Consumers attitude towards pork quality and consumption pattern in two North East states of Assam and Manipur

Introduction

In India, consumer perspectives regarding the quality of pork are being increasingly considered as the food landscape continues to undergo significant changes. Economic growth and urbanization influence consumer preferences, encouraging a growing awareness of the standards and quality associated with food choices. Pork quality is an important factor that closely influences consumer attitudes. Elements such as taste, tenderness, juiciness and overall safety contribute to how consumers perceive pork quality. In light of recent food safety incidents and health concerns that have garnered public attention, there is a notable shift among consumers toward seeking greater transparency regarding the sources and processing of pork products. The dynamics of meat consumption are further driven by important demographic changes (Allievi et al., 2015) [1] , including increased nutritional demands for high-protein foods (Hawkesworth et al., 2010) [9] and evolving consumer preferences. Various determinants such as price, income levels, nutritional value, flavor, dietary habits, safety and convenience of purchase-are all influential in shaping meat consumption patterns (Wu and Xiao, 2013; Liang et al., 2014 [24,14] and Zhang et al., 2014) [25] . Factors including price, income, religious beliefs, flavor preferences, nutritional content, safety and overall eating quality play essential roles in guiding these consumer expectations (Mao et al., 2016) [15] . Pork is the predominant meat consumed in the North Eastern states of India, representing 77.80 percent of the total meat consumption (Kadrivel et al., 2018). The quality of the pig is paramount, as pork is held to elevated standards of taste, texture and freshness, reflecting the region's commitment to locally sourced and minimally processed www.extensionjournal.com foods. Pork quality is a vital component of Assamese cuisine, reflecting the region's strong emphasis on fresh and locally sourced ingredients. A study by Borah et al. (2018) [4] indicates that 95.00 per cent of respondents prioritize freshness and quality when purchasing pork. Other important criteria include visual examination (65.00 per cent), previous taste experiences (65.00 per cent), attractive displays of products (50.00 per cent) and quality assurances provided by retailers (21.00 per cent). Manipur, situated in the Northeastern region of India, exemplifies a rich tapestry of cultural diversity and traditions. Consumers assess a variety of visual attributes when making decisions about pork and pork-based products. The appearance of the meat plays a crucial role in purchasing decisions with factors such as freshness, fat-tolean ratio, colour, marbling and tenderness serving as critical indicators of quality.

Materials and Methods

Investigation was done in two states of North East India i.e., Assam and Manipur which were purposively selected. From each state 60 consumers were selected as respondents for the study making a total sample size of 120. The study was conducted in two districts namely Kamrup (M) in Assam and Chandel in Manipur. From Kamrup (M) district two villages namely Tetelia and Tepesia and from Chandel district, two villages namely Kanankhu and Panchai village were randomly selected. From each village 30 respondents were selected for the study that is 60 respondents from each district making a total of 120. This equal distribution ensured that the sample was balanced across the selected villages, allowing for comparative analysis. The study focused on individuals above 18 years old who had shopping responsibility and also consumer of pork. To thoroughly capture the complexity of attitudes, we created a rigorous structured interview schedule designed to assess attitudes toward pork quality and consumption. The researcher personally visited the residences of each respondent between June 2024 to August 2024. The attitude scale towards pork quality and consumption consisted of 24 carefully crafted items.

Participants will indicate their level of agreement with each statement on the attitude scale, reflecting their thoughts and judgments about pork quality and consumption. The scoring system is clear and effective: the minimum and maximum obtainable scores were 24 and 120 for the pork quality and consumption. This method ensures a thorough and accurate assessment of participants' attitudes, providing valuable insights into their perspectives on pork quality and consumption.

Strongly agree -5 Agree -4 Undecided -3 Disagree -2 Strongly disagree -1 For negative statement score were just reverse

Results and Discussion

The findings highlight notable differences in consumer attitudes toward pork quality and consumption between Assam and Manipur. The results indicate a strong concern for food safety, production practices and quality attributes, coupled with moderate attention to sustainability, animal welfare and broader ethical considerations. The findings in Table 1 revealed that the consumers in Assam showed highest scores for concerns about the "use of additives such as hormones and antibiotics in pork production" (4.20), followed closely by the belief that the "ethical and the way pigs are raised affects the taste and quality of pork" (4.16) and concerns about "cautious about the use of medications on pigs shortly before they are sold" (4.08). These findings suggest that consumers in Assam prioritize food safety, ethical animal husbandry and the perceived impact of production practices on pork quality. However, the lowest scores were associated with preferences for "purchasing with a higher fat content" and "buying pork from suppliers who uphold high standards of animal welfare" (3.56), and "I enjoy cooking and experimenting with new pork recipes" (3.51). This indicates relatively low enthusiasm for fatty pork, concerns about animal welfare and culinary experimentation in this region. In Manipur, scores were consistently higher than those in Assam, reflecting a stronger concern or preference across all evaluated items. The highest scores were observed for concerns about "I am ready to pay mor for organic raised pigs" (4.51), "cautious about the use of medications on pigs shortly before they are sold" (4.46), and "I strive to make healthy dietary choices by considering the impact of pork on my overall well-being" (4.41). These scores indicate that Manipur consumers are particularly conscious of food safety, organic options, and the health implications of pork consumption. Conversely, the lowest scores in Manipur were for "exploring alternative protein sources" (3.95) and "prioritize purchasing with a higher fat content" (3.06). These findings suggest relatively lower importance placed on fattier cuts and alternative proteins considerations. The pooled results on the importance of pork quality attributes such as food safety, the influence of pig rearing practices on pork quality and consistent tenderness and flavor. These priorities reflect consumer focus on safety, ethical production practices and product consistency. However, there is relatively less emphasis on preferences for fattier pork, purchasing from sources that prioritize pig welfare and supporting sustainable pork farming practices. This suggests these factors are less influential in shaping overall consumer attitudes compared to other aspects of pork quality and consumption. Similar findings were reported by Chen et al. (2010), Resano et al. (2011) [21] , Kiran et al. (2011) [12] , Li, (2012) [13] , Melfou (2012) [16] , Paul and Rana (2012) [19] , Wu and Xiao, (2013) [24] , Tarczynska (2014), Zhang et al. (2014) [25] , Liang et al. (2014) [14] , Mao et al. (2016) [15] , Kiran et al. (2017) [11] , Miranda et al. (2017) [17] , Borah et al. (2018) [4] , Grunert et al. (2018) [8] , Fraqueza, Borges and Patarata (2018) [6] , Bir et al. (2019) [3] , Nguyen et al. (2019) [18] , Pophiwa, Webb and Frilynck (2020) [20] and Gonera et al. (2021) [7] . However, the finding was contradicted with the findings of Verbeke et al. (2010) [23] and Font et al. (2012) [5] . www.extensionjournal.com

Cronbach's alpha coefficients, mean and standard deviations of attitude towards the pork quality and consumption

The results in Table 2 revealed that Cronbach alpha coefficients for reliability analysis for attitude towards pork quality and consumption were calculated as 0.90 in Assam, 0.83 in Manipur and 0.90 in pooled sample. The mean for pork quality and consumption were 3.84 in Assam, 4.21 in Manipur and 4.03 in pooled sampled with their respective standard deviation as 0.87, 0.75 and 0.83 respectively. The results showed that Assam consumers' hold generally positive attitudes towards pork quality and consumption, though slightly less favorable compared to Manipur. Greater variability in consumer responses, indicating a more diverse range of perceptions. This variability may stem from differences in access to high-quality pork, cultural diversity within Assam, and variations in consumer expectations across rural and urban settings.

Comparing the two states attitudes towards pork quality and consumption

The results in Table 3 revealed that concerning pork quality and consumption, the average score of the consumer were 92.28 and 101.16 with their respective standard deviation as 11.70 and 7.65 and range as 68.00-116.00 and 88.00-117.00 respectively in Assam and Manipur. After comparison of the mean scores of consumers of the two states, it was found that the mean score of Manipur was highly significant than that of Assam (z = -3.88**, P = 0.00). The result showed that the attitudes of Manipur consumers towards pork quality were significantly more positive than those of Assam. The present study presented evidence of consumer differences between the states of Assam and Manipur in attitudes toward pork quality. Consumers' attitudes toward the quality of pork are based on fundamental preferences and cultural expectations. Both Assam and Manipur perceive certain quality parameters differently, yet common social and cultural their values have grown apart in unique ways over time. Such values could not be held common among consumers of both states because of their beliefs in the importance of factors such as texture, taste and methods of production that define the quality of pork.

Conclusion

The study highlights clear differences in consumer attitudes toward pork quality in Assam and Manipur, with Manipur showing significantly higher concern for health, safety, and ethical production practices. This suggests strong potential for premium, organic and ethically sourced pork in Manipur. In Assam, the variability in attitudes points to a need for awareness campaigns to educate consumers about quality and safety aspects. For producers and policymakers, the findings stress the importance of promoting traceable, hygienic and welfare-oriented pig farming practices. Enhancing training for local farmers and AI technicians, along with improved veterinary care, could really help and aligning supply chains with consumer expectations can boost market value and consumer trust. These insights can guide targeted interventions to improve pork quality and consumption in Northeast India.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementsThe authors are grateful to the Vice Chancellor of Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat for permitting and providing necessary facilities to carry out this research programme. The valuable help from staff of college of veterinary science, Khanapara and cooperation of pork consumers during the entire course of present study are also dully acknowledged.

References

1. Allievi F, Vinnari M, Luukkanen J. Meat consumption and production: analysis of efficiency, sufficiency and consistency of global trends. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2015;92:142-151.
2. Banović M, Fontes MA, Barreira MM, Grunert KG. Impact of product familiarity on beef quality perception. Agribusiness. 2012;28(2):157-172.
3. Bir C, Davis M, Widmar N, Zuelly S, Erasmus M. Perceptions of animal welfare with a special focus on turkeys. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2019;6:413413.
4. Borah B, Borgohain A, Khuman LS, Bordoloi G. Analysis of pork preference and consumption pattern www.extensionjournal.com among households in Assam. International Journal of Agricultural Science and Research. 2018;8(2):1-12.
5. Font-i-Furnols M, Tous N, Esteve-Garcia E, Gispert M. Consumer studies on sensory acceptability of boar taint: a review. Meat Science. 2012;91:441-453.
6. Fraqueza MJ, Borges A, Patarata L. Strategies to reduce the formation of carcinogenic chemicals in dry cured meat products. Food Control. 2018;295-342.
7. Gonera A, Svanes E, Bugge AB, Hatlebakk MM, Prexl KM, Ueland Ø. Moving consumers along the innovation adoption curve: a new approach to accelerate the shift toward a more sustainable diet. Sustainability. 2021;13(8):4477-4477.
8. Grunert KG, Sonntag WI, Glanz-Chanos V. Consumer interest in environmental impact, safety, health and animal welfare aspects of modern pig production: results of a cross-national choice experiment. Meat Science. 2018;137:123-129.
9. Hawkesworth S, Dangour AD, Johnston D, Lock K, Poole N, Rushton J, et al. Feeding the world healthily: the challenge of measuring the effects of agriculture on health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2010;365(1554):3083-3097.
10. Kadirvel G, Banerjee BB, Meitei S, Doley S, Sen A, Muthukumar M. Market potential and opportunities for commercialization of traditional meat products in North East hill region of India. Veterinary World. 2018;11(2):118-118.
11. Kiran M, Nagabhushan C, Prabhu NK, Paramesha SC, Rajshekar T, Praveen MP, et al. Consumption pattern, consumer attitude and consumer perception on meat quality and safety in Southern India. International Food Research Journal. 2017;25(3):1026-1030.
12. Kiran M, Sudhakar Reddy K, Kondal Reddy K, Madhav Rao T, Naveena BM. Effect of blade tenderization and ammonium hydroxide marination on textural properties and microstructure of spent hen meat. Fleischwirtschaft International. 2011;5:71-80.
13. Li F. A study on behavior of consumer's purchase quality safety beef: based on the survey in Jilin province [master's thesis]. 2012.
14. Liang D, Li T, Gai L. Characteristics and influencing factors of rural residents beef consumption. Food and Nutrition in China. 2014;20(5):50-52.
15. Mao Y, Hopkins DL, Zhang Y, Luo X. Consumption patterns and consumer attitudes to beef and sheep meat in China. American Journal of Food and Nutrition. 2016;4(2):30-39.
16. Melfou K, Papanagiotou P, Tzimitra-Kalogianni I. Pork quality in the eye of the Greek consumer. British Food Journal. 2012;114(5):647-660.
17. Miranda-De La Lama GC, Estévez-Moreno LX, Sepulveda WS, Estrada-Chavero MC, Rayas-Amor AA, et al. Mexican consumers' perceptions and attitudes towards farm animal welfare and willingness to pay for welfare friendly meat products. Meat Science. 2017;125:106-113.
18. Nguyen-Viet H, Dang-Xuan S, Pham-Duc P, Roesel K, Huong NM, Luu-Quoc T, et al. Rapid integrated assessment of food safety and nutrition related to pork consumption of regular consumers and mothers with young children in Vietnam. Global Food Security. 2019;20:37-44.
19. Paul J, Rana J. Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 2012;29(6):412-422.
20. Pophiwa P, Webb EC, Frylinck L. A review of factors affecting goat meat quality and mitigating strategies. Small Ruminant Research. 2020;183:106035-106035.
21. Resano H, Perez-Cueto FJ, de Barcellos MD, VeflenOlsen N, Grunert KG, Verbeke W. Consumer satisfaction with pork meat and derived products in five European countries. Appetite. 2011;56(1):167-170.
22. Tarczyńska AS. Perception of pork quality by students. Quality Food. 2013;149:1-149.
23. Verbeke W, Pérez-Cueto FJ, de Barcellos MD, Krystallis A, Grunert KG. European citizen and consumer attitudes and preferences regarding beef and pork. Meat Science. 2010;84(2):284-292.
24. Wu Q, Xiao H. Characteristics and influence factors of mutton consumption of China's urban and rural residents. Agricultural Outlook. 2013;8:71-75.
25. Zhang H, Sun S, Feng Y. Analysis of mutton consumption habit and buying behavior in urban and rural areas. Xinjiang State Farms Economy. 2014;1:4651.