Consumers’ Perception of the Definition and Quality Parameters of
Functional Food: A Qualitative Study
Tri Rakhmawati, Sik Sumaedi, I Gede Mahatma Yuda Bakti, Nidya Astrini and Medi Yarmen
Indonesian Institute of Sciences, Jakarta, Indonesia
Keywords: Consumer Perception, Functional Food, Perceived Quality, Quality Parameters.
Abstract: Nowadays, functional food products have developed. It was due to the need for daily consumption of foods
with positive health benefits. Plenty of literature has discussed functional foods. However, there has not been
an established and clear definition of functional food in Indonesia. This research aims to identify the
perception of functional foods’ consumers regarding the definition and the quality parameters of functional
foods. To achieve that objective, this study employed a qualitative research method. Data was gathered
through interviews on eleven functional foods’ consumers separately to ensure independence. This study used
thematic analysis. It was found that eight from eleven informants did not know the term ‘functional food.’
‘health food’ was more familiar. However, they have relatively similar definitions on the concept and the
form of functional foods. They all agreed that functional foods could be both fresh and processed. Also, this
research has identified 36 parameters of functional food quality from consumers’ perception. The government
can use this result as an input in defining functional food, creating public education program, and establishing
a quality standard for functional foods aside from the objective quality parameter.
1 INTRODUCTION
People awareness of a healthy lifestyle has improved
over the years (Ballestrazzi et al., 2011; Kher et al.,
2013; Vukasović, 2017). This has caused diet pattern
changes (Vukasović, 2017), especially the type of
daily foods. People do not only care about nutrition,
but also ways to improve health and to reduce the risk
of diseases. In this condition, functional food has
risen as a food choice.
The consumption of functional food increases
every year (Kearney, 2010). It happens in all
industrial countries (Kearney, 2010). The demand for
foods and beverages that are physiologically
beneficial is rising in many countries (Diplock et al.,
1999). In addition, research related to functional
foods have been widely conducted and published.
Even in the food industry, functional foods became
one of the most interesting research topics
(Annunziata & Vecchio, 2011; Siró et al., 2008).
Unfortunately, although there has been a lot of
research related to functional food, as far as the
Authors concerned, studies related to consumer
perceived quality of functional foods are still limited.
Though this is important because the success of
functional foods rely on the relationships between
consumers and products (Frewer et al., 2003).
Specifically, consumers perception of functional
foods quality affects consumers acceptance (Urala,
2005). Most research on functional foods focused on
the technical aspect of product (e.g., Ma et al., 2019;
Maeda-Yamamoto, 2017; Ramírez et al., 2011; Holdt
& Kraan, 2011; Silva et al., 2018), consumer
awareness (e.g., Christidis et al., 2011; Gok & Ulu
2019; Bazhan et al., 2017), purchase
intention/willingness to buy (e.g., Rezai et al., 2017;
Markovina et al., 2011), and consumer attitude (e.g.,
Markovina et al., 2011; Schnettler et al., 2016).
Another issue related to functional food is there is
still no agreed-upon definition of a functional food
(Vukasović, 2017; Patch et al., 2004; Krystallis et al.,
2008; Veeman, 2002). Scrinis (2008) argued that
there was no credible definition of functional food
that can distinguish its position with other types of
food. In Indonesia, there has not been an established
and clear definition of functional food. The term
‘functional food’ has been omitted from the
regulation and functional food was included in ‘food
with claim’ category.
Based on the narration above, this research aims
to identify consumers’ perception of functional foods
that include the definition, the form, the definition of
166
Rakhmawati, T., Sumaedi, S., Bakti, I., Astrini, N. and Yarmen, M.
Consumers’ Perception of the Definition and Quality Parameters of Functional Food: A Qualitative Study.
DOI: 10.5220/0009986500002964
In Proceedings of the 16th ASEAN Food Conference (16th AFC 2019) - Outlook and Opportunities of Food Technology and Culinary for Tourism Industry, pages 166-172
ISBN: 978-989-758-467-1
Copyright
c
2022 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
high-quality functional foods, and the quality
parameters of functional foods. This research is a
contribution for governments in converging the
definition of functional foods that can be approved by
stakeholders, educating the public, and formulating
functional foods quality standard.
2 METHODS
This study employed a qualitative research method.
Data was gathered through interviews on eleven
functional foods’ consumers separately to ensure
independence. Informants represented five age
groups, which are 17-19 years old (student age), 20-
23 years old (college students age), 24-35 years old
(young), 36-50 years old (middle age), and above 50
years old (senior). Each group was represented by at
least two informants consisting of one female and one
male informant, except for the college student group
(only one female). Before each interview began, this
study screened the potential informants to ensure that
they consumed functional foods in the last month.
Data gathered included informants’ demographic
profiles, knowledge on functional foods, the
definition of functional foods according to them,
functional foods they consumed in the last month, the
form of functional foods, the definition of high-
quality functional foods, and the quality parameters
of functional foods. An interview guideline was used
as an instrument to guide the data-gathering process.
The interviews were also recorded to assist with data
analysis.
The demographic profile was analyzed using
descriptive statistics. Data related to the definition of
functional foods, the definition of high-quality
functional foods, and the quality parameters of
functional foods were analyzed using a thematic
analysis method.
3 RESULTS
Data from the interviews were analyzed. Table 1
shows the informants demographic profile. This
study involved five male informants and six female
informants. They represented five age groups. The
lowest education level was high-school and
informants hold various jobs.
Table 2 shows the informants’ knowledge on the
term ‘functional food’, the definition of functional
foods, the form of functional foods, and the functional
food they ate in the last month. Based on the
interviews, three out of eleven informants were
familiar with the term, while the rest were not. When
the interviewer mentioned several product brands
which according to the interviewer were functional
food products, eight informants said that those were
‘health foods’.
The interview results showed that informants
have their own ways to define functional foods (some
informants call it health foods). However,
thematically, functional foods or health foods can be
defined as foods or beverages which are
physiologically beneficial because they supply the
nutrients needed by the body, supply beneficial
compounds, promote health, or prevent diseases.
Functional foods can be fresh or processed. Based on
the interviews, the informants consumed various
functional or health foods in the past month, foods
and beverages.
Table 3 shows the definition of quality functional
foods or health foods according to informants and the
criteria they usually used to differentiate between
low-quality functional foods and high-quality
functional foods. Most of the informants explained
the definitions of quality functional foods by
describing their criteria or characteristics. The criteria
include physical attributes (e.g., taste, texture,
density, color, sugar content, calorie, and nutrition)
and non-physical attributes (e.g., price,
recommendation, image, and label).
Table 1: Informants profile.
Informants
Gender
Age
Education
Occupation
1
Male
17 years old
High school (ongoing)
Student
2
Female
17 years old
High school (ongoing)
Student
3
Male
19 years old
High school
Unemployed
4
Female
22 years old
Bachelor’s degree (Hons)
Student
5
Male
30 years old
Bachelor’s degree
Civil servant
6
Female
33 years old
Bachelor’s degree (Hons)
Entrepreneur
7
Female
28 years old
College Diploma
Employee
8
Male
47 years old
Master’s degree
Employee
9
Female
36 years old
Master’s degree
Civil servant
10
Male
60 years old
Bachelor’s degree (Hons)
Employee
11
Female
62 years old
Bachelor’s degree
Retired
Consumers’ Perception of the Definition and Quality Parameters of Functional Food: A Qualitative Study
167
Table 2: The definitions of functional foods and forms of functional foods.
Informants
Knowledge of functional
foods
Definitions
Functional foods are
eaten in the last month
1
Didn’t know, I knew about
health foods
Health foods are foods that
have good nutrition
Probiotic drinks
2
Didn’t know, I knew about
health foods
Health foods are foods that
have good nutrition needed for
the body
Yogurt, fruit and
vegetable juice,
probiotic drink, granola
bar
3
I knew about functional
foods
Functional foods are products
that encourage us to be healthy
Yogurt, probiotic
drink, cereal
4
Didn’t know, I knew about
health foods
Health foods are foods that are
good for our body and can help
prevent diseases
Fruit juice
5
I knew about functional
foods
Functional foods are foods that
have health benefits, nutrition,
and specific targets
Yogurt, cereal,
fermented drink, snack
bar
6
Didn’t know, I knew about
health foods
Health foods are foods that do
not have negative impacts for
our bodies, have balanced
nutrition, no MSG, organic, not
too oily, not too salty or sugary,
and are regarded as a part of a
balanced diet
Oatmeal
7
Didn’t know, I knew about
health foods
Health foods are foods with the
necessary nutrition, good
composition (carbohydrate,
protein, vitamin), and fulfil our
needs with that good
compositions
Oatmeal, whole-grain
bread
8
Didn’t know, I knew about
health foods
Health foods are nutritious
foods that do not cause diseases
like cholesterols and diabetes
Omega-3 eggs, yogurt,
granola
9
I knew about functional
foods
Functional foods are foods that
supply beneficial compounds
needed for our body, to add
compounds to the daily diet
Probiotic drink
10
Didn’t know, I knew about
health foods
Health foods are nutritional
foods, which are good for the
body
Drinks with vitamin
11
Didn’t know, I knew about
health foods
Health foods are foods that
have complete compositions,
like carbohydrate and protein
needed for our body. We don’t
need to eat much, but complete
Drinks with collagen
Table 4 shows the quality parameters, which are
the results of the thematic analysis of functional food
or health food definitions, quality functional food or
health food, and the distinguishing criteria based on
informants’ perception. In this study, the functional
food quality parameters are limited to quality
parameters for functional food in the form of
processed food. This is in accordance with the
National Agency of Drug and Food Control (BPOM)
provisions that include functional food or food with
health claims in certain processed food categories.
Based on the thematic analysis, there are 36
quality parameters of functional foods. Based on the
constructs, those parameters can be categorized into
nine dimensions of perceived quality, which are
health benefits, nutrition, ingredients, production
process, regulatory compliance, safety, sensory
characteristics, information, and convenience.
16th AFC 2019 - ASEAN Food Conference
168
Table 3: The definitions of functional foods according to informants.
Informants
Definitions of quality functional foods or health foods
Criteria
1
Quality health foods are foods that can help maintain health
Taste, package, brand, label, health
benefit
2
Quality health foods are foods that have good appearance,
healthy composition, and belongs to a brand that is famous
for its good image
Appearance (package), texture, sugar
content, physiological effect, nutrition
content, density
3
Quality functional foods are the ones that have been
approved by Badan Pengawas Obat dan Makanan or BPOM
(National Agency of Drug and Food Control) (tested)
Taste, health benefit
4
Quality health foods are products which health benefits are
intact when they reach consumers hands and consumers can
feel the benefits of consuming those products, (they are also)
recommended
Claim, benefits, recommendation
5
Quality functional foods are products that have been
approved by BPOM (tested)
Taste, halal certificate, price, image, test
results, nutrition content, package,
practicality
6
Quality health foods are products that belong to a long-
standing brand, products that contain the necessary nutrition,
filling, and affordable.
Label, ingredients, physical appearance:
freshness & color, calorie, sugar content,
variation, density, naturalness, purity,
taste, physiological impact, not an
allergen, texture, aroma, easiness in
cooking
7
Quality health foods are natural, homemade (better than
processed foods) and cooked/made with healthy ways
Taste, sugar content, calorie, nutrition,
protein, satiety index, naturalness,
texture, ingredients, freshness, can be
consumed by anybody
8
Quality health foods are healthy, do not cause any disease,
low in calorie, and low in sugar
Freshness, taste, hygiene, expired date,
calorie, sugar content, physiological
benefit, side effects (do not cause
diseases), package, texture
9
Quality functional foods are tasty and physiologically
beneficial. They have health claims and data to support them
Taste, benefits, claims and data,
recommendation
10
Quality health foods are foods with many vitamins and
nutrition. They are tasty and their package designs are
interesting and built using good materials. They give
adequate information on the package and they have nice
aroma
Vitamin and nutrition, taste, package
(material, design, and information),
aroma
11
Quality health foods are natural foods. They were not
excessively processed and did not have negative effects on
our body
Naturalness, health benefits (including
disease prevention), conformity with self-
needs, negative effects, processing (was
not excessively processed)
Table 4: Functional Food Quality Parameters.
No
Quality Parameters
(The food…)
Quality Dimensions
1
Has clear health benefits claim
Health benefits
2
Is supported by strong evidence/data that it has health benefits
3
Has a proven claim
4
Has a positive real physiological impact after consumption
5
Contains specific functional components that have special functions to
maintain health
6
Fulfils my health need
7
Has many vitamins and minerals
Nutrition
8
Does not have to be consumed in large quantity, but provides high nutrition
9
Has complete nutrition
Consumers’ Perception of the Definition and Quality Parameters of Functional Food: A Qualitative Study
169
Table 4: Functional Food Quality Parameters. (Cont.)
No
Quality Parameters
(The food…)
Quality Dimensions
10
Is low in salt, sugar, and fat
Ingredients
11
Has a healthy composition
12
Has safe materials
13
Uses minimum artificial/chemical additives
14
Uses many natural ingredients
15
Has been through a healthy and hygienic production process
Production process
16
Has not been excessively processed
17
Has official approval
Regulatory compliance
18
Has passed tests from an independent laboratory
19
Has certification to ensure quality, safety, and halal status
20
Does not cause an allergic reaction or negative effects
Safety
21
Has a safe package (does not endanger health and food)
22
Is clean and hygienic
23
Has a high satiety index and hydrating
Sensory characteristics
24
Is tasty
25
Has many flavours
26
Has a suitable texture
27
Has a pleasant aroma
28
Has an interesting and natural colour
29
Has an interesting appearance
30
Has an interesting and good packaging
31
Has an appropriate picture on the package/add
Information
32
Has a complete and easy-to-understand information/label
33
Can be consumed by anybody
Convenience
34
Is practical
35
Is easy to find
36
Is easy to prepare and consume
4 DISCUSSION
Most informants who engaged in this study were not
familiar with the term ‘functional foods’. To them,
those foods were ‘health foods’. Informants
unfamiliarity might be because the term ‘functional
food’ is not used in the current regulation, so the
public was not aware of it.
In this study, the informants defined functional
foods (or health foods) in various ways. Various
definitions of functional food are also found in the
literature (Vukasović, 2017; Patch et al., 2004;
Krystallis et al., 2008; Veeman, 2002). Based on
thematic analysis, functional foods (or health foods)
according to informants are foods which offer health
benefits by fulfilling nutritional needs or other
beneficial compounds, promoting health, and
preventing diseases. Furthermore, all informants in
this study agreed that both fresh and processed foods
could be functional (or health) foods. Regardless of
its suitability with the concept of functional food in
the literature, this study provides a definition of
functional food based on the perception of 11
functional food consumers.
Regarding the quality of functional foods, there
were similarities and differences among the
informants when they were asked about criteria to
evaluate the quality of functional foods. According to
the literature on consumer behavior, perceived quality
is subjective. Personal factors also influenced
consumers (Oude Ophuis & Van Trijp, 1995).
Therefore, it is very likely that opinion among
informants would be different. It might be because
they have different needs and concerns regarding
food products. For example, for Informants 1, 3, 5, 6,
7, 8, 9, dan 10, the taste was one of the criteria to
evaluate the quality of functional foods. On the other
hand, Informants 2, 4, and 11 did not consider it as a
quality measure. The first informant group liked tasty
foods. Therefore, “taste” became an important quality
criterion. The second group did not consider taste as
an important factor. They could still tolerate the trade-
off between taste with other attributes (for example,
health benefits, nutritional needs, etc.).
16th AFC 2019 - ASEAN Food Conference
170
Quality parameters gathered have been
categorized into nine functional foods quality
dimensions, which are health benefits, nutrition,
ingredients, production process, regulatory
compliance, safety, sensory characteristics,
information, and convenience.
The dimension “health benefits” measures to what
extent functional foods can provide real physiological
benefits that match their claims. The dimension
“nutrition” evaluates the extent to which the
completeness of nutrition, compound, and component
of the functional food or health food needed by our
body. The third dimension, “ingredients,” represents
the goodness of content/ingredients of functional or
health foods, seen from the level and
nature/characteristics. “Production process”
evaluates the extent to which the functional food
production process can maintain the quality of the
product so that it matches its claims. The dimension
“regulation” explains to what extent the functional
food product complies with the regulation or food
standard. “Safety” refers to how safe the food to
consume while the “sensory characteristics”
dimension illustrates the extent to which functional
food is acceptable to human senses or in accordance
with the preferences of human senses. The dimension
“information” evaluates the completeness, clarity,
and suitability of functional food product information
provides in its packaging. Finally, the “convenience”
dimension assesses how easy the functional food
products can be obtained and consumed.
4.1 Theoretical Implication
This study fills gaps in the literature related to the
perceived quality of functional foods by providing a
definition of functional food according to consumer
perception. The definition was formed based on
consumers’ knowledge of functional food. It is still
rarely done by previous research.
In addition, this research also identifies 36 quality
parameters of functional food based on consumers'
perception and grouping them into nine dimensions.
The quality dimensions of functional foods according
to consumer perceptions are similar to the quality
dimensions of food mentioned by previous studies
with more emphasis on the existence of health claims
and the proof or the real physiological benefits felt as
claimed. For example, health, safety, and sensory
attributes were used to measure quality of shellfish by
Wang & Somogyi (2018); safety, sensory,
convenience, and nutrition were used to measure
quality of Kale (Brassica oleracea O.) by Lagerkvist
et al. (2012); safety, nutrition, and sensory were
quality dimensions of organic and conventional pork
according to Grebitus et al. (2011); process quality
was a measure of meat products quality in a research
by Paustian et al. (2016); ingredients and processing
was used to measure quality of specialty food by
Calvo-Porral & Lévy-Mangin (2018); and regulations
was a measure of domestic food quality according to
Vabø et al. (2016).
4.2 Managerial Implication
This research provides information about consumers’
knowledge of functional foods, functional food
definition, and functional food quality parameters.
The government can use this result as an input in
defining functional food, creating public education
program, and establishing a quality standard for
functional foods aside from the objective quality
parameter.
4.3 Future Research
This study has two limitations. First, this study only
involved eleven people through convenience
sampling. Second, the subjective quality parameters
of functional foods were developed only based on
informants’ perception and have not been empirically
tested. Therefore, similar studies involving more
consumers are needed to enrich these quality
parameters. Aside from that, these quality parameters
need to be complemented with quality parameters
from the literature and empirically tested in the
context of various functional foods to ensure its
stability and generability.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study is funded through Insentif Riset Sistem
Inovasi Nasional (National Innovation System
Research Incentive) The Ministry of Research and
Higher Education of the Republic of Indonesia.
REFERENCES
Annunziata, A. & Vecchio, R. 2011. Functional foods
development in the European market: A consumer
perspective. Journal of Functional Foods, 3(3): 223-
228.
Ballestrazzi, R., Mason, M. C. & Nassivera, F. 2011. Green
marketing and renewable energy: Evidence on
motivations and behaviour in the aquacultural market.
Chinese Business Review, 10(12): 111–112.
Consumers’ Perception of the Definition and Quality Parameters of Functional Food: A Qualitative Study
171
Bazhan, M., Keshavarz-Mohammadi, N., Hosseini, H. &
Kalantari, N. 2017. Consumers’ awareness and
perceptions regarding functional dairy products in Iran.
British Food Journal, 119(2): 253-266.
Calvo-Porral, C. & Levy-Mangin, J.-P. 2016. Specialty
food retailing: The role of purchase
frequency and determinants of customer satisfaction
and loyalty. British Food Journal, 118(11): 2798-2814.
Christidis, N., Tsoulfa, G., Varagunam, M. &
Babatzimopoulou, M. 2011. A cross sectional study of
consumer awareness of functional foods in
Thessaloniki, Greece. Nutrition & Food Science, 41(3):
165-174.
Diplock, A. T., Aggett, P. J., Ashwell, M., Bornet, F., Fern,
E. B. & Roberfroid, M. B. 1999. Scientific concepts of
functional foods in Europe: consensus document.
British Journal of Nutrition, 81: S1-S27.
Frewer, L., Scholderer, J. & Lambert, N. 2003. Consumer
acceptance of functional foods: issues for the future. Br.
Food J., 105: 714–731.
Gok, I. & Ulu, E. 2019. Functional foods in Turkey:
marketing, consumer awareness and regulatory aspects.
Nutrition & Food Science, 49(4): 668-686.
Grebitus, C., Yue, C., Bruhn, M. & Jensen, H. H. 2011.
Perceived quality in organic and conventional pork
markets in Germany. Food Econimics – Acta Agricult
Scand, Section C, 8: 187-199.
Holdt, S. L. & Kraan, S. 2011. Bioactive compounds in
seaweed: functional food applications and legislation.
Journal of Applied Phycology, 23(3): 543–597.
Kearney, J. 2010. Food consumption trends and drivers.
Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B,
365: 2793-2807.
Kher, S. V., De Jonge, J., Wentholt, M. T. A., Deliza, R.,
de Andrade, J. C., Cnossen, H. J., Luijckx, N. B. L. &
Frewer, L. J. 2013. Consumer perceptions of risks of
chemical and microbiological contaminants associated
with food chains: A cross‐national study. International
Journal of Consumer Studies, 37(1): 73–83.
Krystallis, A., Maglaras, G. & Mamalis, S. 2008.
Motivations and cognitive structures of consumers in
their purchasing of functional foods. Food Quality and
Preference, 19: 525–538.
Lagerkvist, C. J., Okello, J. & Karanja, N. 2012. Anchored
vs. relative best–worst scaling and latent class vs.
Hierarchical Bayesian analysis of best–worst choice
data: Investigating the importance of food quality
attributes in a developing country. Food Quality and
Preference, 25: 29–40.
Ma, Y., Tang, P. T. P., McClure, D. D., Valtchev, P.,
Ashton, J. F., Dehghani, F. & Kavanagh, J. M. 2019.
Development of a menaquinone-7 enriched functional
food. Food and Bioproducts Processing, 117: 258-265.
Maeda-Yamamoto, M. 2017. Development of functional
agricultural products and use of a new health claim
system in Japan. Trends in Food Science & Technology,
69: 324-332.
Markovina, J., Čačić, J., Gajdoš Kljusurić, J. & Kovačić, D.
2011. Young consumers' perception of functional foods
in Croatia. British Food Journal, 113(1): 7-16.
Oude Ophuis, P.A.M. & Van Trijp, H.C.M. 1995.
Perceived quality: a market driven and
consumer oriented approach. Food Quality and
Preference, 6(3): 177-183.
Patch, C. S., Tapsell, L. C. & Williams, P. G. 2004.
Dietetics and functional foods. Nutrition & Dietetics,
61: 21–29.
Paustian, M., Reinecke, F. E. & Theuvsen, L. 2016.
Consumer preferences for regional meat products.
British Food Journal, 118(11): 2761-2780.
Ramírez, J. A., Uresti, R. M., Velazquez, G. & Vázquez.
2011. Food hydrocolloids as additives to improve the
mechanical and functional properties of fish products:
A review. Food Hydrocolloids, 25: 1842-1852.
Rezai, G., Teng, P., Shamsudin, M., Mohamed, Z. &
Stanton, J. 2017. Effect of perceptual differences on
consumer purchase intention of natural functional food.
Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging
Economies, 7(2): 153-173.
Schnettler, B., Adasme-Berríos, C., Grunert, K., Márquez,
M., Lobos, G., Salinas-Oñate, N., Orellana, L. &
Sepúlveda, J. 2016. The relation between attitudes
toward functional foods and satisfaction with food-
related life. British Food Journal, 118(9): 2234-2250.
Scrinis, G. 2008. Functional foods or functionally marketed
foods? A critique of, and alternatives to, the category of
“functional foods.” Public Health Nutrition, 11(5):
541–545.
Silva, M. A., Albuquerque, T. G., Alves, R. C., Oliveira, M.
B. P. P. & Costa H. S. 2018. Melon (Cucumis melo L.)
by-products: Potential food ingredients for novel
functional foods?. Trends in Food Science &
Technology. In Press, Corrected Proof. DOI:
10.1016/j.tifs.2018.07.005.
Siró, I., Kápolna, E., Kápolna, B. & Lugasi, A. 2008.
Functional food. Product development, marketing and
consumer acceptance—A review. Appetite, 51: 456-
467.
Urala, N. 2005. Functional foods in Finland: Consumers’
views, attitudes and willingness to use. VTT
Publications, Finland.
Vabø, M., Hansen, H., Hansen, K. V. & Kraggerud, H.
2015. Ethnocentrism and Domestic Food Choice:
Insights from an Affluent Protectionist Market. Journal
of Food Products Marketing, DOI:
10.1080/10454446.2015.1048025.
Veeman, M. 2002. Policy development for novel foods:
issues and challenges for functional foods. Canadian
Journal of Agricultural Economics, 50: 527-539.
Vukasović, T. Functional foods in line with young
consumers: challenges in the marketplace in Slovenia.
In Bagchi, D. & Nair, S. 2017. Developing New
Functional Food and Nutraceutical Products. 1st
Edition. Academic Press, USA.
Wang, O. & Somogyi, S. 2018. Chinese consumers and
shellfish: Associations between perception, quality,
attitude and consumption. Food Quality and Preference,
66: 52–63.
16th AFC 2019 - ASEAN Food Conference
172