The shift from conventional to organic food consumption has become increasingly common in Tiruchirappalli in recent years, driven by rising health consciousness and growing concern over the harmful effects of chemically produced food. To understand this changing pattern, the present study examines the buying behaviour of consumers toward select organic food products, rice, millets, fruits, and vegetables using data collected from 532 respondents through a well-structured questionnaire. The responses were analysed using statistical tools such as simple percentage, mean, standard deviation, coefficient of variation, factor analysis, t-test, and one-way ANOVA. The findings reveal that consumers exhibit a generally positive attitude toward organic food products, with the highest ratings observed for production method, followed by health-related aspects and trust–price considerations. Moderate levels of behaviour were noted in terms of availability and environmental concern, while lower scores were recorded for packaging and product display. This indicates that consumers prioritize authenticity, safety, and nutritional benefits over promotional and aesthetic elements. The study further shows that socio-economic factors such as gender, marital status, and family type significantly influence consumer behaviour, while age, education, family size, and residential area play a more decisive role than income. These insights suggest that targeted awareness programmes and marketing strategies are essential, particularly for rural and less-educated groups, to strengthen the organic food market in Tiruchirappalli. The study contributes valuable implications for consumers, producers, marketers, and policymakers aiming to promote sustainable food consumption
In recent years, the global shift toward health consciousness and environmental sustainability has led to a significant increase in the demand for organic food products. Consumers are becoming increasingly aware of the harmful effects of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and artificial additives used in conventional food production, prompting a preference for natural and eco-friendly alternatives. In India, the organic food market has experienced steady growth due to rising income levels, improved health awareness, and changing lifestyles. Despite this positive trend, consumer buying behaviour towards organic products continues to vary across regions depending on factors such as awareness, availability, price, and trust in certification. The state of Tamil Nadu has witnessed remarkable growth in organic farming and marketing initiatives in recent years. Within this context, Tiruchirappalli District stands out as a developing urban center where consumer interest in organic food is steadily increasing. However, the level of awareness, perception, and actual buying behaviour of consumers towards organic products remains inconsistent. Understanding these behavioural patterns is crucial for promoting sustainable consumption and supporting the organic market ecosystem. This study, therefore, aims to analyse the buying behaviour of consumers towards select organic food products in Tiruchirappalli District, focusing on factors such as awareness, perception, preferences, and challenges faced in the purchase process. By identifying key determinants influencing consumer behaviour, the study provides valuable insights for marketers, producers, and policymakers to enhance marketing strategies, improve product availability, and strengthen consumer confidence in the organic food sector.
Consumer Behaviour plays a crucial role in understanding the acceptance and demand for organic food products. Behaviour refers to the way individuals interpret, evaluate, and form opinions about products based on their experiences, beliefs, and available information. In the context of organic food, Behaviour is shaped by various factors such as health consciousness, product quality, safety, price, taste, certification, and environmental awareness. These Behaviour influence not only the willingness to purchase organic foods but also the frequency and consistency of consumption. With growing awareness about health and environmental sustainability, many consumers view organic food as a safer and more nutritious alternative to conventional products. However, Behaviour may differ across consumer groups depending on their knowledge, exposure, lifestyle, and socio-economic background. Some may associate organic foods with purity and wellness, while others may perceive them as expensive or less accessible. Understanding these Behaviour is essential for marketers and producers to identify consumer expectations, perceived barriers, and satisfaction levels related to organic food consumption. Hence, studying consumer Behaviour of organic food products helps in assessing how consumers value, trust, and differentiate these products in the marketplace
Roshny Munshi et al (2020) studied the consumer perception towards organic food products in Western Mumbai. The study found that there was tremendous demand for organic food products but there were gaps in terms of awareness (about organic food products amongst the consumers) and faith (in the claims which were made by organic food marketers). Price had little effect on the existing organic food consumers where as others were aware about its benefits but were not willing to shell out extra money for consuming organic. Khatun N.R., and Fathima Rani S.V. (2021) focused on Consumer Preference towards organic food products in Chennai. The finding of the study was the factors influencing consumer preference on organic food products, “Contain good Nutrition” with the average mean score of 95.78 contributed 1st rank, “Products are Healthy” with the average mean score of 92.42 contributed 2nd rank. Basumatary A. (2022) studied consumers Behaviour towards Organic Food in Guwahati. The findings of the study revealed that the majority of consumers, particularly in metropolitan areas, choose organic food products. Since organic product marketing was so poor in the studied area, demand for organic products is increasing but supply was quite low.
Sivaranjani R., and Thayammal I.P.R. (2022) studied consumer preference towards Organic Food Products in Tirunelveli. The study found that consumers preferred to buy organic foods. There were several factors that influenced the preference for organic food compared to female respondents. Educated respondents and higher income people preferred to buy organic food. Consumers preferred to buy organic food because they like fresh vegetables and fruits. Reason for choosing it to be healthy, taste good, be safe, protect the environment, etc. Prasanth U., and Sivakanni (2023) investigated consumer behaviour towards Organic Product in Chennai. The study concluded that The consumer’s concerns on food safety, quality and nutrition on organic products are increasingly becoming important across the planet, which has provided growing opportunities for organic products within the recent years. The demand for organic products is steadily increasing within the developed countries, while developing countries like India still got to go a long way. Radhika R., and Elumalai K. (2024) focused the consumer buying behaviour towards organic products in Chennai city. The study concluded that most respondents claimed that purchasing organic food was motivated by food quality and environmental stewardship. The majority of consumers preferred organic food products. Food safety concerns significantly influenced customer purchasing behaviour. Most consumers were pleased with organic food products. They were hesitant to buy organic food items for various reasons, including a need for more trust in organic food products.
Kaur T., and Kalotra A. (2024) enquired consumers’ perception and behaviour towards Organic Food. The study concluded that researchers saw the demand for organic food items both internationally and in India. Additionally, a number of variables that affect how consumers see organic food items have been found. Studies on preferences, knowledge, and contentment with organic food items have also been conducted. Gomathi A.C., and Narayan A. (2024) investigated consumer purchase intentions towards organic foods with a special focus on the Tenkasi region. The findings of the study highlighted the significance of factors like health awareness, environmental consciousness, and product characteristics in influencing consumer decision-making within the organic food industry. The study underscored the importance of aligning marketing strategies with consumer values, addressing adoption barriers, and enhancing transparency through clear labeling and communication. Sachdev N., and Sindhwani A. (2025) examined the behavior of urban households in Ludhiana, Punjab, a fast-growing Tier-2 city-towards the consumption of morganic food products. The study evidenced that internal drivers like health consciousness and environmental concern were positively associated with higher purchase intent, while barriers such as price sensitivity and limited product availability hinder consistent consumption. Trust in certification and digital marketing influenced purchase behavior significantly, especially among younger, socially aware consumers. Gupta L., et al (2025) analysed consumer behaviour towards organic food products in Udaipur, Rajasthan. The study concluded that while there was a strong awareness and positive perception of organic products among the student population, affordability and accessibility remain barriers to broader adoption. Strategic awareness campaigns and policy interventions could further promote organic food consumption.
Objectives
The study is made with the following objectives,
Switching over organic food products from non-organic food products in Tiruchirappalli is wide common in recent years. In order to understand the buying behaviour of consumers towards select organic food products in the study area. For this purpose, the researcher selected a total of 532 consumers of organic food products. The researchers restricted to four organic food products namely, rice, millets, fruits and vegetables.
The researcher prepared a well-structured questionnaire and served the sample consumers and collected primary data. The collected responses were analysed by the researchers using the statistical tools of simple percentage, mean, standard deviation, coefficient of variation, Factor analysis, ‘t’ test and One-way ANOVA. To filfill the second objective of the study the researchers framed the following null hypothesis.
Ho: There is no significant association between socio-economic variables and shopping related variables with Behaviour towards organic food products
The researcher has studied the buying behaviour of consumers towards select organic food products in Tiruchirappalli district in the state of Tamilnadu. This section of the paper presents the results and discussion of the above analysis. For this purpose, the researchers identified a total of 47 variables in studying buying behaviour. These vast number of variables are reduced using factor analysis. Factor analysis is a statistical technique designed to clarify the variability found among observed and correlated variables through a potentially reduced set of underlying factors. Before, doing this the researcher tested the sampling adequacy using the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test. The result indicates that the KMO measure of sampling adequacy is 0.921, while Bartlett’s test of sphericity produced a Chi-square value of 21212.887, which is statistically significant at the 1% level. The findings indicate that all variables related to the respondents' Behaviour of organic food products in the study area are normally distributed, making them adequately suitable for consolidation into a primary factor.
Table below shows the communalities of the statements before and after factor extraction.
Table 1: Communalities – Behaviour on Organic Food Products
|
SN |
Factors |
Initial |
Extraction |
|
1 |
Organic food products (OFP) improve health |
1.000 |
0.578 |
|
2 |
OFP have high nutritional values |
1.000 |
0.861 |
|
3 |
OFP are healthier than conventionally products |
1.000 |
0.672 |
|
4 |
OFP are tastier |
1.000 |
0.564 |
|
5 |
OFP are produced using natural fertilizers |
1.000 |
0.742 |
|
6 |
OFP are produced in the specially prepared lands |
1.000 |
0.560 |
|
7 |
Natural pesticides are used to control pests |
1.000 |
0.638 |
|
8 |
OFP available in my area are fresh |
1.000 |
0.690 |
|
9 |
Package of OFP is environmentally friendly |
1.000 |
0.794 |
|
10 |
OFP are clean |
1.000 |
0.758 |
|
11 |
OFP are chemical free |
1.000 |
0.866 |
|
12 |
Prices of OFP are fair |
1.000 |
0.795 |
|
13 |
OFP are highly suitable for children |
1.000 |
0.558 |
|
14 |
OFP are highly suitable for aged people |
1.000 |
0.504 |
|
15 |
OFP are attractively packed |
1.000 |
0.541 |
|
16 |
OFP are regularly available in my area |
1.000 |
0.700 |
|
17 |
All the top brands of OFP are available |
1.000 |
0.527 |
|
18 |
Departmental stores have separate section for OFP |
1.000 |
0.521 |
|
19 |
Specialised stores are trustable for buying OFP |
1.000 |
0.562 |
|
20 |
OFP are attractively displayed in the stores |
1.000 |
0.945 |
|
21 |
OFP available in online stores are trustable |
1.000 |
0.858 |
|
22 |
All brands of OFP are available in online stores |
1.000 |
0.876 |
|
23 |
Trust the genuineness of OFP in online stores |
1.000 |
0.923 |
|
24 |
Buying OFP increase my prestige |
1.000 |
0.658 |
|
25 |
Feel that buying OFP supports local farmers |
1.000 |
0.910 |
|
26 |
Like to buy OFP preferably from local market |
1.000 |
0.854 |
|
27 |
Search offers to buy OFP |
1.000 |
0.572 |
|
28 |
Prefer to consume OFP to live disease free |
1.000 |
0.848 |
|
29 |
Like to eat OFP to maintain my weight |
1.000 |
0.813 |
|
30 |
Started to buy OFP after the advice of doctor |
1.000 |
0.565 |
|
31 |
Social media posts influenced to switch to OFP |
1.000 |
0.766 |
|
32 |
It is difficult to identify OFP in the market |
1.000 |
0.831 |
|
33 |
Buy OFP since there are old age people |
1.000 |
0.585 |
|
34 |
Buy OFP to take care of children’s health |
1.000 |
0.901 |
|
35 |
Buy OFP since the production method saves environment |
1.000 |
0.707 |
|
36 |
Buy OFP to support organic movement |
1.000 |
0.595 |
|
37 |
Buy OFP to save natural resources |
1.000 |
0.631 |
|
38 |
Buy OFP, because I earn more |
1.000 |
0.813 |
|
39 |
Accessibility of OFP market is easy in my area |
1.000 |
0.714 |
|
40 |
Buy OFP because of adulteration free |
1.000 |
0.831 |
|
41 |
Prefer OFP, since they are easy to cook |
1.000 |
0.922 |
|
42 |
OFP take longer time to perish |
1.000 |
0.948 |
|
43 |
Started to buy OFP because of shopkeepers’ recommendation |
1.000 |
0.864 |
|
44 |
Feel that after consuming OFP, health condition of family improved |
1.000 |
0.582 |
|
45 |
OFP are available during all the season |
1.000 |
0.851 |
|
46 |
OFP do not require special preservation methods |
1.000 |
0.789 |
|
47 |
Consuming OFP increase immunity |
1.000 |
0.742 |
The table 1 demonstrates that the individual variances of the variables were considerable, falling within a statistically significant range. The results indicate that the calculated values of the extracted communalities for all variables surpass 0.5. These extracted communalities represent the goodness of fit of the factor analysis. A higher value of extracted communalities for the variables indicates a more favourable outcome. Consequently, all variables are appropriate for inclusion in the factor analysis. The factor analysis utilizes the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) method to identify and estimate the eigenvalues of the principal components. After calculating the eigenvalues of the components, they are arranged in descending order based on the computed eigenvalues. In line with Kaiser’s criterion, factors with an eigenvalue exceeding 1 are retained for the analysis. This leads to a reduction in factors as shown in the table provided below.
Table 2: Total Variance Explained: Behaviour on Organic Food Products
|
Component |
Initial Eigen values |
Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings |
||||
|
Total |
% of Variance |
Cumulative % |
Total |
% of Variance |
Cumulative % |
|
|
1 |
6.334 |
13.477 |
13.477 |
6.334 |
13.477 |
13.477 |
|
2 |
5.797 |
12.334 |
25.811 |
5.797 |
12.334 |
25.811 |
|
3 |
4.500 |
9.574 |
35.385 |
4.500 |
9.574 |
35.385 |
|
4 |
3.972 |
8.451 |
43.836 |
3.972 |
8.451 |
43.836 |
|
5 |
2.614 |
5.562 |
49.398 |
2.614 |
5.562 |
49.398 |
|
6 |
1.922 |
4.089 |
53.487 |
1.922 |
4.089 |
53.487 |
|
7 |
1.827 |
3.887 |
57.374 |
1.827 |
3.887 |
57.374 |
|
8 |
1.786 |
3.800 |
61.174 |
1.786 |
3.800 |
61.174 |
|
9 |
1.555 |
3.309 |
64.483 |
1.555 |
3.309 |
64.483 |
|
10 |
1.420 |
3.021 |
67.504 |
1.420 |
3.021 |
67.504 |
|
11 |
1.070 |
2.277 |
69.781 |
1.070 |
2.277 |
69.781 |
|
12 |
0.956 |
2.034 |
71.815 |
|
|
|
|
13 |
0.931 |
1.981 |
73.796 |
|
|
|
|
14 |
0.920 |
1.957 |
75.753 |
|
|
|
|
15 |
0.894 |
1.902 |
77.655 |
|
|
|
|
16 |
0.867 |
1.845 |
79.500 |
|
|
|
|
17 |
0.855 |
1.819 |
81.319 |
|
|
|
|
18 |
0.785 |
1.670 |
82.989 |
|
|
|
|
19 |
0.738 |
1.570 |
84.560 |
|
|
|
|
20 |
0.732 |
1.557 |
86.117 |
|
|
|
|
21 |
0.665 |
1.415 |
87.532 |
|
|
|
|
22 |
0.622 |
1.323 |
88.855 |
|
|
|
|
23 |
0.575 |
1.223 |
90.079 |
|
|
|
|
24 |
0.476 |
1.013 |
91.091 |
|
|
|
|
25 |
0.458 |
0.974 |
92.066 |
|
|
|
|
26 |
0.423 |
0.900 |
92.966 |
|
|
|
|
27 |
0.385 |
0.819 |
93.785 |
|
|
|
|
28 |
0.296 |
0.630 |
94.415 |
|
|
|
|
29 |
0.285 |
0.606 |
95.021 |
|
|
|
|
30 |
0.248 |
0.528 |
95.549 |
|
|
|
|
31 |
0.235 |
0.500 |
96.049 |
|
|
|
|
32 |
0.229 |
0.487 |
96.536 |
|
|
|
|
33 |
0.205 |
0.436 |
96.972 |
|
|
|
|
34 |
0.196 |
0.417 |
97.389 |
|
|
|
|
35 |
0.181 |
0.385 |
97.774 |
|
|
|
|
36 |
0.124 |
0.264 |
98.038 |
|
|
|
|
37 |
0.121 |
0.257 |
98.296 |
|
|
|
|
38 |
0.095 |
0.202 |
98.498 |
|
|
|
|
39 |
0.091 |
0.194 |
98.691 |
|
|
|
|
40 |
0.088 |
0.187 |
98.879 |
|
|
|
|
41 |
0.085 |
0.181 |
99.060 |
|
|
|
|
42 |
0.081 |
0.172 |
99.232 |
|
|
|
|
43 |
0.079 |
0.168 |
99.400 |
|
|
|
|
44 |
0.077 |
0.164 |
99.564 |
|
|
|
|
45 |
0.075 |
0.160 |
99.723 |
|
|
|
|
46 |
0.066 |
0.140 |
99.864 |
|
|
|
|
47 |
0.064 |
0.136 |
100.000 |
|
|
|
|
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Source: Primary Data |
||||||
The table 2 demonstrates that the individual variances of the variables were considerable, falling within a statistically significant range. The results indicate that the calculated values of the extracted communalities for all variables surpass 0.5. These extracted communalities represent the goodness of fit of the factor analysis. A higher value of extracted communalities for the variables indicates a more favourable outcome. Consequently, all variables are appropriate for inclusion in the factor analysis. The factor analysis utilizes the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) method to identify and estimate the eigenvalues of the principal components. After calculating the eigenvalues of the components, they are arranged in descending order based on the computed eigenvalues. In line with Kaiser’s criterion, factors with an eigenvalue exceeding 1 are retained for the analysis. This leads to a reduction in factors as shown in the table provided below.
Table 3: Results of Factor Reduction and Labelling
|
SN |
Factors Included |
Group No. |
Label |
|
1 |
1, 2, 3, 28, 29, 44, 47 |
1 |
Health Related Aspect |
|
2 |
12, 19, 21, 23, 27 |
2 |
Trust and Price Aspect |
|
3 |
16, 17, 22, 32, 45 |
3 |
Availability of Organic Food Products |
|
4 |
35, 37, 46 |
4 |
Concern on Nature |
|
5 |
5, 6, 7 |
5 |
Production Method |
|
6 |
18, 26, 39 |
6 |
Purchase Place Aspect |
|
7 |
4, 8, 10, 11, 40, 41, 42 |
7 |
Quality and Taste Aspect |
|
8 |
9, 15, 20 |
8 |
Packaging and Product Display |
|
9 |
30, 31, 43 |
9 |
Recommendations and Advertisements |
|
10 |
13, 14, 33, 34 |
10 |
Suitability of Consumption |
|
11 |
24, 25, 36, 38 |
11 |
Psychological Aspect |
By applying factor analysis, the researcher reduced the total number of 47 variables studying Behaviour of consumers regarding organic food products to 11 factors. The following table presents the rank analysis of consumer Behaviour on organic food products, based on the reduced factors.
Table 4: Rank Analysis of Behaviour on Organic Food Products
|
SN |
Factors |
Mean |
SD |
CV |
Rank |
|
1 |
Health Related Aspect |
3.49 |
1.25 |
35.73 |
II |
|
2 |
Trust and Price Aspect |
3.48 |
1.35 |
38.85 |
III |
|
3 |
Availability of Organic Food Products |
3.36 |
1.35 |
40.25 |
IV |
|
4 |
Concern on Nature |
3.34 |
1.24 |
37.16 |
V |
|
5 |
Production Method |
3.57 |
1.33 |
37.22 |
I |
|
6 |
Purchase Place Aspect |
3.31 |
1.49 |
45.02 |
VI |
|
7 |
Quality and Taste Aspect |
3.27 |
1.49 |
45.42 |
VII |
|
8 |
Packaging and Product Display |
2.86 |
1.34 |
46.91 |
XI |
|
9 |
Recommendations and Advertisements |
3.25 |
1.45 |
44.52 |
IX |
|
10 |
Suitability of Consumption |
3.24 |
1.27 |
39.29 |
X |
|
11 |
Psychological Aspect |
3.26 |
1.35 |
41.53 |
VIII |
Table 4 shows that consumers hold a generally positive Behaviour, but the level of importance varies across the eleven dimensions studied. The highest-ranked dimension is the Production Method (Mean = 3.57, Rank I), showing that consumers have strong faith in the natural and sustainable farming practices used in producing organic food. This finding shows that consumers value the fact that organic products are grown using natural fertilizers, eco-friendly pesticides, and chemical-free cultivation methods, which enhance both authenticity and safety. This confidence in production practices forms the foundation of their trust in organic products. The Health-Related Aspect (Mean = 3.49, Rank II) is the next most important dimension, reflecting that consumers believe organic food products promote good health, improve immunity, and reduce the risk of diseases. It highlights that health consciousness remains a primary motivation for purchasing organic foods, with many consumers viewing them as a preventive health measure and a safer alternative to conventional products.
The Trust and Price Aspect (Mean = 3.48, Rank III) also ranks high, indicating that most consumers consider the price of organic products fair and justified given their quality, and they generally trust the genuineness of the products they purchase. However, some degree of skepticism remains, particularly regarding online purchases, where concerns about authenticity and certification still exist. The Availability Aspect (Mean = 3.36, Rank IV) and Concern on Nature (Mean = 3.34, Rank V) rank moderately high. These findings show that while consumers appreciate the increasing market availability of organic foods and understand their positive environmental impact, these aspects are secondary motivators compared to health and quality. Consumers are aware that organic foods help conserve natural resources and reduce pollution, but this awareness has not yet become a dominant purchasing driver. The Purchase Place (Mean = 3.31, Rank VI) and Quality and Taste (Mean = 3.27, Rank VII) dimensions reveal moderate satisfaction levels. Consumers prefer buying from local markets due to convenience and familiarity, though they also acknowledge growing accessibility in departmental and online stores. They appreciate the cleanliness and chemical-free nature of organic foods but believe that improvements in taste consistency, freshness, and shelf life are still needed.
In the lower rankings, the Psychological Aspect (Mean = 3.26, Rank VIII) indicates that some consumers associate organic food with prestige, social responsibility, and income level, showing that purchasing organic foods can also be a status and lifestyle symbol. Similarly, Recommendations and Advertisements (Mean = 3.25, Rank IX) show that social media influence and doctors’ advice play a role in encouraging purchases, though traditional advertising and shopkeeper recommendations have limited impact. The Suitability of Consumption (Mean = 3.24, Rank X) reflects that consumers find organic foods suitable for all age groups, particularly for children and the elderly, reaffirming their belief in the safety and nutritional value of organic foods for family health. The lowest-ranked dimension is Packaging and Product Display (Mean = 2.86, Rank XI), indicating a clear area for improvement. Consumers feel that organic products lack attractive packaging and effective in-store display, making them less noticeable compared to conventional branded foods. Though packaging is often eco-friendly, it lacks visual appeal and marketing visibility, which could limit consumer engagement at the point of purchase.
Association between Socio-Economic Variables and Buying Behaviour
The study on the association between socio-economic variables and Behaviour aims to understand how different demographic and socio-economic characteristics of consumers influence their attitudes and Behaviour toward organic food products. These results are presented subsequently. Table 5 presents the results of ‘t’ test between consumers’ behaviour and socio-economic variable.
Table 5: ‘t’ Test Between Socio-Economic Variables and Behaviour
|
SN |
Socio-economic Variable |
‘t’ value |
P – value |
Sig. |
Ho Result |
|
1 |
Gender |
2.034 |
0.042 |
Significant |
Rejected |
|
2 |
Marital Status |
2.279 |
0.023 |
Significant |
Rejected |
|
3 |
Family Type |
4.543 |
0.001 |
Significant |
Rejected |
The results of the table 5 shows that the variable gender shows a t-value of 2.034 with a p-value of 0.042, which is less than 0.05, it is significant at 5% level, hence the null hypothesis is rejected, it is indicating a significant difference in Behaviour between male and female consumers. This reveals that gender plays an important role in shaping attitudes toward organic foods, possibly due to differences in health awareness, household responsibilities, or purchasing behaviour. Similarly, marital status with Behaviour level of the respondents towards organic food products records a t-value of 2.279 and a p-value of 0.023, showing a significant difference in Behaviour between married and unmarried consumers. Since, the result is statistically significant, hence the null hypothesis is rejected. The results show that married consumers may be more health-conscious and family-oriented, thus showing a stronger behaviour and positive Behaviour toward organic products. The socio-economic variable family type also shows a highly significant relationship with Behaviour (t = 4.543, p = 0.001), indicating that Behaviour differ notably between nuclear and joint families. Since, the result is significant at 1% level and the null hypothesis is rejected. This could be due to variations in family size, income distribution, and decision-making patterns, where nuclear families may show more inclination toward convenient, health-focused, and premium products like organic foods.
The following table presents the results of One-way ANOVA between behaviour level of consumers and socio-economic variable.
Table 6: ANOVA Between Socio-Economic Variables and Behaviour
|
SN |
Socio-economic Variable |
‘F’ value |
P – value |
Sig. |
Ho Result |
|
1 |
Age |
3.016 |
0.030 |
Significant |
Rejected |
|
2 |
Education |
3.051 |
0.017 |
Significant |
Rejected |
|
3 |
Income |
2.571 |
0.054 |
Not Significant |
Accepted |
|
4 |
Occupation |
2.604 |
0.051 |
Not Significant |
Accepted |
|
5 |
Family Size |
3.153 |
0.044 |
Significant |
Rejected |
|
6 |
Residential Area |
3.769 |
0.024 |
Significant |
Rejected |
Table 6 shows that the variable age shows an F-value of 3.016 with a p-value of 0.030, revealing a significant difference among various age groups, since the result is significant at 5% level and the Ho is rejected. This reveals that Behaviour toward organic foods vary across age categories, with younger and middle-aged consumers likely being more health-conscious and responsive to organic product trends. The variable education of the respondents also shows a significant association (F = 3.051, p = 0.017), it is significant at 5% level and the Ho is rejected. This result indicates that consumers with higher educational qualifications tend to have greater awareness and positive Behaviour about the benefits, authenticity, and safety of organic food products. Education thus appears to enhance understanding and acceptance of organic consumption. The socio-economic variable family size of the respondents shows a significant association with Behaviour of the respondents towards organic food products (F = 3.153, p = 0.044), since the calculated F-value under ANOVA is statistically significant and the Ho is rejected. It indicates that Behaviour differs based on household composition. Larger families may exhibit greater concern for collective health and food safety, driving stronger positive Behaviour. Similarly, the socio-economic variable residential area of the respondents also shows a significant difference (F = 3.769, p = 0.024), since the calculated F-value under ANOVA is statistically significant and the Ho is rejected. It implies that urban consumers tend to have higher awareness and more favourable Behaviour compared to rural consumers, likely due to better access to organic products and exposure to marketing campaigns.
Conversely, the socio-economic variables income (F = 2.571, p = 0.054) and occupation (F = 2.604, p = 0.051) show no significant association with consumer Behaviour towards organic food products, since the calculated F-values are not significant and the Ho is accepted for the above cases. It leads to the acceptance of the null hypotheses for these variables. This finding implies that Behaviour of organic foods are not strongly dependent on income level or type of employment, suggesting that awareness and behaviour are relatively widespread across economic and professional groups.
In recent years, awareness on health conscious is high among people. It leads for buying organic food products instead of conventionally produced food products. Understanding buying behaviour of the consumers towards organic food products, will help other people to choose best products, best place to buy and so on. It also will help the producers and marketers of such products to enhance their market. In this context, the study has been undertaken in Tiruchirappalli district of the state of Tamilnadu. The study found that consumer behaviour on organic food products shows a positive attitude, with notable variations across dimensions. Consumers rated the production method highest, followed by the health aspect, the trust and price aspect. Moderate Behaviour were observed for availability, and concern on nature. Lower scores were recorded for packaging and product display. Consumers prioritize authenticity, health, and fair pricing over promotional and aesthetic factors, indicating that improving packaging, branding, and product visibility could enhance satisfaction and strengthen the organic food market. It was also evidenced that the socio-economic variables gender, marital status, and family type significantly influence consumer behaviour toward organic food products. The study further evidenced that the socio-economic variables age, education, family size and residential area play a stronger role than economic ones in shaping consumer behaviour of organic food products. Therefore, to expand the organic market, awareness initiatives and promotional efforts should particularly target less-educated, rural, and larger family groups, while reinforcing health and environmental messages across all consumer segments.