77%), asthma (3.85%), allergy (1.92%), typhus (1.92%), vitality (1.92%), cancer (0.96%), and insomnia (0.96%).
Functional foods are foods with added nutritional and pharmaceutical properties, and kefir as a functional food was also believed to have curative properties for some diseases. This factor was the most important contributor for buying these foods (Stanton et al 2001; Geoffrey 2005; Farnwoth 2005). Habit and health benefits had a negative correlation with goat milk kefir consumers, hence the better health status of consumers the more was the decrease of their preference in buying goat milk kefir; on the contrary the lower the health status then the preference for this product was increased.
The successful development of probiotic milk was due to its positive image to consumers (Aktas and Cebirbay 2010). Therefore all factors which affect consumers’ preference have a positive image. Halal, nutritive value, natural product and ingredients represented physiological needs in direct relation to quality of life as reported by Assadi (2003). Kottler (1997) argued that all these factors were a mirror of quality of life and could be seen in two perspectives, namely internal and external factors. Internal quality of a product was based on its specification, while external quality was based on consumers’ perception and had an important role from the point of view of marketing. The acceptance of goat milk kefir by consumers as being a functional food was an important factor in relation to the success of marketing. According to Siro et al (2008), consumers acceptance of a food is mainly determined by their concern on health issues, and the belief that the product was a functional food, with natural ingredients.
From the price viewpoint, goat milk kefir in East Java is expensive (Rp 100,000 to 120,000/littre). According to Kotler (1997), the purchase of expensive goods is of concern to consumers and they generally need to compile and evaluate a number of factors concerning the products they wish to purchase.
A strategic developmental plan for advancing goat milk kefir sales should stress its values as a functional food with health benefits.
Aktas N and Cebirbay M A 2010: Determination of the Factors Affecting Consumer Attitudes of Functional Foods in Konya, Turkey. Article Retrieved March 1, 2010 from http: www.google.co.id.
Assadi D 2003: Do religions Influence Customers Behaviour?: Confronting religious rules and marketing consepts. Groupe ESC DIJON BOURGOGNE. Article Retrieved April 6, 2010 from http: www.estijon.co.
Essael H 1987: Consumer Behaviour and Marketing Action. 4th ed. Kent Publishing Company. London.
Ettenson R, Wagner J and Gaeth G 1988: Evaluating the Effect of Country-of-Origin and the ”Made in the USA” Campaign: Conjoint Approach. Journal of Retailing. 64 (1): 85-100.
Farnworth E R 2005: Kefir-a complex probiotic. Food Science and Technology. Bulletin: Functional Foods, 2(1): 1-17.
Geoffrey K 2005: Dietary Suplements and Functional Food. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Oxford UK.
Hasler C 2002: Functional Food: benefits, Concerns and Chalengers. Journal of Nutrition, 132: 3772-3781.
Hosono A, Tanabe T and Otani H 1990: Binding Properties of Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolated from Kefir Milk with Mutagenic Amino Acid Pyrolizates. Milchwiss, 45: 647-651.
Kotler P 1997: Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Control. Prentice Hall International. New Jersey.
Otles S and Cagindi O 2003: Kefir: A Probiotic Dairy-Composition, Nutritional and Therapeutic Aspects. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 2, (2): 54-59.
Siro I, Kapolna E, Kapolna B And Lugasi A 2008: Functinal food, Product development, Marketing, and consumer. Appetite. 51:456-467.
Stanton W J 2001: Fundamental of Marketing. McGraw-Hill Book Company. Inc. New York.
Received 19 September 2011; Accepted 13 February 2012; Published 4 March 2012