19CONSUMER ATTITUDES AND HABITS ABOUT PRODUCTS WITH GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION IN SERBIA
Milos Ciric1, Ivana Ciric2, Tatjana Pivac3, Snezana Besermenji4 *Corresponding author E-mail: milos.ciric.gastronom@gmail.com
A R T I C L E I N F O Original Article Received: 30 June 2022 Accepted: 15 September 2022 doi:10.59267/ekoPolj230181C UDC 658.893:338.439.22(497.11) Keywords:
GI, attitudes, habits, consumers, Serbia.
JEL: L15, Q13, Q18
A B S T R A C T
To market products with geographical indications in the best possible way, it is necessary to examine the attitudes and habits of consumers. The subject of this paper is a survey on habits and attitudes of consumers about products with GI in Serbia. The aim of this paper is to examine the level of familiarity, attitudes, and habits of consumers, as well as to determine the knowledge and interest in these products. Citizens of Serbia participated in the research (n = 399). The methodology is based on a questionnaire that obtained the data that were processed via t-test statistical methods for independent samples, one-factor analysis of variance, the x2 test, and Pearson's correlation coefficient. Based on the conducted research, it can be stated that about 70% of respondents are willing to pay a higher price for these products.
Introduction
The protection system of products with GI (Geographical Indication) was created in order to follow the development and the need to offer and highlight unique agricultural, food and gastronomic products. In this way, GI has had positive effects on consumers of services or products, creating a clear picture of the specific, authentic characteristics of food and beverages. Their constant production and sales has had a positive impact
1 Milos Ciric, MSc, Teacher, Academy of Vocational Studies Belgrade, Department of Hotel Management School, Kneza Viseslava 70, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia, E-mail: milos.ciric. gastronom@gmail.com, ORCID ID (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4182-448X)
2 Ivana Ciric, MSc, Teacher, High School of Tourism New Belgrade, Otona Zupancica 4, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia, E-mail: jankovic.ivanaaa@gmail.com, ORCID ID (https://orcid. org/0000-0002-4758-5160)
3 Tatjana Pivac, Ph.D., Full Professor, Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Trg Dositeja Obradovica 3, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia, Phone: +381 21 48 52 835, E-mail: tatjana.pivac@dgt.uns.ac.rs, ORCID ID (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1660-1295)
4 Snezana Besermenji, Ph.D., Full Professor, Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Trg Dositeja Obradovica 3, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia, Phone: +381 21 48 52 836, E-mail: snezana.besermenji@dgt.uns.ac.rs,
on economic development of the country - the region from which the products originate (Ciric et al., 2020), helping thus the process of nurturing tradition, aspiring tourist potential and preserving regional and national image (Lukinovic et al., 2021). These quality schemes have been developed to protect producers and consumers from similar products that may be found on the market (Balogh et al., 2016). Geographical indications refer to products with specific characteristics, quality or reputation that derive from their geographical origin. Geographical indications are intellectual property, which is regulated by international policies and regulations (Vandecandelaere et al., 2020).
Geographical indications are especially important for less developed countries, because most of their exports are these products, with Slovenia being the best example of placement and use of protected products (Kalenjuk et al., 2010). The geographical indication shows the locality from which the labelled product originates, it provides these consumers with information from which country, region and place it originates, but also, due to originating from that locality, the product has specific properties, as a result of natural factors, skills of people from that geographical area or a combination of the two (Tesanovic, Koprivica, 2007).
Products that have a geographical indication have a developed market both in Europe and the rest of the world. Research within the European Community has shown that an increasing number of consumers when buying food opt for products that bear a geographical indication, although such products fetch a higher price than conventional ones. Also, research conducted by Uzar et al. (2022) showed that consumers who value quality of the products perceive GI as a confirmation of its quality and means of support to local producers. Examples from the EU countries show that a properly established system of GI inevitably brings huge economic benefits - this approach to ensuring the quality and brand of food products ensures the development of the region; it drives the economy, and above all, tourism in a certain region, especially rural areas (Savic, Buric, 2008). From the aspect of healthy nutrition and a healthy natural environment, it can be said that tourism is vitally dependent on agriculture, although, on the other hand, it directly or indirectly encourages the prosperity of agriculture and the economy of a country (Vujovic, 2007).
Producers mostly look at the economic side of this production, which is most often an excuse for its current realisation (Cervenski et al., 2020). Several consumer studies have confirmed these two perspectives, shedding light on the fact that local food products can be seen as a way to support and protect the local agricultural economy (Onozaka et al., 2010), as well as a way to preserve the environment (Aprile et al., 2016). Agriculture is one of the few economic activities in Serbia that has been continuously recording a positive foreign trade balance for many years (Kovacevic et al., 2020).
Literature Review
The origin of food and the transparency of the food chain are also of interest to consumers due to the growing awareness of environmental and health concerns
(Skallerud, Wien, 2019). At the moment, the food sector is considered one of the most important in the global economy, which is certainly shown by FAO data, where the value of food production increased by 8% in the period 2007-2017, which amounts to 2.3 billion dollars, but we should not ignore the fact that the food sector and food industry continue to face many challenges in product management (Horvat et al., 2019; Pinna et al., 2017; Ryynanen, Hakatie, 2014).
Primary production and adequate distribution of products as products with GI attract great attention as a very important factor influencing consumer behaviour, in addition, this type of protection requires high quality products aimed at protection from unfair competition (Katerinopoulou et al., 2020).
Authors Ciric et al. (2020) state that products with GI represent a system for the preservation of national identity and are extremely important for the authentic offer of gastro tourism. In this sense, gastronomic tourism is therefore based on the concept of knowledge and learning, consuming and enjoying the gastronomic culture that identifies with the territory (Fuste-Forne, 2020) which means that food tourism represents visits to food producers, food fairs and gastro festivals, events, markets or other forms of tourism based on food activities.
Geographical indication PDO, PGI, TSG represent an abbreviated name of products that originate from certain regions and follow the traditional production process, the European Union has defined four geographical indications, which differ from each other:
- Protected Designation of Origin (PDO), includes agricultural, food products and wines related to the products of a certain geographical area, considering that all segments of production, preparation and processing are performed in the same geographical area,
- Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), covers agricultural, food products and wines that are closely related to the geographical area, while at least one of the stages of production, processing or preparation takes place in this area, while in wine 85% of the grapes must be from that geographical climate,
- Traditional Specialty Guaranteed (TSG) covers food and agricultural products, this label indicates the traditional aspects of the product in the way it is made or its composition by linking it to a certain geographical area, protecting it from counterfeiting and misuse,
- Geographical indication of spirit drinks and aromatized wines (GI), protects the name of an alcoholic beverage or aromatized wine originating in a country, region or locality where the special quality, reputation or other characteristics of the product's core can be attributed to its geographical origin (European Commision 2023).
Table 1. Number of registered PDO, PGI, TSC, GI products
PDO PGI TSC GI
Food 78 101 7 -
Applied Wine 71 27 - -
Spirit drinks - - - 14
Food 16 25 1 -
Published Wine 6 1 - -
Spirit drinks - - - 1
Food 681 928 63 -
Registered Wine 1184 445 - -
Spirit drinks - - - 259
Food - 3 0 -
Rejected Wine - 1 - -
Spirit drinks - - - -
Food - 4 - -
Cancelled Wine 2 - - -
Spirit drinks - - - -
Source: EU DOOR database 2023
Based on EU data for 2023, shown in Table 1, a total of 1856 PDO products have been registered, 681 of which belong to the category of food and agriculture, while the remaining 1184 products belong to the category of wine. When it comes to TSG products, there are only 63 of them. Alcoholic beverages (GI) amount to 259 products. The largest number of registered PDO, PGI, TSG and GI products in 2023 can be found in Italy (880), followed by France with (753), Spain (349), Greece (277), Portugal (196), Germany (176), and the UK (83). When it comes to the surrounding area of Serbia, Croatia has 63 products, Hungary has 84 protected products, and Romania has 72 products with a designation of origin. Bulgaria has 75 products with a designation of origin. This number is often not correlated with the financial value of production and trade of PDO and PGI products, exercised by a Member State. For example, Portugal has a large number of products in the European register, given the fact that they are mostly low-value products (fruits and vegetables), this country has a very small financial turnover on a European scale. In contrast, Germany and the UK account for over 30% of total European turnover with a relatively small number of registered products (EU DOOR database, 2023).
There are multiple correlations between sustainability and geographical indications, products with geographical protection of origin can be considered as drivers of sustainable and rural development (Chilla et al., 2020). In particular, food tourism refers to the discovery of culture through food (Long, 2004). In this sense, gastronomic tourism is therefore based on the concept of knowledge and learning, consuming and enjoying a gastronomic culture that identifies with the territory (Fuste-Forne, 2020). Intellectual property rights have gained in value only in the last few years (Zaric et al., 2012). However, as the main shortcoming of the Law on Indications of Geographical Origin (Official Gazette 44/2018), authors should point out the fact
that Traditional Specialty Guaranteed (TSG) is not defined according to European legislation (Simovic, 2015). As another inconsistency, two institutions participate in the process of registering geographical indications - Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management of the Republic of Serbia and Intellectual Property Office of the Republic of Serbia (Kovacevic et al., 2022). According to the Intellectual Property Office in 2022, this list in Serbia includes 67 domestic products with a protected name of origin or geographical origin, which are registered in the name of domestic persons, which certainly represents a small number according to the potential. By inspecting the website of the Institute for Intellectual Property (www.zis.gov.rs), it can be concluded that most of the listed products do not have active authorised users, i.e. 22 products do not have specified authorised users, which clearly shows that the geographic indication registration process is very demanding and insufficiently recognizable on the market. Of the total number of protected products in the world, 85% of products are related to agri-food products (Simin et al., 2016).
Materials and Methods
In the research, 399 respondents participated, and over the course of March 2021, a questionnaire was distributed via social media (Facebook groups) in a free sample to the citizens of the Republic of Serbia. The questionnaire, which was used for the research, was taken over and modified based on the research Teuber, 2011 and Dragin et al., 2018. Before filling in the questionnaire, the respondents were introduced to the goal of the research, as well as the way of marking the selected answers. SPSS 20.0 was used for data processing. The results are presented graphically and tabularly. In order to determine the differences between the respondents by gender, in terms of attitudes about products with geographical indication, a t-test for independent samples was used. In order to compare the respondents by age and level of education in terms of attitudes about products with geographical indication, a one-factor analysis of variance was used. In order to examine the relationship between the sociodemographic characteristics of the respondents and the questions from the questionnaire originating from the nominal or ordinal measurement scale, the x2 test was applied. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to determine the relationship between age and frequency of product consumption on the one hand and self-assessment of product knowledge on the other.
Results and Discussion
Analysis of Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
Looking into Table 2, it is observed that one third of the respondents are male, while twice as many are female. Observed by age, there's a uniform number of respondents by groups. Namely, about 25% of respondents are in the following categories: up to 25 years, from 36 to 45 years, as well as over 45 years. Slightly fewer respondents, 21% are between 26 and 35 years old. The average age of the respondents is 37 years. Regarding the last obtained level of formal education, it can be said that there is a fairly balanced
percentage of respondents with High School (35%), College and University 33% and a degree in Specialized, Bachelor's Studies, Master's Degree or Doctorate 30%. The number of respondents who have only completed Primary School is negligible.
Table 2. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents
Question Claims Value (n) Share (%)
Gender Male 129 32.30
Female 270 67.70
Age range Aged till 25 104 26.10
Aged from 26 to 35 84 21.10
Aged from 36 to 45 102 25.60
Aged over 45 102 25.60
Without answer 7 1.80
Degree of education Primary school 8 2
High School 141 35.30
College or Faculty 132 33.10
Specialized Academic Studies, Bachelor's Degree, Master's Degree, Doctorate 118 29.60
Source: Author's Research
The largest percentage of respondents are those who are Employed 63%, while 18% are Pupils/Students and about 13% are Unemployed. There are 4% of the Retired who participated in the research, and about 2% of Housewives. Observed by type of settlement, the sample is dominated by respondents who live in Cities about 80%, while every fifth respondent lives in the Countryside. Half of the respondents live in the Capital, and every fourth is a resident of Vojvodina. 7% of respondents come from Sumadija and Southern Serbia respectively, and about 5% of them are from Western Serbia. The smallest number of respondents is from Eastern Serbia 3% and from Kosovo and Metohija 0.5%. Regarding the economic status and considering the average income at the national level, it can be said that almost two thirds of the respondents estimate that they live in a household that can be qualified as a household of moderately satisfactory economic status. Every fourth respondent thinks that the material condition of their household is more modest, and every tenth thinks that they have a high economic status (Table 3).
Table 3. Workplace, Population, Region of Living, Material Status of the Respondents
Question Claims Value (n) Share (%)
Representation of the Sample Structure by Employment Status Unemployed 51 12.80
Employed 252 63.20
Retired 16 4
Housewife 7 1.8
Pupil/Student 73 18.30
Representation of the Sample Structure by the Type of Settlement Countryside 84 21.10
City 315 78.90
Representation of the Sample Structure by Region Vojvodina 103 25.80
Belgrade 203 50.90
Sumadija 28 7
Western Serbia 22 5.5
Eastern Serbia 12 3
Southern Serbia 29 7.3
Kosovo and Metohija 2 0.5
Representation of the Sample Structure by the Economic Status of Households Household of More Modest Economic Status 104 26.10
Household of Medium Satisfactory Economic Status 257 64.40
Household of High Economic Status 38 9.50
Source: Author's Research
Descriptive Statistics
Respondents were able to express their views on products with protected geographical origin. They had 19 statements in front of them and answered by choosing one of the offered answers on the scale (I completely disagree, I disagree, I am not sure, I agree, I mostly agree).
Table 4. Distribution of respondents' responses to claims about products with a protected
geographical area
Claims AS SD
By purchasing products with geographical indications, support is given to small producers 4.38 0.93
The purchase of products with geographical indications provides support to the local economy 4.41 0.90
I am willing to pay a higher price for products with geographical indications 3.92 1.12
Products with a geographical indications become recognizable due to a direct link with a certain geographical area, which gives them a special value 4.41 0.90
Products with geographical indications are custodians of cultural heritage 4.46 0.86
Claims AS SD
Products with a geographical indication achieve a better position on the domestic market 3.72 1.06
Products with a geographical indication achieve a better position on the international market 4.10 0.99
I believe that the awareness of the need to protect geographical indications is not sufficiently developed in our country 4.48 0.95
I believe that the promotion of products with a geographical indication contributes to the development of tourism 4.58 0.79
Source: Author's Research Note: AS-arithmetic mean, SD-standard deviation
It can be stated that respondents express the highest degree of agreement (summarised categories I agree and mostly agree) with the statement "I believe that the promotion of products with a geographical indication contributes to the development of tourism", because this attitude is represented by 90% of them. Large % matches the claims that our country is not sufficiently developed in its awareness about the importance of geographical indication, that these products are custodians of cultural heritage, that they have special value due to connection with a specific geographical area, but also that their purchase supports small producers and the local economy. Respondents have a somewhat more reserved view of the claim that products with a geographical indication achieve a better position in the international market, although most of them agree, 17% of them are not sure that this is the case. Willing to pay a higher price for products with geographical indication, 18% are not sure of their position on this item reading, while every tenth respondent expresses disagreement with the statement. Respondents have a relatively divided opinion regarding the claim that products with a geographical indication achieve a better position in the domestic market, so about 60% of them express agreement, in whole or in part, while 30% of respondents are unsure of their position on this topic, and 10% do not agree with the statement (Table 4).
Respondents had the opportunity to list three domestic products that they know have a geographical indication. Almost all of them answered the question (only 10 out of 399 respondents did not give an answer), by mentioning one or more products. Most respondents mentioned: ajvar (163), Pirot sausage (82), Sjenica cheese (71), raspberry from Arilje (62) and Futog cabbage (59), honey (77). A total of 1264 responses were collected, grouped by product type. Graph 1 shows the responses of respondents categorised according to different product groups (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Overview of product categories with geographical indication according to the
respondents
350 300 250 200 150
23,5% 23,7%
16,5%
9,7% 9,7%
>,6% 6,1%
■ I I I I
100 5,3% 5 50 0
S ^ / S ^ / / /
S
Source: Author's Research
It can be noticed that the respondents mostly mentioned meat products, but also dairy products, as products with geographical indication. In addition to them, a large share has products that can be classified as winter products, and a slightly smaller share has vegetables, alcoholic beverages, honey and fruits. About 5% of respondents answered that they do not know which products have a geographical indication. Some respondents listed specific products, but there were also those who listed a specific product category. There are a total of 299 answers related to meat products. Of the products belonging to vegetables, 123 responses were given, while a total of 122 responses are related to alcoholic beverages. Honey was listed as a food item 77 times, while a total of 71 responses concerned fruit (Chart 1).
Table 5. Distribution of respondents' responses to claims about products with geographical
indication
Question Claims Value (n) Share (%)
„ Assess your knowledge of protected geographical indications from 1 to 5, with 1 being the lowest and 5 the highest." 1 27 6.80
2 84 21.10
3 165 41.40
4 81 20.30
5 42 10.50
"I am interested in learning more about the subject of products with geographical indication." Yes 337 84.50
No 62 15.50
Question Claims Value (n) Share (%)
Do you think that the placement of products with geographical indication helps the development of the local economy and the region?" I completely disagree 4 1
I disagree 8 2
I am not sure 13 3.30
I agree 102 25.60
I mostly agree 272 68.20
'Adequate placement of products with geographical indication on the catering market resulted in higher quality food in restaurants. I completely disagree 6 1.50
I disagree 10 2.50
I am not sure 47 11.80
I agree 132 33.10
I mostly agree 204 51.10
Source: Author's Research
By looking at Table 5, a normal distribution of results can be observed. Namely, most of the respondents 41% rated themselves with a medium grade, while about 20% of them gave themselves a grade of 2 or 4. Every tenth respondent thinks that he deserves the highest grade for his/her knowledge of products with geographical indication, while 7% of respondents rate themselves with the lowest grade. It can be stated that only 30% of respondents assess themselves as individuals who have relevant knowledge about this type of products, and that it is necessary to implement appropriate strategies and plans to make the population more familiar with products bearing the protected geographical indication, their characteristics and significance. Many respondents, 85%, express interest in getting more fully acquainted with the topic of products with protected geographical indication, which is not surprising, given the answers to the previous question. Half of the respondents express complete agreement, and a third claim that they agree that the placement of products with geographical indication helps the development of the local economy and the region. About 12% of respondents are unsure of their position on this issue, while 4% disagree. Respondents mostly agree that adequate placement of products with geographical indication on the catering market results in higher quality food in restaurants - about 70% express complete agreement, and 25% agree.
Table 6. Comparison of respondents by gender in terms of attitudes about products with
geographical indication
Claims Pol N M SD T P
By purchasing products with geographical indication, support is given to small producers male 129 4.2 1.1 -2.16 .031*
female 270 4.5 0.9
Products with geographical indication are custodians of cultural heritage male 129 4.3 1.0 -2.05 .042*
female 270 4.5 0.8
Source: Author's Research Note: N - number of respondents, M - arithmetic mean, SD - standard deviation, t - statistics, p - statistical significance; ** significance at level 0.01.; * significance at the level of 0.05.
The results of the t-test of independent samples show that there are statistically significant differences regarding the statement "Purchase of products with geographical indication gives support to small producers" between men and women, (t (211.174) = -2.16, p = .031). Namely, female respondents' express agreement with the statement (AS = 4.5, SD = 0.9) to a greater extent compared to male respondents (AS = 4.2, SD = 1.1). Also, the existence of statistically significant differences was found regarding the statement "Products with geographical indication are custodians of cultural heritage" between men and women (t (207,976) = -2.05, p = .042). Namely, female respondents to a greater extent express agreement with the statement (AS = 4.5, SD = 0.8) compared to male respondents (AS = 4.3, SD = 1.0) (Table 6).
Regarding other claims, no statistically significant differences were found between male and female respondents.
Table 7. Comparison of average values on the scale of attitudes about products with geographical indication according to the age of the respondents
Claims Sum of square Df Average square F P
By purchasing products with Between groups 7.074 3 2.358 2.733 .044
geographical indication, support is Within groups 334.801 388 .863
given to small producers In total 341.875 391
The purchase of products with Between groups 6.302 3 2.101 2.614 .051
geographical indication provides Within groups 311.818 388 .804
support to the local economy In total 318.120 391
I am willing to pay a higher price Between groups 23.946 3 7.982 6.579 .000
for products with geographical Within groups 470.748 388 1.213
indication In total 494.694 391
Products with a geographical indication become recognizable due to a direct link with a certain geographical area, which gives them a special value Between groups 4.289 3 1.430 1.777 .151
Within groups 312.219 388 .805
In total 316.508 391
Products with geographical indication are custodians of cultural heritage Between groups 9.207 3 3.069 4.280 .005
Within groups 278.219 388 .717
In total 287.426 391
Products with a geographical indication achieve a better position on the domestic market Between groups 16.354 3 5.451 4.983 .002
Within groups 424.493 388 1.094
In total 440.847 391
Products with a geographical indication achieve a better position on the international market Between groups 29.294 3 9.765 10.518 .000
Within groups 360.213 388 .928
In total 389.508 391
Claims Sum of square Df Average square F P
I believe that the awareness of the need to protect products with a geographical indication is not sufficiently developed in our country Between groups 1.350 3 .450 .487 .691
Within groups 358.395 388 .924
In total 359.745 391
I believe that the promotion of products with a geographical indication contributes to the development of tourism Between groups 8.313 3 2.771 4.451 .004
Within groups 241.541 388 .623
In total 249.855 391
Source: Author's Research Note: Df - degrees of freedom, F - statistics, p - statistical significance
The results of the ANOVA test indicate that there are statistically significant differences regarding the statement "Purchasing products with geographical indication gives support to small producers between respondents of different ages." (F (3,388) = 2,733, p = .044). A follow-up test for multiple comparisons (Tuckey HSD) found that respondents over the age of 45 statistically differed significantly from those under the age of 25 in terms of expressing a higher degree of agreement with the statement compared to younger respondents. While the statement "I am ready to pay a higher price for products with geographical indication" among respondents of different ages (F (3,388) = 6,579, p <.001) just like the statement "Products with geographical indication are custodians of cultural heritage" (F (3,388) = 4,280, p = .005). A follow-up test for multiple comparisons (Tuckey HSD) found that respondents aged 35 to 45 and over 45 were statistically significantly different from those under 25 in terms of expressing a higher degree of agreement with the above statement compared to younger respondents (Table 7).
The results of the ANOVA test indicate that there are statistically significant differences regarding the statement "Products with a geographical indication achieve a better position in the domestic market" between respondents of different ages (F (3,388) = 4,983, p = .002), just as the statement "Products with a geographical indication achieve a better position in the international market "(F (3,388) = 10,518, p<.001) and "I believe that the promotion of products with a geographical indication contributes to the development of tourism ", just as is the case in previous statements (F ( 3,388) = 4,451, p = .004). A follow-up test for multiple comparisons (Tuckey HSD) found that respondents over 45 years of age differed statistically significantly compared to respondents up to 25 years of age in terms of expressing a higher degree of agreement with the statement compared to younger respondents, while in the second and third statements found that respondents aged 35 to 45 years and over 45 years were statistically significantly different compared to respondents younger than 25 years. Also, in the second statement, the respondents belonging to the age group of 35 to 45 years are statistically significantly different from the respondents from 26 to 35 years of age in the sense that they agree more with the statement. No statistically significant differences (p>.05) were found between
respondents of different age groups in terms of other claims concerning attitudes about products with protected geographical origin (Table 7).
Table 8. Comparison of average values on the scale of attitudes about products with geographical indication according to the level of education of the respondents
Claims Sum of square Df Average square F P
By purchasing products with geographical indications, support is given to small producers Between groups 1.644 2 .822 .980 .376
Within groups 325.486 388 .839
In total 327.130 390
The purchase of products with geographical indications provides support to the local economy Between groups 4.884 2 2.442 3.159 .044
Within groups 299.996 388 .773
In total 304.880 390
I am willing to pay a higher price for products with geographical indications Between groups 4.001 2 2.000 1.639 .195
Within groups 473.401 388 1.220
In total 477.402 390
Products with a protected geographical indications become recognizable due to a direct link with a certain geographical area, which gives them a special value Between groups .829 2 .414 .529 .590
Within groups 304.220 388 .784
In total 305.049 390
Products with geographical indications are custodians of cultural heritage Between groups .449 2 .224 .308 .735
Within groups 282.687 388 .729
In total 283.136 390
Products with a geographical indication achieve a better position on the domestic market Between groups 5.609 2.805 2.536 .080
Within groups 429.005 388 1.106
In total 434.614 390
Products with a geographical indication achieve a better position on the international market Between groups 1.016 2 .508 .523 .593
Within groups 376.892 388 .971
In total 377.908 390
I believe that the awareness of the need to protect products with a geographical indication is not sufficiently developed in our country Between groups 1.315 2 .658 .737 .479
Within groups 346.358 388 .893
In total 347.673 390
I believe that the promotion of products with a geographical indication contributes to the development of tourism Between groups 3.715 2 1.857 3.086 .047
Within groups 233.497 388 .602
In total 237.212 390
Source: Author's Research Note: Df - degrees of freedom, F - statistics, p - statistical significance
The results of the ANOVA test indicate that there are statistically significant differences regarding the statement "Purchasing products with geographical indication gives support to the local economy", between respondents of different levels of education (F (2,388) = 3,159, p = .044), just as with the statement " I believe that the promotion of products with a geographical indications contributes to the development of tourism "among respondents of different levels of education (F (2,388) = 3,086, p = .047). A follow-up test for multiple comparisons (Tuckey HSD) found that more educated respondents (with completed specialist academic studies, master's degree, master's degree and doctorate) were statistically significantly different from respondents with completed high school in terms of greater agreement with the statement, while in the second statement, it was determined that the respondents with higher education differ statistically significantly from the respondents with completed high school and college in the sense that the most educated respondents express a more affirmative attitude regarding the stated statement in relation to the others. No statistically significant differences (p>.05) were found between respondents of different levels of education in terms of other claims concerning attitudes about products with protected geographical indications (Table 8).
Table 9. Relationship between age and self-assessment of knowledge about products with
geographical indications
Self-assessment
Age Pearson Correlation .116*
Sig. .022
N 392
Source: Author's Research
Note: Pearson Correlation - statistics, Sig. - statistical significance, N - number of
respondents
** significance at level 0.01.; * significance at the level of 0.05.
The results of Pearson's correlation indicate that there is a statistically significant positive correlation between the age of the respondents and the self-assessment of knowledge about products with protected geographical indications (r (390) = .116, p = <.05)). Although the correlation is significant, it is very low and indicates that the older the respondents, the more positively they assess their knowledge (Table 9).
Conclusion
The geographical indication system plays a very important role in the regional economy, given that such products are the drivers of the region's economy. Regarding the comparison of respondents' attitudes towards products with geographical indications, it can be said that women were more likely to believe that the purchase of these products supports small producers, as well as that products with a geographical indication are custodians of cultural heritage. Also, older respondents (over 45 years of age) differ statistically significantly and agree to a greater extent with most claims about products with geographical indications compared to the youngest category of respondents (younger than 25 years). Considering
that the claims are primarily affirmative, it can be concluded that older respondents show a higher level of understanding and evaluation of these products. When it comes to the educational structure, there are differences in terms of claims that the purchase of these products supports the local economy and contributes to the development of tourism in the sense that more educated respondents are more in line with these claims than those with lower education. When it comes to self-assessment of knowledge of respondents in relation to products with geographical indications, no connection has been established between self-assessment of knowledge and gender, i.e., education of respondents. Older respondents rate their knowledge with a slightly higher grade, as do those who more often consume products with a geographical indication.
The limiting factors are reflected in the fact that the number of male respondents is insufficiently represented, just like the number of respondents according to employment status. It should also be emphasised that the number of respondents from rural areas is insufficiently represented, as well as the uneven response of respondents in the regions of Serbia, which can certainly affect different attitudes and habits. While in terms of material status, the number of respondents is also not equal, which can completely change the perception of attitudes and habits of consumers about products with geographical indications. Therefore, as one of the recommendations for further research, it is possible to refer to the necessity of wider research, i.e., in a more correct distribution of respondents, in order to obtain more relevant data that would enable a great variety of attitudes and habits about products with geographical indications. It should also be pointed out that as a limiting factor, producers are not interested in the certification process, given that the certification process itself is expensive, and that customers do not recognize and do not want to favour products for geographical indications.
Recommendations for future research can go in the direction of examining consumers about the familiarity of which food has a GI and how many customers recognize the Serbian GIs label.
Acknowledgments
"The authors acknowledge financial support of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia (Grant No. 451-03-68/202214/200125)"
Conflict of interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Aprile, M. C., Caputo, V., & Nayga Jr, R. M. (2016). Consumers' preferences and attitudes toward local food products. Journal of food products marketing, 22(1), 19-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2014.949990.
2. Balogh, P., Bekesi, D., Gorton M., Popp, J., & Lengyel, P. (2016). Consumer willingness to pay for traditional food products. Food Policy 61, 176-184. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.03.005.
3. Cervenski, J. F., Medic-Pap, S. S., Danojevic, D. B., Savic, A. D., & Bugarski, D. Z. (2020). The importance of crop rotation in Intensive vegetable production in a greenhouse. Journal of Agricultural Sciences (Belgrade), 65(3), 199-212. DOI: 10.2298/JAS2003199C.
4. Chilla, T., Fink, B., Balling, R., Reitmeier, S., & Schober, K. (2020). The EU Food Label 'Protected Geographical Indication': Economic Implications and Their Spatial Dimension. Sustainability, 12(14), 5503. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145503.
5. Ciric, M., Kalenjuk, B., & Jankovic, I. (2020). Regional Products With the Protection of Origin in Serbia Tourism Offer. Indonesian Journal of Tourism and Leisure, 1(2), 61-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36256/ijtl.v1i2.101.
6. Dragin, A., Blesic, I., Pivac, T., Kosic, K., & Demirovic, D. (2018). Importance of connection of hospitality and local agricultural manufacturers. Agroeconomics. 47(78), 73-84. [in Serbian:Dragin,A., Blesic, I., Pivac,T., Kosic, K., & Demirovic, D. (2018). Importance of hospitality and local producers connectivity. Agroekonomika 47(78), 73-84]. DOI 10.5937/skolbiz1-16287.
7. European Commission (2023). Geographical indications and quality schemes explained. Accessed on 29 January 2023, available at: https://agriculture.ec.europa. eu/farming/geographical-indications-and-quality-schemes/geographical-indications-and-quality-schemes-explained_en#pdo
8. European Commission (EU DOOR database, 2023). Geographical indications register. Accessed on 29 January 2023, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/ food-farming-fisheries/food-safety-and-quality/certification/quality-labels/ geographical-indications-register/
9. Fuste-Forne, F. (2020). Developing Cheese Tourism: A Local-based Perspective From Valle de Roncal (Navarra, Spain). Journal of Ethnic Foods, 7(1), 26. https:// doi.org/10.1186/s42779- 020-00064-2.
10. Horvat, A., Behdani, B., Fogliano, V., & Luning, P. A. (2019). A systems approach to dynamic performance assessment in new food product development. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 91, 330-338. https://doi.org/10.10167j.tifs.2019.07.036.
11. Kalenjuk, B., Vulic, G., & Tesanovic, D. (2010). Positioning of protected Slovenian gastronomic products in tourism. Research Review of the Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, 39, 232-247. [in Serbian: Kalenjuk, B., Vulic, G., & Tesanovic, D. (2010). Pozicioniranje zasticenih slovenackih gastronomski proizvoda u turizmu. Proceedings of the Departmentfor Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, 39, 232-247].
12. Katerinopoulou, K., Kontogeorgos, A., Salmas, C. E., Patakas, A., & Ladavos, A. (2020). Geographical Origin Authentication of Agri-Food Products: A Review. Foods, 9(4), 489. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9040489.
13. Kovacevic, V., Brenjo, D., Cvetkovic, S., & Rainovic, L. (2022). Comparative analysis of foodstuff geographical indications in the Western Balkans. Economics of Agriculture, 69(1), 163-178.
14. Kovacevic, V., Grujic Vuckovski, B., & Tica, N. (2020). Measures to support investments in the production and processing of agricultural products on small farms: Existing legal framework and administrative conditions in the sector of processing agricultural products on the farm.In: Improving knowledge transfer to obtain safe and competitive agricultural products obtained by processing small farms in the dairy sector, meat, fruits and vegetables - book 2. Institute of Agricultural Economics, Belgrade, pp, 177-198. ISNB 978-86-6269-086-9. [in Serbian: Kovacevic, V., Grujic Vuckovski, B., & Tica, N. (2020). Measures to support investments in the production and processing of agricultural products on small farms: Existing legal framework and administrative conditions in the sector of processing agricultural products on farms. In: Improving the transfer of knowledge in order to obtain safe and competitive agricultural products, which were obtained by processing on small farms in the milk, meat, fruit and vegetable sectors - book 2. Institute for Agricultural Economics, Belgrade, pp 177-198. ISBN 978-86-6269-086-9].
15. Long, L. M. (2004). Learning to listen to the food voice: recipes as expressions of identity and carriers of memory. Food, Culture & Society, 7(1), 118-122. https:// doi.org/10.2752/155280104786578067.
16. Lukinovic, M. V., Opacic, A. I., & Milojevic, I. M. (2021). Geographical Indications As A Means Of Valorization Of Economic Business - A Chance For Rural Recovery. Sociological Review, 55(4), 1412-1437. [in Serbian: Lukinovic, M. V., Opacic, A. I., & Milojevic, I. M. (2021). Oznake geografskog porekla kao sredstvo valorizacije privrednog poslovanja - sansa za oporavak sela. Socioloski pregled 55(4), 1412-1437].
17. Official gazette of the Republic of Serbia, Law On Marks Of Geographical Origin ("Official Gazette of RS", no. 18/2010 and 44/2018).
18.Onozaka, Y., Nurse, G., & McFadden, D. T. (2010). Local food consumers: How motivations and perceptions translate to buying behavior. Retrieved from www. choicesmagazine.org/magazine/article.php?article=109.
19. Pinna, C., Plo, L., Robin, V., Girard, P., & Terzi, S. (2017). An approach to improve implementation of PLM solution in food industry-case study of Poult Group. International Journal of Product Lifecycle Management, 10(2), 151-170. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPLM.2017.085958.
20. Ryynanen, T., & Hakatie, A. (2014). We must have the wrong consumers"-a case study on new food product development failure. British Food Journal. https://doi. org/10.1108/BFJ-08-2012-0215.
21. Savic, M., & Buric, I. (2008). Geografic indications of origine of agricultural and food products. Economics of Agriculture, 55(2), 207-218. [in Serbian: Savic, M., & Buric, I. (2008). Geografske oznake porekla poljoprivrednih i prehrambenih proizvoda. Ekonomikapoljoprivrede, 55(2), 207-218].
22. Simin, M. J., Jovicevic, P., & Novakovic, S. (2016). Appellations of geographical origin as a generator of national competitiveness. Economics of Agriculture, 63(2), 567-583.
23. Simovic, K. (2015). Agro-Food Quality Schemes At Eu Level. Potential benefits of protecting Serbian products in the context of negotiations with the EU. European Policy Center. [in Serbian: Simovic, K. (2015). Agro-prehrambene seme kvaliteta na nivou EU. Potencijalne koristi zastite srpskih proizvoda u kontekstu pregovora sa EU. Centar za Evropska politike].
24. Skallerud, K., & Wien, A. H. (2019). Preference for local food as a matter of helping behaviour: Insights from Norway. Journal of Rural Studies, 67, 79-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/jjrurstud.2019.02.020.
25. Tesanovic, D., & Koprivica, M. (2007). Influence of quality definition of regional gastronomic products on formation of touristic offer of Serbia. In International Participation conference, Recognizable national gastronomy-tourist potential, Bled, Slovenia (pp. 217-223).
26. Teuber, R. (2011). Consumers' and producers' expectations towards geographical indications: Empirical evidence for a German case study. British Food Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070701111148423.
27. Uzar, D., Dunderski, D., & Pejanovic, V. (2022). Consumers'intention to buy cheeses with geographical indications: the case of Serbia. Economics of Agriculture, 69(3), 819-832.
28. Vandecandelaere, E., Teyssier, C., Barjolle, D., Fournier, S., Beucherie, O., & Jeanneaux, P. (2020). Strengthening sustainable food systems through geographical indications: evidence from 9 worldwide case studies. Journal of Sustainability Research, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.20900/jsr20200031
29. Vujovic, S. (2007). Agriculture tourism as incentive factor economic development of Vojvodina. Economics of Agriculture, 54(2), 215-230. [in Serbian: Vujovic, S. (2007). Agroturizam kao podsticajni faktor ekonomskog razvoja Vojvodine. Ekonomika poljoprivrede, 54(2), 215-230]. DOI: 10.22004/ ag.econ.245686
30. Zaric, V., Bogdanov, N., & Vasiljevic, Z. (2012). Traditional products ofthe Republic of Serbia - a contribution to the assessment of the institutional framework and the potential for production and protection of products. In: K. Zmaic, T. Sudaric (eds.) Tradition despite the crisis - is it possible? Vinkovci: Zebra. pp 47-58. (In Serbian).
