Hemp as a food source was unavailable in Australia prior to the change in legislation in November 2017.Hemp’s rich history combined with the recent change in legal status has provided an ideal exemplar to evaluate the introduction of a unique novel food into the Australian consumer market.This study aims to understand which factors contribute to the early adoption of hemp by comparing attributes of individuals who have consumed hemp food to those who have chosen not to,one year after its introduction to the Australian market.The process of diffusion of a product throughout a population becomes an underlying factor in our understanding of the acceptance of novel food products.Rogers’ application of diffusion of innovation in new product acceptance,and its subsequent redefinition ,remains a widely accepted framework for acceptance of novel products throughout a population.diffusion is reported to be determined by “a chain of influence from the earlier adoption groups to the later adoption groups” ,therefore placing importance on understanding group differences not only in the early adoption of a product,but also in predicting where group influence from early adopters to later adoptees becomes an instrumental part of the diffusion process.The current study sought to evaluate group differences between hemp food consumer groups at an early point after its introduction to the Australian market in order to help define the factors integral to the diffusion process.diffusion of a novel product does not occur in isolation but within a broader context of policy,structure,and systems.However,understanding the motivations of consumers to adopt a product and how perception differs between adoption groups provides insight to the trajectory of a novel product within this system.Each adoption group is defined according to where in the diffusion process a consumer first uses a novel product,and are shown in Fig.1.Each group display characteristics common among its members that cumulatively influence their perception and attitude toward a novel product,with these characteristics occurring within a whole population in a normal distribution,as would be expected of behavioural and personality traits.
Innovators and early adopters share some attributes that result in their having early product knowledge,be open to innovation,microgreen rack for sale and serve as role models within the diffusion process to trigger further adoption in others.In contrast,adoption by early and late majority groups is largely due to peer pressure,and laggards are the last within a social system to adopt a novel product,needing reassurance of a product’s worth and knowledge of the product that alleviates suspicion of it before final acceptance.Non-adopters are considered separate to the adopter groups under the diffusion model and are those consumers whose traits contribute to a value judgement of how beneficial the novel product is to them,and who decide that there are insufficient benefits to its adoption.While non-adopters will never take up the novel product,there will be stages throughout the diffusion process defined by where consumers who will ultimately become adopters have not yet accepted the novel product.During this time,understanding the attributes of each of the groups and the sequential nature of the process might help define where along the adoption continuum time line the acceptance of a product currently sits.More recent models of diffusion of novel products incorporate feedback loops to define the social factors influencing product adoption and while it is beyond the scope of this paper to evaluate the dynamics of social influence on product adoption,it is important to mention that this model continues to place importance on path dependence of the process,particularly the need to understand the attributes of each of the adoption groups within the sequential diffusion process.For clarity of definition between the theorised and study sample groups,the study cohorts will be described in this paper as hemp group and non-hemp group,and Rogers’ innovation groups referred to by their empirically reported names as demonstrated in Fig.1.The hemp group are defined as those study participants who reported having consumed hemp food at the time of the study,and the non-hemp group are defined as those study participants who reported knowing that hemp food had been legalised,knew of a place that hemp food was sold,and had not at the time of the study consumed hemp food.It was anticipated that the hemp group would comprise mostly early adopters as well as some early majority adopter members,and that the non-hemp group would largely comprise those who would remain non-adopters but may also include some early and late majority adopters and laggards who had not yet made the decision to consume but would do so at some time in the future.
Non-hemp group members who reported not knowing a place where hemp food could be purchased were excluded from the study.It was anticipated that understanding the predicted trajectory of the diffusion process might reap benefits for the hemp food industry,and provide insight into the diffusion of a novel food product in the Australian population.Intrinsic to the diffusion process is the compatibility of the novel product to the belief systems,needs and values of consumers adopting the product.The rate and degree of diffusion of a novel product is reported to occur throughout a population according to these factors,including specific value judgements of potential adoptees,and their amenability to certain external effects,including product promotion and price.The Food Choice Questionnaire has been empirically demonstrated to be a reliable and valid measure of several of the factors that impact on these value judgements and was adopted as a measure of these factors in the current study.Food neophobia is often considered to be the greatest barrier to acceptance of novel foods.Food neophobia,literally meaning a fear of new food,is considered an enduring personality trait of evolutionary origins which can be conceptualised as the avoidance factor along a “neophobia-neophilia continuum” according to con-sumers’ propensity to avoid novel foods,or be drawn toward them.It has been consistently found to be not only a significant barrier to the acceptance of novel food ,but also a barrier to dietary change,particularly where behavioural modification is needed to address diet related health problems,and has been demonstrated to be associated more generally with reduced dietary varietal intake.Food neophobia has been reported to be inversely related to food satisfaction,as well as more generally to life satisfaction.According to Rogers’ description of adopter groups,“laggards tend to be suspicious of innovation and change agents”,with any adoption of novel products “lagging far behind awareness-knowledge” of the novel products.The highest rates of food neophobia would be expected to be reported by both laggards,and those consumers whose aversion contributes to their choice to never consume the food,the non-hemp group.It was hypothesised that the avoidance of hemp food demonstrated by the non-hemp group in the current study was largely representative of trait food neophobia,and that this group would score higher in the FNS than the hemp consumers.
Factors contributing to food choice behaviour are drawn from evolutionary survival needs,neuropsychological processes in response to sensory input,biological and learned responses,and a myriad of sociocultural influences.Vabo and Hansen reported from a broad review of consumer marketing and food science literature that while many factors contributed similarly to both food choice and food preference,there were many facets of food choice that were distinct from food preference.Where preference for foods is largely developed early in life,much of it in the first five years,food choice is a dynamic phenomenon which can change along with situational and personal changes.Additionally,socially constructed associations based on previous experience and beliefs can influence consumers’ evaluation of food in the marketplace.These dynamics of food choice may apply to hemp foods where,for example,an association with hemp’s illegal cousin,marijuana,might negatively impact acceptance.Rasco reported a similar phenomenon where consumer perceptions toward specific aquatic foods were detrimentally affected by negative associations made to mercury,drug residue,and environmental contaminants through the actions of activists.While consumer concerns were reported to be unfounded,it was clear that negative consumer perceptions had a negative impact on fish consumption.Therefore,despite many similarities with other novel foods the association hemp has with marijuana,or more specifically with tetrahydrocannabinol ,creates a unique circumstance which should be evaluated in conjunction with hemp food acceptance.It was hypothesised that in a similar way that consumer perceptions of aquatic foods was impacted through negative associations,the association of hemp food with marijuana would impact the acceptance of hemp food.Additional factors considered to be influential in the dynamics of food choice include those measured by the Food Choice Questionnaire.Since its inception,the FCQ has been employed within a multitude of contexts evaluating the acceptance of novel foods.Adopting a shortened version of the FCQ,Annunziata et al.found price,convenience,health concerns,and suspicion of reliability of product information contributed to negative attitudes toward functional foods for older consumers.Jaeger et al.found health,mood,convenience,and sensory appeal were more important considerations for New Zealand consumers than natural content,price,cannabis grow facility layout and weight control across a variety of foods,and that familiarity increased in importance for consumers high in food neophobia.Schlup and Brunner found health and convenience have significant positive relationships with a willingness to consume a novel food,insects,while a higher importance placed on familiarity meant that consumers were inclined to prefer more familiar products,resulting in a significant negative relationship with willingness to consume the insects.
Findings from several studies ,each employing the FCQ to determine factors influencing novel food acceptance,support the suitability of the measure in determining differences in food choice priorities between the hemp and non-hemp groups.It was hypothesised that a higher priority placed by the non-hemp group on factors contributing to food choice might indicate greater complexity in the decision to consume,a notion supported in the literature where it was reported there is an increase in complexity of the decision making process as food neophobia increased.The anticipated capture of late adopters and laggards within the non-hemp group was expected to contribute to an overall higher level of food neophobia for that group.It was expected that eight constructs have a static relationship to choice for each individual throughout the diffusion model.In contrast,price,acts in a different way as its influence is fluid,differing in importance according to the current status of the diffusion of the novel product rather than the attributes of the product itself.Socioeconomic factors are determined to play an important role in the adoption decision early in the diffusion process but have a much lesser impact later in the diffusion process when pressure of social norms cause economic considerations to be placed aside,adding to the complexity of the decision making process.The notion of increased complexity in decision making for individuals reluctant to accept novel foods is supported by a means-end-chain methodology evaluation of the emotional influence on purchase behaviour toward novel foods.The relationship of food choice motivation with complexity in the decision making process leads to a prediction that factors measured by the FCQ will have a higher reported importance in the current study for those consumers less willing to consume the novel food,the non-hemp consumers’ group members.The current study sought to define differences between individuals who had consumed hemp and those who had not,one year after its legalisation,with the aim of understanding differences in motivation toward adoption of a novel product,hemp food.Using Rogers’ model of diffusion of a novel product throughout a population,it was firstly hypothesised that trait food neophobia would contribute to the non-adoption of hemp food,demonstrated by a higher score on the food neophobia scale for the non-hemp group.While a difference was reported between the groups,it was not in the direction expected.Rogers’ outline of attributes for adoption groups leads to a suggestion that the unexpected inverse direction of the difference between the study cohorts might indicate that laggards have been captured in the hemp group which was thought to be comprised primarily of the early adopters of hemp food.Food neophobia is expected to correlate with suspicion of a novel product and avoidance behaviour as would be expected to be displayed by laggards and non-adopters.While there is no standardised time frame for diffusion of a novel product throughout a population and variation between similar products can be several decades ,the finding of higher food neophobia in those who have already consumed hemp food suggests the hemp group has captured a greater diversity of consumers than merely the early adopters.One conclusion that might be drawn from this is that diffusion of hemp food has reached a later stage than was anticipated prior to the study.