Consumer Awareness, Product Recognition and Stated Willingness to Pay for GI-Tagged Agricultural Products: An Empirical Study
R. Ravikumar *
Department of Agricultural Economics, Vanavarayar Institute of Agriculture, Manakkadavu, Pollachi – 642 103, Tamil Nadu, India.
S. Sanofia
Vanavarayar Institute of Agriculture, Manakkadavu, Pollachi – 642 103, Tamil Nadu, India.
S. Ragavendhar
Vanavarayar Institute of Agriculture, Manakkadavu, Pollachi – 642 103, Tamil Nadu, India.
G. Raghavi
Vanavarayar Institute of Agriculture, Manakkadavu, Pollachi – 642 103, Tamil Nadu, India.
K. Rajkumar
Vanavarayar Institute of Agriculture, Manakkadavu, Pollachi – 642 103, Tamil Nadu, India.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
This study assessed consumer awareness, recognition of individual GI-tagged agricultural products, perceptions of GI-related attributes, stated willingness to pay a premium, and preferred promotional channels among visitors to a GI-product consumer expo in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu. Methodology: Primary data were collected from 90 consumers using a structured questionnaire and purposive sampling. Consumer responses to GI-related statements were measured on a five-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise consumer responses, while binary logistic regression was used as an exploratory analysis of associations between selected perception variables and stated willingness to pay a premium. Results: General understanding of GI certification was relatively high (mean score 4.20), whereas the ability to identify GI-tagged products was substantially lower (2.75), indicating an awareness–recognition gap. Perceptions of authenticity and origin were particularly favourable (4.65), as were perceptions of quality and trustworthiness (4.45 each). Seventy-five of the 90 respondents (83.33%) stated that they were willing to pay a premium for GI-tagged products; however, this represents stated premium acceptance rather than an observed monetary price premium. The exploratory logistic regression based on 86 complete observations was not statistically significant (likelihood-ratio χ² = 2.613, df = 4, P = .625; Nagelkerke R² = .052), and none of the four explanatory variables was individually significant. Promotional preferences were highest for school/college awareness programmes (29.7%), followed by television/print media (27.0%) and social media (20.7%). Conclusion: The principal finding is a substantial gap between conceptual awareness of GI certification and recognition of specific GI products. Strengthening product-level labelling, GI-logo visibility, retailer communication and consumer education may help translate general awareness into effective market recognition. Larger probability-based samples and monetary WTP measures are required for stronger inference.
Keywords: Geographical indication, consumer awareness, product recognition, stated willingness to pay, agricultural marketing, GI products, consumer perception