Democritus University of Thrace Faculty of Environmental Engineering

Transcript

1 Democritus University of Thrace Faculty of Environmental Engineering by Stefanos Markidis Supervisor: Konstantinos Tsagarakis Committee: Ioannis Nikolaou, Katerina Stamatelatou 2011

2 2011

3 Ευχαριστώ θερμά τoν καθηγητή Robert Mellon για την θεωρητική και τεχνική υποστήριξη που προσέφερε καθ όλη την διάρκεια της έρευνας, τις συμφοιτήτριες μου Αναστασίου Χαρά, Γεωργίου Βασιλική, Τσαγκαράκη Μαρία και Τσακανίκα Κατερίνα για την σημαντικότατη συμβολή τους στη συλλογή των δεδομένων και τέλος τον επίκουρο καθηγητή Κωνσταντίνο Τσαγκαράκη που μου έδωσε την δυνατότητα να υλοποιήσω αυτή την έρευνα και για την συνολική συμβολή του στο διάστημα της συνεργασίας μας. Μαρκίδης Στέφανος Σελίδα i

4 Σελίδα ii

5 --- Table of Contents --- Εισαγωγή... vi Ανάλυση Δεδομένων... vi Συμπεράσματα... xiii Abstract Introduction History and current status of EU organic products regulations Organic logo symbols world wide The European Union s approach for adopting a logo for organically-grown products Backup theoretical basis of the research A critical analysis of the EU s approach An alternative, empirical strategy Methodology First Survey: Inquiry into consumers attitudes and implicit representations of organic food Second Survey: Comparison of empirically-designed logos with the new EU logo Third Survey: Testing of logo preference of field professionals compared to non-professionals Results Results of first survey Perceived advantages and disadvantages of organic products EU organic logo characteristics implicitly evoked Word mark for organic products Colors evoked by the concept of organic products Color proposal for empirically derived logos Σελίδα iii

6 Perceptions of the consumer effects of organic certification labels Willingness to pay models Proposal for an empirically-derived EU organic products logo Second Survey Current EU logo recognizability Results of direct comparison of EU Logo and logo derived through the methodology of the first study Preference of naming conversion of organic products Third Survey Exploration of possible discrepancies in the perception of an effective logo between design experts and consumers Discussion Conclusions Future research References I Σελίδα iv

7 Σελίδα v

8 Εισαγωγή Στην παρούσα διπλωματική αξιολογείται μια μέθοδος σχεδιασμού λογότυπων για την πιστοποίηση των βιολογικών προϊόντων στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Τα αποτελέσματα της έρευνας αυτής συγκρίνονται με τα αποτελέσματα της μεθοδολογίας που ακολουθήθηκε επίσημα από την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση για την επιλογή του λογότυπου σήμανσης των βιολογικών προϊόντων. Η έρευνα πραγματοποιήθηκε σε τρεις φάσεις και η συλλογή των δεδομένων έγινε με ερωτηματολόγια. Κατά την πρώτη φάση συλλέχθηκαν δεδομένα στην Ελλάδα (n=605) σχετικά με την στάση των καταναλωτών έναντι των βιολογικών προϊόντων, την αγοραστική τους συμπεριφορά γενικότερα και των κύριων χαρακτηριστικών που προσδίδουν σε ένα βιολογικό λογότυπο. Με τα δεδομένα αυτά σχεδιάστηκαν δύο εμπειρικά λογότυπα. Η δεύτερη φάση της έρευνας (n=1153), η οποία πραγματοποιήθηκε σε έξι χώρες, είχε στόχο την σύγκριση των εμπειρικών λογότυπων με το επίσημο Ευρωπαϊκό λογότυπο βιολογικών προϊόντων. Τα αποτελέσματα έδειξαν πως ένα από τα εμπειρικά λογότυπα έχαιρε σημαντικά μεγαλύτερη αποδοχή από το καταναλωτικό κοινό. Τέλος, κατά την τρίτη φάση της έρευνας (n=143), προέκυψε πως το νέο Ευρωπαϊκό βιολογικό λογότυπο προτιμάται περισσότερο από φοιτητές και απόφοιτους αρχιτεκτονικών σχολών σε σχέση με το καταναλωτικό κοινό. Ανάλυση Δεδομένων Ο στόχος της αρχικής έρευνας, η οποία πραγματοποιήθηκε στην Ελλάδα ήταν η εύρεση των σημαντικότερων χαρακτηριστικών, σύμφωνα με τους καταναλωτές, ενός πιθανού λογότυπου για την καθολική πιστοποίηση των βιολογικών προϊόντων. Στους ερωτηθέντες ζητήθηκε να σχεδιάσουν ένα πιθανό λογότυπο, να επιλέξουν το βασικό χρώμα του σχεδίου από μία καρτέλα πιθανών χρωμάτων (Σχήμα 1) και τελικά να επιλέξουν ένα πρόθεμα μεταξύ των Bio-, Org-, Nat-, Green- ή να προτείνουν ένα νέο Α Β C D Ε Σχήμα 1. Καρτέλα χρωμάτων του Microsoft Office Σελίδα vi

9 Για την απλοποίηση της ανάλυσης των σχεδίων των καταναλωτών επιλέχτηκαν έξι κατηγορίες στις οποίες κατατάχθηκαν τα σχέδια με βάση κάθε χαρακτηριστικό τους (Σχήμα 2). Οι τέσσερις κατηγορίες προέκυψαν μετά από ανάλυση των σχεδίων και είναι λογότυπα, με Ευρωπαϊκό σύμβολο, φυτά, φύση και κείμενο, ενώ οι δύο επιπλέον κατηγορίες προέκυψαν με βάση την ψυχολογία των σχημάτων και αφορούν σύμβολα που περιλαμβάνουν κυκλικό ή ορθογώνιο περίγραμμα (Σχήμα 2). Σύμφωνα με την ανάλυση, 3,1% των σχημάτων περιείχαν Ευρωπαϊκά σύμβολα (Σχήμα 2, α) 49,1% του συνολικού δείγματος φυτά (Σχήμα 2, β) 17,2% του συνολικού δείγματος στοιχεία φύσης (Σχήμα 2, γ) 29,6% του συνολικού δείγματος περιλάμβαναν κείμενο (Σχήμα 2, δ), 6,4% του συνολικού δείγματος ορθογώνια σχήματα (Σχήμα 2, ε) και τέλος, 11,2% του συνολικού δείγματος κυκλικά σχήματα (Σχήμα 2, ζ). Ενδιαφέρον παρουσιάζουν και τα αποτελέσματα της ανάλυσης που δείχνουν πώς το επίπεδο εκπαίδευσης καθώς και η ηλικία σχετίζεται με την τάση να συμπεριλάβουν κείμενο στα σκίτσα τους, καθώς δίνει κάποια στοιχεία για το θέμα της χρήσης κειμένου στο λογότυπο. α β γ δ ε ζ Σχήμα 2. Κατηγορίες συμβόλων όπως προέκυψαν από την ανάλυση των δεδομένων: α. Ευρωπαϊκό σύμβολο, β. Φυτό, γ. Φύση, δ. Κείμενο, ε. Ορθογώνιο περίγραμμα, ζ. Κυκλικό περίγραμμα. Όσον αφορά την επιλογή των χρωμάτων, από τα 605, 578 ερωτηματολόγια κρίθηκαν έγκυρα. Στο Σχήμα 3 παρουσιάζεται η επιλογή χρώματος για το συνολικό δείγμα. Ενδιαφέρον είναι πως σε αντίθεση με τους υποστηρικτές ή καταναλωτές των βιολογικών προϊόντων που επέλεξαν ανοιχτόχρωμη απόχρωση του πράσινου, οι αρνητικά διακείμενοι Σελίδα vii

10 Percentage (%) Frequencies ή αυτοί που δεν αγοράζουν βιολογικά προϊόντα επέλεξαν κυρίως μια πιο σκούρα απόχρωση του πράσινου Ε D C Β Α Α Β C D Ε Σχήμα 3. Αποτελέσματα χρώματος συνολικού δείγματος. Τέλος, τα αποτελέσματα της έρευνας για το πρόθεμα που οι καταναλωτές θεώρησαν πως είναι καταλληλότερο για να συνοδεύσει το λογότυπο των βιολογικών προϊόντων εμφανίζονται στο Σχήμα Bio-; 65.8% Green-; 18.5% Nat-; 11.4% Prefix Org-; 3% 0.2 Σχήμα 4. Επιλογή προθέματος. Αξιοποιώντας τα παραπάνω δεδομένα, σχεδιάστηκαν εμπειρικά δύο λογότυπα με στόχο την σύγκρισή τους στην δεύτερη φάση της έρευνας με αυτό της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης αλλά και με ένα σύνολο πιθανών λογότυπων που συμμετείχαν στον επίσημο διαγωνισμό. Τα λογότυπα που σχεδιάστηκαν παρουσιάζονται στο Σχήμα 5. Σελίδα viii

11 Σχήμα 5. Λογότυπα που προέκυψαν εμπειρικά με βάση τα δεδομένα του πρώτου ερωτηματολογίου. Το δεύτερο μέρος της έρευνας επιλέχτηκε να πραγματοποιηθεί σε έξι Ευρωπαϊκές χώρες. Συγκεκριμένα στην Γερμανία, Ελλάδα, Ισπανία, Ιταλία, Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο, Κύπρο. Για την έρευνα αυτή σχεδιάστηκαν καρτέλες 16 λογότυπων, σε τυχαία σειρά, στις οποίες συμπεριλήφθηκαν το Ευρωπαϊκό λογότυπο του 2010, τα δύο άλλα λογότυπα του επίσημου τελικού, το λογότυπο του 2008 το οποίο απορρίφτηκε εξαιτίας της ομοιότητας που έφερε με το λογότυπου του γνωστού ομίλου Aldi και τέλος τα δύο εμπειρικά λογότυπα (Σχήμα 5). Τα υπόλοιπα δέκα λογότυπα, επιλέχτηκαν με τυχαία σειρά από μια λίστα λογότυπων που συμμετείχαν στον διαγωνισμό. Ακόμη σχεδιάστηκαν καρτέλες για την άμεση σύγκριση του Ευρωπαϊκού λογότυπου πιστοποίησης των βιολογικών προϊόντων με τα εμπειρικά λογότυπα που προέκυψαν από την πρώτη φάση της έρευνας. Στην αρχή της διεξαγωγής της έρευνας, οι καταναλωτές καλούνταν να απαντήσουν σε κάποιες τυπικές ερωτήσεις με σκοπό να διευκρινιστεί το επίπεδο γνώσης τους σχετικά με τα βιολογικά προϊόντα. Στην συνέχεια, παρουσιάζονταν η καρτέλα με τα 16 λογότυπα και ζητούνταν να επιλέξουν αυτό που θεωρούσαν πως είναι το νέο ευρωπαϊκό λογότυπο για την πιστοποίηση των βιολογικών προϊόντων. Σε περίπτωση που τους ήταν γνωστό, αποκλείονταν από την περεταίρω ανάλυση. Αμέσως μετά, παρουσιάζονταν η καρτέλα άμεσης σύγκρισης του νέου βιολογικού λογότυπου με ένα από τα δύο εμπειρικά λογότυπα. Στην περίπτωση που επέλεγαν ένα από τα εμπειρικά σχεδιασμένα λογότυπα, παραθέτονταν μια καρτέλα για επιλογή του προθέματος που προτιμούσαν (Bio-, Org- ή χωρίς πρόθεμα). Τα αποτελέσματα από την ανάλυση των καρτελών των 16 λογοτύπων παρουσιάζονται στον Πίνακα 2. Τα αποτελέσματα της άμεση σύγκρισης του εμπειρικού λογότυπου και του νέου Ευρωπαϊκού λογότυπου παρουσιάζονται στον Πίνακα 1. Το δεύτερο εμπειρικό λογότυπο με κύριο σχήμα το άπειρο, τελικά αποκλείστηκε από περεταίρω ανάλυση αφενός γιατί δεν πέτυχε τα επιθυμητά αποτελέσματα και αφετέρου για να επιτευχθεί ένας καλύτερος αριθμός δειγμάτων ανά χώρα. Σελίδα ix

12 Πίνακας 1. Αποτελέσματα σύγκρισης Ευρωπαϊκού και εμπειρικού λογότυπου (σήμα φωτοστέφανο) ανά χώρα. Country EU HALO N (%) N (%) X 2 p Greece 31 (39.2) 48 (60.8) Italy 12 (33.3) 24 (66.7) Germany 17 (40.5) 25 (59.5) Spain 39 (39.0) 61 (61.0) UK 65 (59.1) 45 (40.9) Cyprus 37 (42.0) 51 (58.0) Total 201 (44.2) 254 (55.8) Ενδιαφέρον στα αποτελέσματα του Πίνακα 2 είναι πως το λογότυπο με την μεγαλύτερη συχνότητα είναι το λογότυπο που αποκλείστηκε λόγω δικαστικής παρέμβασης του ομίλου Aldi. Επειδή όμως η πόλωση των αποτελεσμάτων μπορεί να οφείλεται στο γεγονός ότι ήταν το μόνο λογότυπο με κείμενο το αποτέλεσμα δεν αναλύεται περισσότερο στην παρούσα έρευνα. Σε άμεση σύγκριση των δύο λογότυπων, παρατηρείται πως υπερισχύει το εμπειρικά σχεδιασμένο λογότυπο με στατιστικά σημαντική διαφορά. Το τρίτο ερωτηματολόγιο αποσκοπούσε στην εύρεση πιθανής διαφοροποίησης στην επιλογή λογότυπου μεταξύ των τελειόφοιτων αρχιτεκτόνων και του καταναλωτικού κοινού. Για το ερωτηματολόγιο αυτό χρησιμοποιήθηκε μόνο ο Πίνακας των 16 λογότυπων. Τα αποτελέσματα παρουσιάζονται στον Πίνακα 3. Για λόγους σύγκρισης αντιπαρατίθενται επίσης τα συνολικά αποτελέσματα από τον Πίνακα 2. Ενδιαφέρον εδώ είναι πως τα καλλιτεχνικά κριτήρια των αρχιτεκτόνων, τους οδήγησαν να αναδείξουν στις πρώτες θέσεις τα τρία λογότυπα που επιλέχτηκαν και από τους κριτές για τον τελικό του διαγωνισμού. Σελίδα x

13 Πίνακας 2. Αποτελέσματα της επιλογής από τα 16 λογότυπα ανά χώρα. Logo Greece Italy Germany Spain UK Cyprus Total Weighted total n % n % n % n % n % n % n % n % Σελίδα xi

14 Πίνακας 3. Αποτελέσματα της τρίτης έρευνας σε σύγκριση με το σύνολο των καταναλωτών. Λογότυπα Αρχιτέκτονες Λογότυπα Weighted Total 1 Ν % N % Τα αποτελέσματα των αρχιτεκτόνων δεν περιλαμβάνεται στο συνολικό δείγμα. Σελίδα xii

15 Συμπεράσματα Ένα λογότυπο για να πετύχει μέγιστη αποδοχή αρκεί να γίνεται εύκολα κατανοητό από τους καταναλωτές. Για τον λόγο αυτό, θα πρέπει να συνδυάζει τόσο στοιχεία που οι καταναλωτές ταυτίζουν με το προϊόν, όσο και χαρακτηριστικά που προσδίδουν ισχύ σε αυτό ώστε να αναδειχθεί στην υπόληψη τους. Όσον αφορά το Ευρωπαϊκό λογότυπο πιστοποίησης βιολογικών προϊόντων, υπάρχουν δύο ηχηρές έννοιες που αναδεικνύουν συγκεκριμένες αξίες κατά το άκουσμά τους. Έχουμε την έννοια των βιολογικών προϊόντων που τουλάχιστον τα τελευταία δέκα χρόνια αποτελούν μέρος της ζωής των καταναλωτών και ως αποτέλεσμα αυτού, όπως έδειξε και η έρευνα, κατά το άκουσμά της γεννιούνται συγκεκριμένες εικόνες στους καταναλωτές. Από την άλλη έχουμε την έννοια της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, που προσδίδει κύρος στον θεσμό της πιστοποίησης και της οποίας η σημαία έχει χαραχθεί αναμφισβήτητα στην μνήμη των καταναλωτών. Είναι προφανές λοιπόν πως το λογότυπο πιστοποίησης των Ευρωπαϊκών βιολογικών προϊόντων θα έπρεπε να ενώνει αρμονικά τις δύο αυτές έννοιες με τα καθοριστικά, για τους καταναλωτές, χαρακτηριστικά του (χρώματα,σχήμα κλπ.). Το επικρατέστερο εμπειρικό λογότυπο που προέκυψε μέσω του πρώτου σταδίου της έρευνας βασίστηκε αποκλειστικά στην λογική αυτή. Περιλαμβάνει το γνωστό χρώμα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και τα 12 χρυσά αστέρια της σημαίας της σε συνδυασμό με το επικρατέστερο σύμβολο και χρώμα που ταυτίζουν οι καταναλωτές με τα βιολογικά προϊόντα. Με τον συνδυασμό αυτό πέτυχε να ξεπεράσει σε αποδοχή, σε άμεση σύγκριση, το νέο βιολογικό λογότυπο. Υποστηρικτικά στην θεωρία αυτής της έρευνας λειτουργεί και το λογότυπο του 2008 που βρέθηκε στην πρώτη θέση στο τεστ των 16 λογότυπων. Περιλαμβάνει ότι θεωρήθηκε σημαντικό από του καταναλωτές, χρώμα, κείμενο, καθώς και τα κύρια χαρακτηριστικά που ταυτίζουν το προϊόν με την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, τα αστέρια και το χρώμα. Συμπερασματικά, μπορεί κανείς να πει πως οι καταναλωτές τείνουν να αποδέχονται λογότυπα με ξεκάθαρο μήνυμα έναντι λογότυπων που αποτυγχάνουν να ταυτιστούν με το προϊόν, ανεξάρτητα από την καλλιτεχνική τους ποιότητα. Η τρίτη έρευνα έρχεται να επιβεβαιώσει πως υπάρχει σημαντική διαφοροποίηση μεταξύ των απόψεων των σχεδιαστών και των κοινών καταναλωτών. Πρακτικά αυτό σημαίνει πως ο σχεδιασμός λογότυπων που πραγματοποιείται χωρίς την διεξαγωγή κάποιας προκαταρκτικής έρευνας για συλλογή δεδομένων που αφορούν τα χαρακτηριστικά που προσδίδουν οι καταναλωτές στο προϊόν, οδηγεί σε υποδεέστερα λογότυπα στα μάτια των καταναλωτών. Αντίθετα, λογότυπα σχεδιασμένα σύμφωνα με τις απαιτήσεις των Σελίδα xiii

16 καταναλωτών, χαίρουν υψηλής αρχικής αποδοχής ανεξαρτήτως της καλλιτεχνικής τους ποιότητας. Συμπερασματικά, προτιμότερος κρίνεται ο συνδυασμός εμπεριστατωμένων δεδομένων και της εμπειρίας ενός σχεδιαστή για την επίτευξη του βέλτιστου δυνατού αποτελέσματος. Σελίδα xiv

17 Σελίδα xv

18 Abstract This paper critical analyzes the methods followed by the EU in the selection of the new European organic products certification logo. Contrary to competition based method followed by the European Union, a data-based proposal was developed. To evaluate the new methodology a three stage survey approach was followed. The first survey was conducted in Greece (n=605), in an attempt to gather as many information as possible about respondent s knowledge on organic farming, their attitude towards a European-wide certification system and logo for organic products and finally elicit implicit representations of stimulus attributes associated with organic food products (e.g., colors, shapes, code words) for the empirical development of new candidate logos for further evaluation. The second survey (n=1153) tested the relative effectiveness of the empirically-derived logos on consumer choice and on willingness to use and pay for labeled products in relation to the characteristics of consumers in six European Union countries. Finally the third survey (n=143 Greek respondents) tested the hypothesis that while the EU s current, intuitively-designed organic products label is preferred aesthetically by the community of artists and designers employed in its development and selection, an empirically-designed label incorporating consumer s implicit representations of organic products, with explicit use of the established symbol of the European Union and informative word mark, is more effective in influencing consumer behavior in general. Page 1

19 1. Introduction 1.1 History and current status of EU organic products regulations A logo can be defined as A recognizable and distinctive graphic design, stylized name, unique symbol, or other device for identifying an organization. Also called a logotype, it is affixed, included, or printed on all advertising, buildings, communications, literature, products, stationery, and vehicles but is not to be confused with a brand, which identifies a product or family of products (Bussinessdictionary.com). Logos consist of graphics alone, text alone or a combination of graphics and text. The explosive development of genetically modified products over the past years led to the need of distinguishing those products from organic produced products. In consequence, governments worldwide have introduced a number of regulations for defining organic products as well as special logos for assisting the public in the recognition of these products (Meggs, 1998). The first steps towards an EU regulation on how organic agriculture products and foodstuffs should be grown and handled occurred in 1991 (ECC, 1991). At time the first logo was introduced. Then in 1999, a resolution was passed recommending voluntary labeling and inspection of most of the relevant plant and animal species redefining the meaning of organic [(EC) No 1804/1999 of 19 July 1999; EC, 1999a]. In light of the new changes the logo introduced back in 1991 was re-launched in color in an attempt to raise its appeal to both producers and consumers alike (EC, 2000). This logo was voluntarily used by farmers who were certified according to the Council Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 and its revisions as stated in the paper (ECC, 1991). Led by the Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mariann Fischer Boel, in December of 2005 the EU issued a revision of regulation 2092/91, which aimed to provide simpler rules and more transparency but also give the time needed for the transition phase from the individualistic certification system to the centralized system proposed in June Then in June of 2007, the European ministers of agriculture came to an agreement (EC, 2007). In September of 2008 the implementing rules were published (EC, 2008a), and later that same year the Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1235/2008 (EC, 2008b), including rules concerning the importation of organic products from third countries, was approved. On January 1, 2009 those regulations went in effect. However some of the new provisions on labeling were not to take effect before the 1 st of July 2010 (EC, 2008b). This was due to a Page 2

20 number of disputes concerning the EC s proposed label (Figure 1, left logo) followed by complaints by the Aldi Corporation in the UK stating that it was too similar to its own (Figure 1, right logo). In addition to the date being pushed back, the EC agreed to drop the prefix bio from its label s name (Charles, 2008). Figure 1. The EU certifying logo suggested in 2002 (top), the 2008 logo (bottom left) and Aldi Corporation biologo employed at that time (bottom right). 1.2 Organic logo symbols world wide A number of countries have already established logos to certify products of 95% or greater organic origin. The United States Department of Agriculture introduced a logo and published relevant guidelines to certify products that are at least 95% of organic origination (Figure 2a) (National Organic Program, 2002). Since 2009, Canada s Organic Products Regulation requires organic products to be certified and labeled (Figure 3b) in accord with the National Organic Standard for agriculture products (Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 2010). Japan revised its Agricultural Standard Law (JAS) in June of 2000 to support the launch of a new legal organic certification program (Figure 2c; Japan Certification Services, Inc.). Germany introduced its organic label 2001 (Figure 2d), when the Organic food Labeling Act (ÖkoKennzG) was approved. All products produced and inspected in accord with this regulation are identified by the so-called Bio Siegel. As with the US regulation, the label certifies products that are at least of 95% organic origination. (Bio- Siegel.de, 2006). France established an organic certification program in This program regulated the use of the AB- Agriculture Biologique logo (Figure 2e). Since January of 2008, the Agence Bio is the official organic products certification agency in France (Marque AB n.d.). Organic farming in Spain was first introduced in In 1984 and 1985 the private standards of Vida Sana and CAE were introduced respectively. The first domestic regulation took effect in 1989 (Figure 2f) and was in effect until the EU regulation 2092/91 was approved (Organic Farming in Spain, 2007). Sweden s Bio Page 3

21 certification is controlled by the Krav Institute since Krav develops and promotes bio standards under the Krav-label (Figure 2g) which has increased public awareness of organic products to 98% (Krav, 2010). The first certification body for organic products in Austria was founded in 1993 under the name Austria Bio Garantie (ABG). While a private business, the ABG operates on behalf of the food safety authorities (ABG, 2011). In India, the APEDA controls bio production under the name of the National Program for Organic Production (Figure 2h). The National Program was launched in 2000 which was notified in October 2001 under the Foreign and Development Act (India, 2005). Note that all of these National Organic Products logos include either well established national symbols (as does for example the Canadian logo, where a maple leaf arises as a sun to protect the countryside), or verbal assurances of the integrity of the regulatory agency (country names or names of well-known National Organizations, as well as words verbal indications of the specific product that is certified (i.e., the words or initials biological, bio, organic, agricultural standard, etc.). a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. Figure 2. Certifying logos by county: a. USA, b. Canada, c. Germany, d. Japan, e. France, f. Spain, g. Austria, h. India 1.3 The European Union s approach for adopting a logo for organicallygrown products In light of the aforementioned copyright infringement controversy, in May of 2009 a competition was held to create the new EU organic logo which was to support the regulations (Competition launch, 2009). This idea was suggested by the Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development at that time, Mariann Fischer Boel. The logo that Page 4

22 would issue from this process and the competition itself was intended to raise the profile of organic food, as also help consumers to identify organically-grown products more easily (Create the new EU Organic logo, 2009). The competition was open to all students of European institutes of Art and Design. For the purpose of advertisement, a dedicated website, a Facebook group (Competition, 2009 and advertisement spots in English, French and German were published. By the submissions deadline of the 6 th of July, 2009, 3422 logos were submitted. The evaluation of these proposals was divided into 4 phases, three of which were undisclosed to the public. In the first phase, a jury of eight specialists (as detailed in Table 1) initially selected one hundred logos from the submission pool. Then ten of these one hundred were short-listed. Finally, three of the ten were published to be openly voted on by EU citizens. The selection procedure was based on the following criteria (EU Competition Criteria, 2010): Creativity and originality of the logo design Consideration of the diverse aspects of organic food and farming Comprehensibility without using words Universal appeal Clean design Clarity of presentation Timeless design The public selection poll was held on the dedicated website to allow the citizens of the EU to select the winner of the competition, which was based on 129,493 votes. The results of this public vote are presented in Figure 3. 63% 10% 27% Figure 3. The three finalists from the last phase of the EU organic products logo design competition. Page 5

23 Following the outcome of the competition, in April 2010 a regulation (EU, 2010) regarding the new EU logo was published, which made it mandatory for all European pre-packaged organic products to bear the new logo; its use is voluntary for all imported products. The approach for the selection of the new EU logo for the organic products is summarized in Figure Backup theoretical basis of the research 2.1 A critical analysis of the EU s approach As is the case of any symbol, the functionality of a new logo might be most effectively established by a design process in which its intended effects on potential users behavior are clearly specified, and when the effects of the potential users previous learning history with respect to the stimulus elements most likely to evoke such behaviors are empirically ascertained and incorporated into the design (Mellon & Tsagarakis, 2006). Finally, the effectiveness of alternative designs in evoking the desired behaviors should be experimentally validated with samples of potential users (Tsagarakis et al., 2007). An analysis and specification of the intended effects of a European logo for organic products was entirely missing from the criteria provided for potential designers. In particular, while the competition itself was designed to raise the profile of organic products, the effectiveness of the logo in raising the willingness to use and to pay for these products was not included among the criteria, nor was a directive to address certain special challenges in marketing these products. While the organic production of foodstuffs provides substantial benefits for fragile ecosystems, these methods are also substantially more expensive to employ (Organic Farming FAQ), and at least part of the added production costs of organically-grown products must be passed on to consumers. However, the organic origin of foodstuffs is often difficult or impossible for consumers to detect in the physical aspects of the products themselves. Because of the obvious economic advantages for producers who are successful in packaging cheaper, non-organically-grown as organic, consumers who might otherwise pay more for these products have ample reason to doubt producers claims of their strictly organic provenance. This fact, of course, underlies the very existence of state programs for certifying the organic cultivation of products, wherein the effectiveness of certification on consumer behaviour is presumably based on consumers perception of the integrity and effectiveness of the regulating body in assuring the accuracy of producers claims. Page 6

24 It is surprising, in this light, that the EU Agricultural and Rural Commissioner s directives for the design of an EU logo for organically-produced products did not demand any sort of representation of the European Union itself. At substantial expense, the official symbol of the European Union (a circle of twelve yellow five-point stars on a dark blue field) is prominently featured in all official activities and documents and is reproduced in full colour on all banknotes for which payment is guaranteed by this political and economic entity. This symbol is prominently displayed by hotels, restaurants and other establishments in an effort to indicate that the products and services on offer meet European standards. In failing to demand specification of the source of certification in the design of its logo for organically-grown products, the EU would appear to have squandered a precious source of consumer confidence in its meaning. Indeed, it might not be coincidental that, in final voting, the candidate logo that garnered 63% of the voting public s preference was the only one to incorporate (by the artist s own initiative) the twelve-star EU motif (see Figure 3). However, even this logo did not include the characteristic colours of a symbol that is present (by design) in every cash exchange of five euros or greater value occurring throughout the European Union. A second challenge to the establishment of consumer preference for organically-grown products, also unaddressed in the EU s method of logo development, concerns the specification of consumer gain inherent in the choice of these relatively expensive goods. Experimental analysis has indicated that information itself is not reinforcing (e.g., Dinsmoor, 1983; 1985). In order to affect consumer selection, particularly for a product that costs more than alternative goods, a logo must incorporate stimulus elements that were present when similar behaviours were reinforced (i.e. effective) in the past. Put more simply, to affect behaviour, the logo must provide the consumer with a reason for choosing the product that bears it. The EU s design criteria say nothing about the potential advantages of consuming organically-grown products, including possible health benefits, better flavour, the preservation of biodiversity, and the creation of jobs inherent in the adoption of labourintensive organic agricultural methods. Although the health- and flavour-enhancing benefits of organic products have been disputed (GM benefits, 2008) the positive effects of these methods on ecosystems and the labour market are indisputable (EU Organic, 2010). At present the relation between these factors and consumers willingness to use and to pay for organic products is unknown. However, the incorporation of symbolic representations Page 7

25 of the perceived advantages of these products in a logo, certifying their availability in the goods bearing it, is likely to increase their consumer acceptance. Proposal of logo competition Advertisement through, Youtube, (tv), facebook and a dedicated website. Submissions gathered through the website ca 3400 submissions A jury of 8 specialists gathered to evaluate the submissions A public voting held on the dedicated website between the 3 finalists With votes the winner was decided, with a percent of 63% to 27% for the second and 10% for the third Figure 4. Methodological approach of the EU officials Page 8

26 2.2 An alternative, empirical strategy Figure 5 summarizes an alternative method for developing a logo for agricultural products certified to be organically grown by the European Union. This method was first developed in our efforts to characterize the effects of the normative learning history of consumers, and to employ this information in developing identifying symbols that increase their willingness to use and pay for recycled water, another environment-friendly commodity that has met with consumer resistance (Mellon & Tsagarakis, 2006; Tsagarakis et al., 2007). This design strategy begins with an analysis of historical and current legislation concerning the regulation, certification and identification of the product in the geographic region of interest, and continues with an analysis of corresponding practices in other regions, as is detailed in section 1.1 above. Should the extant identification system be judged to be less that optimally effective, a new symbol might be empirically derived as follows: First, a clear specification is made of the characteristics of behavior that the logo is intended to evoke. Then a systematic investigation is made of the normative effects of the previous learning history of potential consumers. This investigation begins with a specification of factors that increase or decrease the probability of occurrence of the desired forms of behaviour (in this case, the selection of more expensive, EU-certified organically-grown products). In light of this information, we then begin an empirical investigation of the stimulus elements (e.g., colours, shapes, words) that normatively tend to evoke the desired forms of behaviour. This investigation utilizes so-called cognitive evocation techniques, in which research subjects are asked to identify the stimulus elements that best represent the product s qualities. These elements are then combined in different ways in creation of two or more symbols. The differential effectiveness of these symbols in evoking the intended characteristic of behaviour is then empirically tested. This may lead either to a recommendation for the adoption of a logo or to a further refined process of cognitive evocation, ultimately leading to a recommendation. The balance of the present report consists of an application of this general strategy in the design and evaluation of a more effective identification device for products certified by the European Union to be organically grown. The findings presented here resulted from a modest independent research project with no external funding, limiting the size of the samples. Under these constraints, rather than provide a definitive proposal for a new EU organic products label our objective was to Page 9

27 illustrate a general research framework for investigating labelling ensuring the organic character of food production, but that also provides a broad range of applications regarding labelling issues. The efficacy of this scientific approach is then tested in comparison with that of the voting competition approach employed by the EU. Research on organic food and EU Laws Research on existent symbols for eco food - dimensions Evaluation of dimensions of behavior to be evoked by symbol, EU certification, Environmental friendly, superior quality "Cognitive evocation" Test of dimension evoked by bio food as are differentiated by demographic factors Investigation of the perceived importance of bio Design of candidate symbols from results of mere findings Test of effectiveness of candidate symbols in relation to that of the extant symbol. Recommendation for future procedure Figure 5. Recommended research approach Page 10

28 3. Methodology This section summarizes the methodology followed. The subsequent sections follow the logical order of the research. A three-stage survey approach was employed. 3.1 First Survey: Inquiry into consumers attitudes and implicit representations of organic food This survey was constructed to gather information on consumers behavior regarding organic products, their beliefs on the European constitutional directive concerning a centralized certification system, and to analyze the implicit representations of the characteristics of organic products based on the participant s previous learning histories. This part of the research took place in Greece, specifically in the cities of Xanthi, Mytiline and Heraklion. These cities were selected to represent a range of socioeconomic areas with a variety of forms of agricultural production. In total, 605 subjects participated in this survey. Potential respondents were approached in urban centers and asked if they would be willing to participate in a university research project concerning organically-grown consumer goods. In light of the evaluation of the method used by the EU and extensive research on organic food and EU laws, a fully structured, four-part questionnaire was developed for this part of the research. The first part consisted of introductory questions designed to assess the subjects general knowledge and attitude on organic farming and the European Union. The first question asked the respondent to evaluate his knowledge on organic farming in general. The next question was intended to evaluate the subjects general knowledge of European Union matters; specifically, they were asked to indicate the number of states in the European Union at that time. Finally, major advantages and disadvantages of organic farming methods were rated on a five-point scale, ranging from not at all important to very important in influencing their own consumer choices. The second part of the questionnaire was designed to inquire information on the respondent s food-buying habits and also evaluate their views and willingness to pay on organic products. A number of products were evaluated as a percent more that the respondent was willing to pay from the conventional price of the respective products. The third part of the questionnaire was designed to capture the respondents view on European quality control and the importance of a European logo for the certification of organic products. Respondents were asked if they were aware of any logo on food products validating their organic origins. Then they were asked if they believed that a European Page 11

29 logo representing organic food would enhance the image of those products. Subsequently, the respondents were asked to assess the effectiveness of European laws concerning the quality control of organic products. After that the respondents were asked how often they look for quality-certifying labels, and if they would prefer to buy products certified by a European logo over similar organically-derived products not carrying the specific logo. Finally, the respondents were asked to choose a possible color for such a logo out of the typical color palette of Microsoft Office as shown in Figure 6, and a code word designation of these products among those most commonly employed (specifically, bio-, green-, nat-, org-) or to suggest their own word. At this point the respondents were provided with a uniformly sharpened #2 (HB) pencil and asked to draw a logo they thought would be appropriate for the identification and promotion of certified organic products. Α Β C D Ε Figure 6. Microsoft Office color palette grid The fourth and final part of the questionnaire consisted of a number of demographic questions, including the age, gender, and educational level of the respondents Second Survey: Comparison of empirically-designed logos with the new EU logo To further test the hypothesis that a better logo could be designed through a scientific approach, and to evaluate the efficacy of the methodology suggested, an investigation of the differential effectiveness of various logos was undertaken in six European countries (Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Italy, Spain and UK). For this part of the research, two surveys were created. One targeting the WTB/WTP of the consumers evoked from a specific logo and one for the direct comparison of the empirical derived logos and the new EU organic logo. In both surveys, consumers were first asked to evaluate their own knowledge of organic products. After that, they were asked to choose out of a selection of 16 different Page 12

30 logos (Figure 7) the one they knew or believed to be the new European logo for the certification of organic products. Among the 16 logos were the 3 finalists of the 2009 competition, the 2 logos issuing from the empirical results of the first survey of the present study, the abandoned EU organic logo of 2008 and 12 logos selected from those that participated in the 2009 competition. The 16 logos were arrayed on cards in 20 different presentation orders. The arrangement of each logo in each card was a result of a computeraided random generation code. In the WTB/WTP survey participating consumers were then asked to state their willingness to buy (WTB) and WTP for a range of organic products, as effected by one of the three logos shown. Specifically to the direct comparison logo, the individuals were presented a combination of one of the logos proposed through this research and the EU logo from which they were asked to choose the one that they believed was more appropriate for the certification of organic products. Two different cards were used to present the logos to be compared, changing the order of which the logos were shown to avoid any systematic order effect errors. In case the individuals chose the EU logo they were then directly presented with a number of demographic questions regarding their age and family status. In cases in which the empirically-derived logo was chosen, a card with that logo in 3 different versions: word-free, with a bio- and or a org- word mark was presented. A flowchart explaining this procedure is presented in Figure 7. An example of the card used for the 16 random logo test Page 13

31 First step of selection The order in which the logos are shown sequentially changes Selection of preferred word-mark, if any Evaluation of demographic characteristics follows The order in which the logos are shown sequentially changes Figure 8. Steps followed for the comparison of Halo with the EU competition derived logo... Page 14

32 3.3. Third Survey: Testing of logo preference of field professionals compared to non-professionals As noted above, only students of art and design or related disciplines were eligible to participate in the EU competition. Moreover, the committee that chose the three finalists out of thousands of entries was mainly composed of experts in the fields of art and design. Therefore, a third questionnaire was explicitly designed to test the possibility that design judged on aesthetic qualities of experts might not be the most influential logo on general consumer behavior. To sample persons with greater than average expertise in the aesthetics of design, the participants in this survey were architecture students in their final years of undergraduate training or architect graduates. This survey took place in Xanthi and Thessaloniki, two cities that have architecture departments in national universities. The subjects were approached at the university campus or at their work place and were asked to choose a logo that was best fitted to represent certified organic products out of the same randomlyarrayed tables of 16 designs (including the three finalists of the EU competition as described in the previous section) that were used in the second survey. This results would then be evaluated in comparison to the results of the second survey, regarding the same table. 4. Results 4.1. Results of first survey Perceived advantages and disadvantages of organic products Respondents were asked to evaluate the importance of a number of arguments in favor and against the consumption of organic products, as are commonly suggested by their supporters and detractors respectively on a five-point scale as presented in Table 1. Also tabulated, in the rightmost column, are rankings of the importance of each advantage and each disadvantage. These rankings were calculated by through the addition of the percentages of those answering rather important and very important. As of this the resulting ranking of the advantages of organic products was: More healthy, more flavorful, preservation of biodiversity and finally greater job availability. On the other hand the disadvantages in order of importance were: The higher costs of organic products compared to conventional products, the plethora of certifying logos that implies that there are no common rules of production certification in the EU, the lower productivity of organic Page 15

33 systems, and finally the lower quality of organic products in comparison with non-organic products. Table 1. Evaluation of advantages and disadvantages as proposed by the respondents in percent Neither Advantages/Disadvantages of Organic farming and products Not at all important Rather unimportant important nor Rather important Very important Rank unimportant Advantages More flavorful 4.5% 6.8% 17.7% 31.9% 39.2% 2 More healthy 1.3% 1.0% 2.6% 18.5% 76.5% 1 Preservation of biodiversity 2.0% 5.1% 22.3% 38.0% 32.6% 3 Job availability 8.8% 13.6% 28.3% 23.8% 25.6% 4 Disadvantages Organic products quality is lower compared to non organic Organic products cost more compared to non organic Organic systems are less productive The numerous biological certifying labels suggest that there are no common rules for organic production in the EU. 32.6% 16.2% 19.8% 12.7% 18.7% 4 2.6% 9.4% 18.3% 28.8% 40.8% 1 5.0% 14.0% 33.1% 29.6% 18.3% 3 7.3% 12.9% 25.5% 33.7% 20.7% 2 The majority of the respondents (95%) cited the view that organic products are healthier than conventional products as rather important or very important for their consumer behavior, while on the other hand they rated the higher prices of organic products as the major drawback (69.6%). With a percent of 54.4%, consumer choice of organic products was negatively affected by the numerous available biological certifying labels with the corresponding implication that there are no common rules for organic production in the European Union. In contrast, 71.1% of the respondents cited the superior flavor of organically-grown products as an important factor for their consumer behavior. In contrast, relatively few respondents cited perceptions of inferior quality (31.4%) to be as substantially affecting for their consumer choices. The fact that organic farming systems are less productive was cited as a substantial deterrent to preference for consumer goods thus cultivated (47.9%); conversely, the increase in job availability associated with this fact was cited equally often (49.4%). While direct personal gain (in health and in the flavor of goods) were more often cited as important determinants for the choice of organically- Page 16

34 grown products, the preservation of biodiversity was also cited as important by a majority of respondents (70.6%). On the question of whether respondents believed that a unique EU logo would enhance the image of organic products, 8.3% of the 605 responded No, while 91.7% responded Yes EU organic logo characteristics implicitly evoked As the EU s design competition was open only to students of art and design, one of the hypotheses that were to be investigated was whether the characteristics specified in spontaneous consumer drawings of a possible organic certifying logo would differ in general population samples and whether implicit design representations of organic food production would differ across demographic characteristics. To investigate this, initially, drawings were classified in six categories. Four categories, namely EU symbols, leafs, nature and Text derived directly from the user drawings while the Circular and rectangular forms categories were believed as needed for the psychological affection they have on human behavior because of the way they are used and their symbolism in today s society. These categories are presented in Figure 9. Elements of the European Union symbol appeared in 3.1% of the drawings of the total sample. Representations of plants or leafs appeared in 49.1% of the drawings. Natural landscapes were represented in 17.2% of the drawings. Some form of text appeared in 29.6% of the drawings produced. Rectangular or circular shapes were presented in 6.4% and 11.2% of the drawings respectively. Parameters associated with the use of each of those six categories were investigated after running an exploration of the possibility that the frequencies of inclusion of different characteristics were differentiated with respect to respondents demographic characteristics. For this purpose, Mann-Whitney U-test and X² test were estimated depending on the variable nature (Table 3). The explanatory variables are described in Table 2. Respondents with, at most, a primary school (EDU_0) education were less likely to include text. On the other hand people of higher educational levels (EDU_2) were more likely to include text (x² = p <0.05, x²=7.062 p <0.01, respectively). University students (PROF_7) were less likely to include nature-themed sketches, while housewife s (PROF_8) showed a positive tendency in drawing nature-themed logos (x²=6.571 p <0.01, x²= p <0.05, respectively). Page 17

35 Percentage (%) University Students (PROF_7) showed a positive tendency towards using text (x²=9.551 p<0.05, respectively), whereas the age of the respondents (AGE) was negatively correlated with the probability of using text in their sketches. (Z = p= <.01). a b c d e f Figure 9. Representative sketches for each category. a: use of elements of the EU device; b: Use of plant or leaf representation; c: Nature (use of natural elements exclusive of plants and leaves; e.g., sun, animals, rainclouds); d: use of text; e: Rectangular form; f: Circular form. Note that a number of these characteristics appear in multiple drawings Word mark for organic products To evaluate the efficacy of the EU s non data-based decision to not rely on explanatory verbal descriptors regarding the meaning of the logo, respondents were asked to select one out of the four common code word associated with organic products, or to suggest a new one. The target of this investigation was to explore the tendency of choice between the code word selected and the native word for organic products. Out of 605 questionnaires, 598 valid preferences were evoked. Bio- was preferred 66.8%, Green- by 18.7%, Nat- by 11.5% and finally Org- was chosen by 3.0% of the respondents while only one subject proposed a new valid prefix, which correspondents to 0.2% of the sample (Figure 8). All proposed words were Greek-language equivalents to the Englishlanguage code words Bio-; 65.8% Green-; 18.5% Nat-; 11.4% Prefix Org-; 3% 0.2 Figure 8. Word mark preferences of respondents Page 18

36 Table 2. Explanatory variables for Table 3 Description of dependent variable Mean Std. Dev. AGE Respondent s age GENDER Gender of the respondent: 0: Man, 1 Woman EDU_0 Illiterates or Primary School graduate. 0: Otherwise, 1: Yes EDU_1 Secondary or High School graduate. 0: Otherwise, 1: Yes EDU_2 College or University graduate. 0:Otherwise, 1: Yes PROF_1 Public sector employee. 0: No, 1: Yes PROF_2 Private employee. 0: No, 1: Yes PROF_3 Freelancer. 0: No, 1: Yes PROF_4 Farmer. 0: No, 1: Yes PROF_5 Retired. 0: No, 1: Yes PROF_6 Unemployed. 0: No, 1: Yes PROF_7 Student of a higher educational institution. 0: No, 1: Yes PROF_8 Housewife. 0: No, 1: Yes Page 19

37 Table 3. Correlations for the investigation of common used shapes to demographic characteristics (N=605) Page 20

38 Frequencies Colors evoked by the concept of organic products The next issue under investigation was the basic color that consumers inherently (that is, without explicit training) think of when imagining a logo for the certification of organic products in the EU. The color preferences are presented in the Figure 9. Out of 605 valid questionnaires 578 valid color entries were extracted. Looking at the frequencies it is obvious that respondents preferred mostly shades of green (Figure 10) Ε D C Β Α Α Β C D Ε Figure 10. Color preferences for organic products from the whole sample Summarizing the results of Figure 10, C3 (RGB: 153, 204, 0) 2 was selected 156 times (27% of respondents), D4 (0, 254, 0) 135 times or 23.4%, followed by C4 (51, 153, 102), with 96 (16.6%) and B4 (0, 128, 0) with 60 respondents (10.4%) respectively. A further investigation for color preference was undertaken by splitting the results into those who buy organic products and those who do not. A general conclusion is that those who did not buy organic products, or were negative to the idea of organic products, while still preferring shades of green, tended to choose slightly darker colors as depicted in Figure 12 2 RGB color code resembling the actual color. R stands for red, G, for green and B for blue Page 21

39 Frequencies Frequencies Ε D C Β Α Α Β C D Ε Figure 11. Color preferences for organic products of those positive to the consumption of biological products Ε D C Β Α Α 1 2 Β C D Ε Figure 12. Color preferences for organic products of those hesitant about the consumption of biological products Page 22