Microgreens are young plants used as ingredients and flavoring in various dishes. Their production time is short, and their production methods can be altered to enhance the nutritional content. To date, consumers' preferences for microgreens that display different aesthetic and non-aesthetic traits have not been addressed. Additionally, consumers' perceived risk of production methods used to enhance nutrition has not been investigated.
An online survey and choice experiment involving a sample of 821 consumers in Tennessee was performed to investigate these topics. A mixed logit model was used to analyze the data. Both aesthetic and non-aesthetic traits influence the consumers' preferences. Green microgreens were preferred and valued more than light or dark purple microgreens. When fertilizer was used during production to enhance nutrients, consumers perceived the microgreens as riskier to the environment and for personal consumption relative to microgreens with light-induced nutrient enhancement.
Using lighting during production to enhance nutrients generated a $0.47 to $0.79 premium relative to no nutrient enhancement. In general, if participants' perceived risk aligned with the nutrient enhancement attribute (i.e., light, fertilizer), then their willingness to pay for the microgreens decreased. This was amplified for the fertilizer nutrient enhancement attribute more than it was for the light enhancement attribute.
In-state production and microgreen height also impacted consumer preferences for microgreens. Consumers showed a clear preference for locally produced microgreens and those of a certain height, indicating that these factors are also significant in their purchasing decisions. This research highlights the complex interplay between aesthetic preferences, perceived risks, and the willingness to pay for enhanced nutritional content in microgreens.
Alicia Rihn, Kellie Walters, and Natalie Bumgarner The Influence of Risk Perceptions on Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Nutrient-enhanced Microgreens