Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

Descriptive summaries of consumer’s general preference for local rice and imported rice
| Groups | Count | Sum | Mean | Variance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tastic (A) | 105 | 713.8 | 6.798095238 | 3.91807326 |
| Irriga (B) | 105 | 582.2 | 5.544761905 | 5.38884249 |
| Supa (C) | 105 | 528.8 | 5.036190476 | 5.47290842 |
Consumer’s preference for intrinsic attributes of cooked and uncooked local and imported rice
| Uncooked rice | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attribute | Tastic A | Irriga B | Supa C | p-value |
| Smell/fragrance/aroma | 6.52 | 6.09 | 5.05 | 0.000046 |
| Size of grain | 7.10 | 5.59 | 5.45 | 0.0000000939392 |
| Shape of kernel | 6.76 | 5.79 | 5.45 | 0.0001 |
| Colour of rice | 6.67 | 6.29 | 5.56 | 0.0052 |
| Texture/feel | 6.98 | 6.25 | 5.74 | 0.000315623 |
Descriptive statistics for WTP for local and imported rice
| Sample of rice type | M ± SD | F-statistic | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uncooked rice | A (Tastic) | 28.68 ±24.42 | ||
| B (Irriga) | 25.98 ±18.06 | 5.32 | 0.0054 | |
| C (Supa) | 20.05 ±10.11 | |||
| Cooked rice | A (Tastic) | 25.45 ±18.47 | ||
| B (Irriga) | 23.70 ±11.11 | 8.32 | 0.00037 | |
| C (Supa) | 18.03 ±9.56 |
Parameter estimates for willingness to pay
| Predictor variables | B | Std. Error | Wald | p-value | Exp(B) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rice B | Intercept | 0.291 | 1.240 | 0.055 | 0.814 | |
| smell | –0.076 | 0.128 | 0.354 | 0.552 | 0.927 | |
| texture | 0.020 | 0.137 | 0.020 | 0.887 | 1.020 | |
| taste | –0.199 | 0.186 | 1.141 | 0.285 | 0.820 | |
| shape | –0.082 | 0.184 | 0.200 | 0.655 | 0.921 | |
| stickiness | –0.149 | 0.162 | 0.847 | 0.357 | 0.862 | |
| swelling capacity | 0.256 | 0.183 | 1.954 | 0.162 | 1.291 | |
| packaging | 0.084 | 0.155 | 0.297 | 0.586 | 1.088 | |
| brand | 0.126 | 0.172 | 0.531 | 0.466 | 1.134 | |
| label | –0.156 | 0.139 | 1.267 | 0.260 | 0.855 | |
| price | –0.148 | 0.175 | 0.716 | 0.398 | 0.862 | |
| promotion | 0.243 | 0.143 | 2.866 | 0.090 | 1.275 | |
| Rice C | Intercept | 2.041 | 1.172 | 3.032 | 0.082 | |
| smell | 0.001 | 0.168 | 0.000 | 0.997 | 1.001 | |
| texture | 0.122 | 0.176 | 0.479 | 0.489 | 1.129 | |
| taste | 0.020 | 0.187 | 0.012 | 0.914 | 1.020 | |
| shape | –0.029 | 0.215 | 0.018 | 0.893 | 0.971 | |
| stickiness | –0.033 | 0.191 | 0.031 | 0.861 | 0.967 | |
| swelling capacity | –0.329 | 0.177 | 3.472 | 0.062 | 0.719 | |
| packaging | –0.165 | 0.190 | 0.756 | 0.385 | 0.848 | |
| brand | 0.106 | 0.194 | 0.302 | 0.582 | 1.112 | |
| label | 0.092 | 0.180 | 0.263 | 0.608 | 1.096 | |
| price | –0.501 | 0.209 | 5.730 | 0.017 | 0.606 | |
| promotion | 0.329 | 0.190 | 2.986 | 0.084 | 1.389 |
Multiple comparisons of means for WTP – Tukey HSD
| Group1 | Group2 | Mean diff | p-adj | Lower | Upper | Reject | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uncooked rice | A | B | –2.7007 | 0.5635 | –8.9252 | 3.5237 | False |
| A | C | –8.6275 | 0.0043 | –14.9691 | –2.2859 | True | |
| B | C | –5.9268 | 0.0744 | –12.2986 | 0.445 | False | |
| Cooked rice | A | B | –1.7445 | 0.6452 | –6.3468 | 2.8579 | False |
| A | C | –7.4201 | 0.0004 | –11.9522 | –2.8876 | True | |
| B | C | –5.6756 | 0.0108 | –10.2669 | –1.0842 | True |
Tastic rice prices from different shops in Northern Namibia
| Shop name | Price (N$/kg) | Average price (N$/kg) |
|---|---|---|
| Woermann Brock | 24.49 | 22.98 |
| Shoprite | 22.99 | |
| Choppies | 22.95 | |
| Pick N Pay | 21.49 |
Socioeconomic and demographic characteristics
| Variable | Characteristics | Consumer (%) n=105 |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | female | 66.7 |
| male | 33.3 | |
| Age | 26-35 | 24.8 |
| 36-45 | 8.6 | |
| 46-55 | 9.5 | |
| 56 and above | 1.0 | |
| below 25 | 56.2 | |
| Marital status | divorced | 1.0 |
| married | 15.2 | |
| single | 83.8 | |
| Level of education | none | 2.9 |
| primary | 1.0 | |
| secondary | 25.7 | |
| tertiary | 67.6 | |
| vocational | 2.9 | |
| Working status | student | 63.8 |
| unemployed | 13.3 | |
| working full-time | 20.0 | |
| working part-time | 2.9 | |
| Range of monthly income (N$) | less than 2,500 | 83.8 |
| more than 17,500 | 3.8 | |
| 10,001–17,500 | 3.8 | |
| 2,501–10,000 | 8.6 | |
| Rice consumption pattern | 2–4 times a month | 14.3 |
| 2–4 times a week | 36.2 | |
| daily | 12.4 | |
| once a month | 6.7 | |
| once a week | 23.8 | |
| rarely | 6.7 | |
| Knowledge of any locally produced rice | no | 52.4 |
| yes | 47.6 |
Model fitting information WTP
| Model | Model fitting criteria | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| -2 Log Likelihood | Chi-square | df | |
| Intercept only | 215.680 | ||
| Final | 186.128 | 29.552 | 22 |
Extrinsic quality attributes that consumers consider important when buying rice and Kendall’s W
| Rice attributes (N = 105) | Mean Rank | Rank |
|---|---|---|
| Taste | 7.5 | 1 |
| Price | 7.46 | 2 |
| Swelling capacity | 6.9 | 3 |
| Promotion | 6.82 | 4 |
| Stickiness | 6.75 | 5 |
| Brand | 6.6 | 6 |
| Shape | 6.5 | 7 |
| Label | 6.4 | 8 |
| Packaging | 6.38 | 9 |
| Texture | 6.32 | 10 |
| Smell/aroma/fragrance | 6.18 | 11 |