Use of food-buying practices within different socio-economic classes in the city of Cape Town

Abstract

Consumer debt has escalated in South Africa ever since the country sank into a recession in early 2009. One of the many consequences of this economic downturn has been a major increase in energy, transport and food prices. Food-buying strategies can be used by consumers to help to reduce the amount of money, which is spent on food, and increase funds that are available for other household expenses. The main objective of this study was to determine the use of four pre-selected food-buying practices by consumers who reside in different socio-economic status (SES) areas in the City of Cape Town. Residents of lower SES areas have been found to have purchasing patterns that are different to those who live in higher SES areas. The subsidiary objectives were to further establish whether there is a difference in the use of food-buying practices by consumers who reside in different SES areas, and to ascertain whether shopper and demographical characteristics have an influence on the use of food-buying practices among consumers in general as well as among consumers within the same SES area. A consumer intercept survey was conducted after being granted ethics approval. Three groups of respondents that represent a low, middle and high SES area were systematically sampled. A total of 1 200 consumers (95% response rate) who are older than 18 years anonymously and voluntarily participated in the study, which was conducted at pre-selected stores in the suburban areas of Delft (low SES area), Maitland (middle SES area) and Meadowridge (high SES area) in the City of Cape Town. These areas and stores were selected to represent the SES of households or consumers, respectively, based on the demographic and employment profile that was provided for each by Statistics South Africa‟s 2001‟s census profiles. The data was collected by using a pilot tested structured, self-administered questionnaire consisting of mainly multiple-choice questions, which gathered information from the respondents regarding their shopper and demographic characteristics, as well as their frequency of use of the four food-buying practices (represented by six structured questions each) as: (i) use of a shopping list; (ii) use of advertisements to plan shopping; (iii) comparison of prices amongst different brands; and (iv) avoidance of impulse buying. These food-buying practices were selected based on available consumer education literature, which focused on the use of these food-buying practices and a pilot study that was conducted in 2011, which indicated that these four practices were most frequently used by the consumers who were surveyed. Within each SES area most of the Cronbach‟s alpha coefficients that were obtained were >0.9 among the six questions, which represented each food-buying practice, and reflected strong internal consistencies among the questions. The Generalised Linear Model analysis of variance utilising the Wald statistic, which is based on the chi-

square distribution and Bonferroni pair-wise comparisons, were used to determine significant differences between respondents‟ use of the food-buying practices and their SES area group, as well as their shopper and demographic characteristics. A significant level of p<0.001, as well as p<0.05 was used. Most (60 to 80%) of the respondents in each SES area are female. Within the total sample, low and middle SES areas a majority (62 to 73%) of the respondents were between 26 to 55 years of age, whereas in the high SES area a majority (63.5%) of the respondents were 46 years and older. In general, more than half (52 to 56%) of the respondents were married and most (38 to 55%) were employed full-time and had household sizes, which mainly (18 to 23%) consist of two to four members. Regarding highest level of education attained, most of the respondents in the total sample either had a Grade 8 to 11 (37.6%) or a Grade 12 (24.7%), whereas most (54%) respondents in the high SES had either acquired a post-matric diploma or certificate, degree or post-graduate degree. Most (67 to 89 %) of the respondents within the total sample, middle and low SES area associated themselves with the Coloured population group, whereas most (56.7%) of the respondents in the high SES area associated themselves with the White population group. Concerning household monthly income, two thirds (65%) of the respondents within the high SES area had an income of R12 801 upward; most (77.5%) of the respondents within the middle SES area had an income of R801 to R12 800 per month; and more than half (57%) of the respondents in the low SES area received an income of R800 to R3 200 per month. In general, most respondents indicated that they shopped for food once a week (33 to 48%); took less than half an hour to shop for food (40 to 52%); and usually shopped alone for food (68.9%). Cash was the most prevalent means of payment among respondents within the total sample (66.7%), middle (70.5%) and low (93%) SES areas, while most (43.2%) respondents in the high SES area paid by means of a debit card. Among the respondents who reside in the different SES suburban areas, differences in the use of food-buying practices were revealed. Respondents within the high (p<0.001) and middle (p<0.05) SES areas displayed a higher propensity to use a shopping list, yet a lower propensity to use advertisements compared to respondents within the low SES area. Respondents within the low and particularly middle SES area displayed a higher propensity to compare prices (p<0.05) compared to respondents within the high SES area. No differences (p>0.05) for the avoidance of impulse buying as a food-buying practice were found among respondents within a low, middle and high SES area. A largely low propensity to avoid impulse buying was found. Regarding shopper characteristics, the respondent payment method influenced the use of a shopping list (p<0.05), use of advertisements (p<0.05 and p<0.001 between the payment

methods) and propensity to avoid impulse buying (p<0.05) as food-buying practices within the low SES area. Among respondents, in general, the payment method influenced the avoidance of impulse buying (p<0.05) as a food-buying practice. The length of time that it took to shop influenced the use of a shopping list (p<0.05) as a food-buying practice within the low SES area and the propensity to compare prices of different brands (p<0.05) as a food-buying practice within the middle SES area. Shopping frequency influenced the use of advertisements (p<0.05) as a food buying practice within the low SES area and co-shopping influenced the propensity to avoid impulse buying (p<0.05 and p<0.001 between the various co-shoppers) as a food-buying practice within the low SES area, as well as the propensity to use advertisements (p<0.05) as a food-buying practice within the high SES area. Gender influenced the use of a shopping list (p<0.05) as a food-buying practice within the high SES area and the use of advertisements (p<0.05), as well as the propensity to avoid impulse buying (p<0.001) as food-buying practices within the middle SES area. Gender also affected the propensity to compare the prices of different brands (p<0.05) as a food-buying practice within the low SES area and among respondents, in general, the propensity to avoid impulse buying (p<0.05), as well as the use of advertisements (p<0.001) as food-buying practices. Employment status affected the use of a shopping list (p<0.05) as a food-buying practice within the high SES area. Population group affected the propensity to use advertisements as a food-buying practice within the low SES area (p<0.05 and p<0.001 between the population groups) and among the respondents, in general, (p<0.05). Household monthly income affected the propensity to compare the prices of different brands (p<0.05) as a food-buying practice within the high SES area. Among the respondents, in general, household monthly income affected the propensity to compare the prices of different brands (p<0.05 and p<0.001 between the income groups) and the use of advertisements (p<0.05) as food-buying practices. The study confirmed that there are differences in the use of food-buying practices among consumers who reside in different SES areas, and further identified specific shopper and demographic characteristics that have an effect on consumers‟ (in general, as well as within the same SES area) use of food-buying practices. Since food-buying practices can be used by consumers to manage their household income expenditure on food, consumer awareness of these practices, in particular the avoidance of impulse buying should be promoted through educational efforts ideally by food retail companies. These companies have the resources and capability to communicate with consumers regularly (while shopping in-store), and can inform their customers about food-buying practices that would help them to save money and/or make additional funds available for other essential household expenses.