Sayadi 2017 (Oliva)

British Food Journal
Translating consumer’s olive-oil quality-attribute requirements into optimal olive-

growing practices: A quality function deployment (QFD) approach
Samir Sayadi Yamna Erraach Carlos Parra-López
Article information:
To cite this document:
Samir Sayadi Yamna Erraach Carlos Parra-López , (2017)," Translating consumer’s olive-oil quality-
attribute requirements into optimal olive-growing practices A quality function deployment (QFD)
approach ", British Food Journal, Vol. 119 Iss 1 pp. 190 - 214
Downloaded by University of Colorado Boulder At 01:22 20 December 2016 (PT)
Permanent link to this document:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-05-2016-0228
Downloaded on: 20 December 2016, At: 01:22 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 107 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 12 times since 2017*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2017),"Guest editorial", British Food Journal, Vol. 119 Iss 1 pp. 2-6 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/
BFJ-09-2016-0446
(2017),"Study on FT-MIR spectra of ghee (anhydrous milk fat)", British Food Journal, Vol. 119 Iss 1
pp. 181-189 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-06-2016-0276
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:374341 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0007-070X.htm
BFJ
119,1 Translating consumer’s olive-oil
quality-attribute requirements
into optimal olive-growing
190 practices
Received 26 May 2016
Revised 30 June 2016 A quality function deployment (QFD) approach
Accepted 21 July 2016
Samir Sayadi
Agricultural Economics and Rural Studies,
Institute of Agricultural Research and Training (IFAPA), Granada, Spain

Yamna Erraach
Department of Agricultural and Agri-Food Economics and Management,
Institut National Agronomique de Tunis, Tunis, Tunisia, and
Carlos Parra-López
Agricultural Economics and Sociology,
Institute of Agricultural Research and Training (IFAPA), Granada, Spain
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to translate consumer requirements regarding olive-oil quality
attributes into specific olive-growing practices that most contribute to satisfy these attributes.
Design/methodology/approach – After identifying consumer requirements or needs regarding different
attributes of olive-oil quality, through a survey of 439 olive-oil consumers, the authors determine the olive-
growing practices that optimally satisfy consumer needs through expert opinions. Finally, the use of expert
knowledge to construct the House of Quality or the first matrix of quality function deployment allow the
authors to define the relative contribution of the various olive-farming practices to the satisfaction of
consumer requirements.
Findings – The findings have shown that the olive-oil quality attributes most requested by consumers
incorporate organoleptic (e.g. acidity, flavour, colour), sociocultural (e.g. creating employment in rural areas,
maintenance of the rural population) and environmental ones (environmental externalities). The “separation
of olives collected from ground and trees” (separation), “timing of harvesting” (according to a fruit-ripeness
index), the “method of the ground harvest” (no picking from the ground), and the “method of tree harvest”
(handpicking) were some of the most commonly identified olive-farming practices that contribute the most to
meeting consumers’ needs with regard to olive-oil quality.
Research limitations/implications – The study suggests detailed analyses of the relationships between
customer requirements and other agents practices involved in the olive sector (processing industries: mills,
distribution, and marketing management, etc.) to more fully investigate the impact of all these practices on
consumers’ perceived olive-oil quality attributes. This is the most reliable way to guarantee that the most
sought-after quality characteristics are taken into account, not only in the farming stage but also in the
various different stages of the olive agri-food chain.
Practical implications – Findings represent an opportunity in the market value chain to develop a quality
olive oil which is more oriented towards the consumer and able to face future segmentations in the market.
This is one of the main innovative features of this study, as it offers “good practice” guidelines to agents of the
olive-oil sector from the consumer perspective.
Social implications – This study provides positive implications to consumers, providing them important
tools to make an informed choice, and producers and marketers helping the design of production strategies to
optimally satisfy the consumer preference with regard to olive-oil quality, and attain a competitive advantage
by adding value to the product.
British Food Journal
Vol. 119 No. 1, 2017
pp. 190-214 The authors appreciate the financial support for this research from the Andalusian Ministry of
© Emerald Publishing Limited Innovation, Science and Enterprise through the project SEJ-03121 (MULTIOLI) and the Ministry of
0007-070X
DOI 10.1108/BFJ-05-2016-0228 Economy, Innovation, Science and Employment through the project AGR-7431.
Originality/value – This paper is regarded as the pioneer in the literature translating the “consumer voice” A quality
regarding olive-oil quality into specific olive-growing practices “good-practices guidelines”. Thus, the relevant
required quality olive-oil attributes should be clearly described on the label, to enable consumers to identify function
the quality features and make an informed choice. Furthermore, to meet consumers’ needs, the olive-oil sector deployment
should focus on the olive-growing practices that optimally satisfy consumer requirements concerning olive-oil
quality attributes. This would help to improve legitimacy and boost public support for the Common
(QFD) approach
Agricultural Policy subsidies for the agricultural sector in general, and the olive sector in particular.
The findings are particularly valuable in helping policy makers to design marketing strategies to improve the
sustainability and competitiveness of Spanish olive oil. 191
Keywords Spain, Consumer satisfaction, Olive-growing practices, Olive-oil quality attributes,
Quality function deployment (QFD)
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Over recent decades, food-quality perception has changed considerably, as it has become a
more multidimensional and dynamic concept (Naspetti et al., 2015). Public concern and
interest in safety, healthiness, environmental sustainability, and social issues on production
practices have increased regarding all levels of the food chain (Vermeir and Verbeke, 2006;
Giampietri et al., 2016). These reflections constitute a source of new trends in consumption in
which consumers include in their purchasing decision such criteria as local and typical
attributes and environmental as well as ethical issues (Fandos and Flavián, 2006; Platania
and Privitera, 2006; Hinojosa-Rodríguez et al., 2014; Belletti et al., 2015; Sanz Cañada et al.,
2015; Cacchiarelli et al., 2016). The emerging scenario, in continuous adaptation, presents
noteworthy implications for strategic management (Parra-López et al., 2016).
In this framework, the agro-food sector must continually seek ways to differentiate
products through perceived quality and innovative design or by considering environmental or
safety issues (Chen, 2009; Naspetti and Zanoli, 2009). This strategic orientation is not aimed at
increasing production, but rather towards diversifying the food supply by exalting the
attributes or benefits which may be valued by the consumers, and thereby differentiating
the product from competitors. An understanding of consumer food preferences can help to
create new opportunities for food producers and to attain a competitive advantage by adding
value to the product (Grunert, 2011). In fact, the international literature on olive-oil market and
value chain and its influence in the supply of olive-oil product and quality differentiation
by the productive sector, to increase its competitiveness and allows farmers to access new
markets (Silva-Pérez, 2005), can be classified into the following different categories: protected
designation of origin (PDO), as a quality differentiation strategy for olive producers
(Baptista and Biswas, 2010; Sanz Cañada et al., 2015; Cacchiarelli et al., 2016), its consumer
demand/acceptance (Bonnet and Simioni, 2001; Fotopoulos and Krystallis, 2001; Erraach et al.,
2014); organic agriculture, its process of diffusion/adoption in the olive productive sector
(Parra-López and Calatrava-Requena, 2005; Parra-López et al., 2007a, b) and its multifunctional
impacts (Parra-López et al., 2008; Gómez et al., 2008; Gómez-Limón and Arriaza-Balmón, 2011);
ISO 9001, its adoption by production sector as a market strategy (Marbán-Flores, 2005;
Parra-López et al., 2016) and its influence on olive-oil quality in the supply value chain
(Vilar-Hernández et al., 2011); quality, in general, as a market strategy for olive producers
(Marbán-Flores, 2003, 2004) and as an output associated with the adoption of certain good
practices by the productive sector (Moyano-Fuentes et al., 2002); and consumer demand for
quality olive oil (Krystallis and Ness, 2005; Galluzzo, 2007; Menapace et al., 2008). In this
context, competitiveness through quality differentiation and certification in the marketplace is
clearly a fundamental survival strategy for olive-oil productive sector. This trend presents a
great opportunity for those products, which besides improving sensory and nutritional
quality also have health benefits for consumers, such as olive oil (Romo Muñoz et al., 2015).
Traditionally, olive-oil consumption has been associated with gastronomic customs, being an
BFJ essential ingredient in the Mediterranean diet (Lazaridis, 2004; Sanz Cañada and Macías
119,1 Vazquez, 2005; Dios-Palomares and Martinez-Paz, 2011). Consequently, the demand, that is
traditionally restricted to the Mediterranean area (77 per cent of the area of world olive-oil
production) is currently increasing worldwide (especially in the USA, Canada, Australia, and
Japan) (Diaz-Mendez and Gómez-Benito, 2010; Santosa et al., 2010; Jimenez-Guerrero et al.,
2012; Cicia et al., 2013; Giampietri et al., 2016). The increasing preference for olive oil
192 worldwide denotes a change in consumer behaviour, either by strengthening the role of it in
their diet or by incorporating it in a novel way. The set of tangible and intangible attributes
that consumers believe to particularly meet their needs is a concept of product marketing
(Jimenez-Guerrero et al., 2012).
Spain is the world leader in olive growing, accounting between 40 and 60 per cent of olive
oil in the world and 24.4 per cent of olive surface area in 2013 (FAO, 2015), while consuming
only 20 per cent of the total (Cardenas and Vilar, 2012). The olive-oil sector is of particular
social, economic, and environmental importance in certain Spanish areas, and more
specifically in Andalusia, located in southern Spain (Carmona-Torres et al., 2014).
Andalusia is the major olive-producing area worldwide with a total surface of 1.52 million
hectares (19 per cent of worldwide olive-orchard area, 30 per cent of the total olive-orchard
area in the EU, and 59 per cent in Spain (MAGRAMA, 2014). Olive production in Andalusia
is the second most important agricultural sector after horticulture, creating an overall
income of 2,660 million euros in 2014 (30 per cent of total agricultural production of
Andalusia) and generating about 20 million days of farm work per year besides its impact
on the employment, the industry, and marketing ( Junta de Andalucía, 2015).
In recent years, due to the technological innovation in the olive-oil sector, mainly in the
crop irrigation and milling, the quality of Spanish olive oil has improved greatly. However,
different studies (Sanz Cañada, 2009; Rodríguez Cohard and Parras Rosa, 2012; Marano
Marcolini et al., 2014) confirm that there is little market orientation of the production section
and this continues to dominate the culture of the orientation to production. This situation
weakens the chances of greater profitability of producers, who sell most of bulk production
both domestically and in foreign markets, thereby limiting the possibilities of the sector
development and the olive-growing territories. Furthermore, the olive sector is dealing with
a continuously shifting market, but in which, once productive excellence is achieved, closer
orientation of the production sector to the market is still a key challenge. This, together with
a lack of business strategy, materializes itself in the form of inefficient business
management and marked organizational weakness, generating what some in the sector
have come to regard as a “marketing problem” (Rodríguez Cohard and Parras Rosa, 2012;
Marano Marcolini et al., 2014). This problem is especially significant in the initial links of the
agro-food chain because the cooperative and small-/medium-sized private olive mills, which
comprise most of the olive producers, have a negligible profile in the market of bottled olive
oil. Despite olive oil being the sector’s main product (1,128,500 tonnes in 2010/2011 (ICEX,
2012), Spanish consumers still consider it to be an undifferentiated product (García-Brenes
and Sanz-Cañada, 2012). Within this context, it is worrying that even after the detection of
attitudes and product attributes valued by consumers, no studies have been made to move
these requirements to product-development practices or to identify what productive aspects
are relevant to meet consumer demands. This poses a considerable challenge for the olive-oil
sector (Mili et al., 2013; Molina Lanzas and Moral Pajares, 2010). Thus, the aim of this study
is to develop and apply a methodological framework that translates consumer requirements
or needs regarding the quality attributes of olive oil (organoleptic, environmental,
sociocultural, etc.) into the specific agronomic practices of the production sector (olive
growers) to meet these needs.
This paper considers the application of quality function deployment (QFD) through the
construction of the House of Quality (HoQ) as a methodological framework to translate
consumer demands into specific olive-growing practices. For this objective, this research A quality
undertakes the following tasks: to identify consumer needs or expectations towards olive-oil function
quality attributes, to determine olive-growing practices that are able to satisfy these needs, deployment
and to construct the HoQ model to prioritize the olive-growing practices that mostly
contribute to satisfy consumer requirements towards olive-oil quality attributes according (QFD) approach
to expert knowledge.
The paper is organized as follows: after this Introduction section, Section 2 presents the 193
methodological framework. This section includes a brief overview in the literature
concerning the application of QFD. In addition, the key steps of QFD application in our
study are explained. Selected results are presented in Section 3. Finally, some conclusions,
implications, and limitations study are presented in Section 4.
2. Methodology framework
2.1 The QFD method
QFD is defined as a design method for products and services which identifies and
defines the voice of the customer and translates it in a series of steps into design
(technical engineering) and operational characteristics which meet the demands and
expectations of the market (Akao, 1997; Viaene and Januszewska, 1999; Bevilacqua et al.,
2012; Naspetti et al., 2012, 2015). QFD is the most complete and comprehensive method for
translating what customers need from the product into what the company can offer to best
fit the needs of customers through the integration of many processes and aligning them
with the customer’s requirements (Holmen and Kristensen, 1998; Sweet et al., 2010). It is
considered an interdisciplinary process that aids the planning of new or improved designs
and processes (Vinayak and Kodali, 2013). The QFD method was created in Japan during the
1960s in the field of commercial psychology and marketing, with a view to enabling
businesses operating in a competitive environment to incorporate consumer preferences into
the product-design stage. In 1978, the book entitled Quality Function Deployment was
published, giving new impetus to the dissemination of QFD and causing it to be quickly
implemented in several companies in the country (Liboreiro and Daibert, 2012). The method
was generally adopted by shipping, automotive and electrical companies. Currently, QFD
stirs strong interest in the world, generating ever-new applications, practitioners, and
researchers each year. In Europe, QFD is also well known and many application cases have
been reported. QFD has been applied to the development of some food products such as
beef, butter cookies, tomato ketchup, and chocolate cake mix (Park et al., 2012). For a
comprehensive collection of case studies in agro-industry and for more recent publications
see Benner et al. (2003), Sweet et al. (2010), Bevilacqua et al. (2012), Liboreiro and Daibert
(2012), Park et al. (2012), and Naspetti et al. (2015).
In general, the use of QFD in the food sector has until now been very scarce, the study by
Bevilacqua et al. (2012) conducted in Italy being the only one found on applying QFD
technique to olive oil. There are no studies available on its use in the Spanish olive sector,
highlighting the relevance of the present research as a practical and novel contribution to
the subject.
A typical QFD contains four matrixes: HoQ (product planning), design deployment
(part planning), manufacturing planning (process parameter planning), and production
planning (production control operation) (Figure 1).
Underlying QFD, there is the so-called quality matrix or HoQ (Rudolph, 1995; Viaene and
Januszewska, 1999; Benner et al., 2003; Vatthanakul et al., 2010) which is, in essence, a matrix
that determines the relative contribution of the practices (technical requirements, i.e. the
HOWs) to the satisfaction of consumer demands regarding quality (i.e. the WHATs).
The main focus of the few examples of applying QFD to food-product development is on the
first matrix: the HoQ. As stated by Bevilacqua et al. (2012), the HoQ can be considered the
BFJ Phase I Phase II Phase III
Phase IV
Production
119,1 Product
planning
(House of quality)
Design
deployment
(Part deployment)
Manufacturing
planning
(Process planning)
planning
(Production operations
planning)
Performace Part Process Production

measures characteristics parameters operations
194
of the customer
House
Voice
Design Manufacturing Production

of
Deployment Planning Planning
Quality
Importance Importance Importance
Figure 1.
The four-phase model

Source: Benner et al. (2003)
hub of the whole QFD method: it provides the specifications for product characteristics in
terms of their relative importance and of target values that have to be reached in production,
enabling the process to proceed from the customers’ requirements to the design
specifications. HoQ represents a powerful tool for product development. Nevertheless, when
it is applied to food products, its general structure has to be adapted because the application
of QFD in the food industry is more complex than the current literature suggests (Benner
et al., 2003; Bevilacqua et al., 2012). The basic structure of the HoQ is shown in Figure 2.
Correlation
matrix
Product requirements
(HOW)
Importance rating
Customer
Customer wants Relationship
competitive
(WHAT) matrix
assessment
How much
Engineering
competitive
Figure 2. assessment
The House of Quality,
the first matrix of the Importance rating
QFD method
Source: Benner et al. (2003)
2.2 The QFD implementation A quality
For consumer requirements concerning quality olive-oil attributes to be translated into function
olive-growing practices, a combined quantitative/qualitative methodology was used. deployment
In addition to a documentary review and various focus groups and informal interviews, two
surveys were designed and conducted. The QFD was implemented according to four (QFD) approach
chronological stages as follows.
2.2.1 Identification, definition, and quantification of consumer’s requirements towards 195
the quality attributes of olive oil (WHATs). The first stage of the study consisted of identifying
and defining the characteristics of quality olive oil as perceived by the consumer (consumer
voice). Qualitative techniques were used to achieve this through informal interviews and group
discussions. Three focus groups, each comprising eight individuals with different profiles
(age, sex, educational level, profession, etc.), permitted direct contact with the group and open
participation in order to take into account the diverse opinions of individuals on olive-oil quality
as well as the general view at the group level. The focus group is an appropriate technique for
commercial ends, its main purpose being to gather information of a qualitative type and to gain
a fuller understanding of the quality perception of some olive-oil attributes. Its application here is
especially useful, since olive oil is a product whose quality is generally difficult for the consumer
to perceive (Bevilacqua et al., 2012; Cicia et al., 2013; Cacchiarelli et al., 2016). In this context,
information was collated on the views, needs, and expectations of those interviewed with regard
to quality olive-oil attributes, this resulting in a long list of consumer expectations and
requirements (the WHATs) that represent what consumers perceive and ask when selecting the
product at the point of purchase.
On the basis of the results taken from the qualitative stage, a wide-ranging quantitative
study was developed using a face-to-face survey to analyse consumer habits, behaviour, and
attitudes with regard to olive oil. The study focussed on the adult population (over 18 years)
of the Autonomous Community of Andalusia (southern Spain) which, according to the
Spanish National Statistics Institute (INE: Spanish National Institute of Statistics, 2014),
comprised around eight million inhabitants, and thus for sampling purposes the population
was considered infinite. Given the nature of the questionnaire, the sample size was defined
to estimate proportions, with a sample error of 5 per cent (confidence level ¼ 95 per cent and
maximum variance p ¼ q ¼ 0.50), resulting in 400 surveys. The survey was conducted on
439 individuals from May to July 2014.
This survey included a question related to the determining attributes of intrinsic olive-oil
quality (sensorial and chemical attributes) and extrinsic quality (quality certification; social and
environmental attributes, pricing, etc.) of olive oil according to the needs detected in the previous
stage. Consumers were asked to rate these attributes of quality on a Likert scale from 1 (not
important at all) to 5 (very important) (Govers, 1996; Vatthanakul et al., 2010; Bevilacqua et al.,
2012; Park et al., 2012). The average (mean) importance Wdi of each demand (di) is calculated as
the arithmetic mean value of all the consumers’ rating, with i: 1, …, n (n: total number of demands
or requirements) (Table I). The information compiled was then used to feed the QFD matrix, also
known as the HoQ (Vatthanakul et al., 2010; Naspetti et al., 2012, 2015; Park et al., 2012).
2.2.2 Identification and definition of olive-growing practices (HOWs). In addition to the
documentary review ( Jiménez and Carpio, 2008; Parra-López et al., 2008; Parra-López and
Calatrava-Requena, 2006; Alba et al., 2009; Humanes and Humanes, 2009; Uceda, 2009; Vega
et al., 2009; Uceda and Aguilera Herrera, 2010, among others), several group discussions
were held in September 2014 with experts in the sector (olive growers, researchers, olive-oil
mill technicians and managers, quality laboratories, etc.). The main objective for this stage is
to identify potential olive-growing practices (also known as the voice of the producer or
technical requirements, the HOWs) which can be used by farmers to satisfy the consumer
requirements established in the previous stage. This process was not only qualitative but
BFJ Average importance
119,1 Demands (di) Quality attributes (Scale 1-5)a (Wdi) SD
Sensorial and chemical Fruity flavour 4.3 0.796

Low degree of acidity 4.1 0.964
Greenish-yellow colour 3.3 1.237
Marketing Price 3.8 1.243
196 Place of purchase: olive-oil mills and
cooperatives 3.1 1.390
Bottle 2.1 1.130
Quality certification Protected designation of origin (PDO) 2.9 1.274
Organic agriculture 2.6 1.306
Table I. Social and environmental Environmentally friendly production 2.4 2.168
Consumer
Creation of employment in the rural areas 1.8 1.364
requirements towards
olive-oil quality Maintenance of the rural population 1.8 1.306
attributes: (consumer Note: aLikert scale, from 1 (not important at all) to 5 (very important)
voice WHATs) Source: Focus group and survey of olive-oil consumers (2014)
also quantitative. The experts were asked to indicate and select only those practices which
they considered may have influence on and a potential relationship to a technical level with
the intrinsic and extrinsic attributes of olive-oil quality.
2.2.3 Correlation between the WHATs and HOWs through QFD. Once the consumer
needs (WHATs) are identified, it is necessary to understand how these attributes relate to the
olive-growing practices (HOWs) to satisfy the consumer preferences. For that, the HoQ
construction process begins by determining the relationship matrix between the WHATs and
the HOWs, also referred to as a strategy matrix or planning matrix. To this effect, 26 experts
involved in olive-oil production were interviewed (olive growers, olive-oil mill technicians,
researchers, quality-analysis laboratory technicians, etc.) in order to quantify these relationships,
generating a strategy matrix for each expert (Wpj,di), with pj: practice j: 1, …, m (m: total number
of practices), and di: demands or requirements i: 1, …, n (n: total number of demands or
requirements). The assessment scale used was 0 (no relation) to 9 (very strong relation)
(see Ramanathan and Ganesh, 1994; Parra-López et al., 2008; Carmona-Torres et al., 2014).
The strategy matrix (Wpj,di) was built taking into account the relationships of the
practices at the disaggregate level and aggregated to the needs of the consumer.
For example, a particular expert could answer at aggregate level that the relationship
between “method of ground harvest” and “degree of acidity” is “9”, but that the
relationship between “method of ground harvest” and “flavour” is “6”. The expert’s response
at disaggregate level to quantify the relationship between “no picking from the ground”, one
of the options that make up the aggregate level of ‘method of ground harvest, and the “low
degree of acidity” is “3” and between “no picking from the ground” and “fruity flavour” is
also “3”. These disaggregated values are then treated as follows: the relationship between
“no picking from the ground” and “low degree of acidity” would be 3 × 9 ¼ 27, and
between “no picking from the ground” and “fruity flavour” would be 3 × 6 ¼ 18, and so on
for the different disaggregated levels of the practices and needs considered, thus giving a
weighting value for each expert or deciding agent (Wpj,di (e)).
The average contribution of each practice ( j) to each demand (i) is calculated as the
arithmetic mean of the assessments of all the experts:
X
E
W pj;diðgroupexpÞ ¼ W pj;diðeÞ =E
e¼1
where E is the number of experts. The average assessment of the whole group of A quality
experts was used as this was considered more reliable than individual assessment, thus function
minimizing any individual bias or lack of knowledge on any particular topic covered. deployment
The analysis of averages in groups of decision-makers is quite common in the scientific
literature (Saaty, 1989). (QFD) approach
Regarding the Correlation Matrix between all the olive-growing practices (HOWs)
represented in the roof of HoQ (see the top of Figure 2), it is a unity matrix which shows that 197
the alternatives for these practices are inner-independent from a dominance/contribution
point of view. That is to say, the olive-growing technique alternatives for a given farming
practice are not interrelated. However, they are technically outer restricted: the validity of a
particular combination of farming practices to be jointly implemented is conditioned by its
technical feasibility. For instance, to fertilize or not to fertilize are independent alternatives.
However, it is impossible not to fertilize and still apply direct fertilization to the soil
(fertilizer-application method).
2.2.4 Total and normalized relative contribution of practices to satisfying the whole
demands. The absolute total contribution of each practice (HOW) to satisfying the whole set
of consumer requirements (WHATs) (Wpj) is calculated in two steps: calculating the
absolute contributions of the practice to satisfying each of the demands, by multiplying
their average relative contributions (Wpj,di(groupexp)), determined in stage 3 from experts’
opinions, by the average importance of each corresponding demand (Wdi), determined in
stage 1 from consumers’ opinions and calculating the absolute total contribution of the
practice (Wpj) to satisfying the whole set of requirements by adding together the previous
absolute contributions:
X
n
W pj ¼ W pj;diðgroupexpÞ W di
i¼1
where n is the total number of requirements.

Subsequently, the Wpj value was normalized (Naspetti et al., 2012, 2015; Vatthanakul
et al., 2010) to calculate the normalized relative contribution of each practice to satisfying the
whole set of requirements as follows:
Xm
W pj‐norm ¼ W pj 100 = W pj
j¼1
where m is the total number of practices. This information is of great use as it can guide olive
growers towards the most important practices which optimally satisfy consumer’s requirements
of quality attributes of olive oil. A high relative total contribution value Wpj-norm for a given
practice suggests the need to have direct design and technological development (through
agricultural policies, etc.) towards the implementation of this practice.
3. Results and discussion

3.1 Consumer’s requirements towards olive-oil quality “consumer voice: WHATs” and
their importance
From the focus groups with consumers, a consolidated list of 11 requirements or demands was
drawn up. The demand for quality attributes of olive oil includes not only chemical and sensory
attributes (flavour, acidity, and colour) but also others related to marketing (price, place of
purchase, and bottle), quality certification and guarantee (PDO, Organic Farming (OF)), social
aspects (maintaining the local population, creating employment, etc.), and even environmental
issues (environmentally friendly, etc.). According to the survey on consumers, the attributes in
BFJ greatest demand with regard to olive-oil quality and their average importance are shown in
119,1 Table I and represent the WHATs or consumer voice of olive oil.
Within the range of requirements, the most important attributes for consumer are
“fruity flavour” (the average importance Wdi ¼ 4.3), “low degree of acidity” (Wdi ¼ 4.1), “price”
(Wdi ¼ 3.8), and “greenish-yellow colour” (Wdi ¼ 3.3). Along the same lines, a study conducted
by the Spanish Interprofessional Olive Oil Association (Spanish Interprofesional Olive Oil
198 Association, 2010) indicates that for the Spanish consumers, the most common
olive-oil classification is established on the basis of its flavour or degree of acidity. This
research also leads to the conclusion that the sensory characteristics of olive oil are the main
element associated with quality, placing these above price and origin. In keeping with this,
Santosa and Guinard (2011) and Cicia et al. (2013) confirm that in the case of extra-virgin olive
oil, the sensory attributes are the most important both in terms of consumption and buying
motives. On the other hand, these requirements identified among consumers in Andalusia,
southern Spain do not coincide precisely with those of the non-producer regions abroad. For
instance, García et al. (2002) found that price is one of the most influential factors on consumer
preferences for olive oil in the UK. Likewise, García-Valdecasas (2010) notes that for the French
consumers, the criteria used for choosing olive oil are primarily brand, followed by price and
lastly, flavour. French consumers look for fruity flavours and “first cold pressings”.
Our results also show that during the buying process, consumers form their preferences
taking into account important quality attributes such as “place of purchase: olive-oil mills
and cooperatives” (Wdi ¼ 3.1) (Table I). Similar results can be found in other olive-producing
Mediterranean countries such as Italy and Greece, according to Jiménez-Guerrero et al.
(2012). This habit is the consequence of consumer experience, i.e. of belonging to producing
countries. By contrast, Delgado and Guinard’s (2011) study reveals that in the case of
American consumers, the majority (68 per cent of survey participants) buy olive oil mainly
at the supermarket.
Andalusian consumers appear to take other attributes into account when judging the quality
of olive oil, such as quality certification: “PDO” (Wdi ¼ 2.9) or “OF” (Wdi ¼ 2.6); a production
system which is “environmentally friendly” (Wdi ¼ 2.4). Accordingly, authors showed that
Italian consumers’ use of olive oil increased when the bottle label displayed PDO certification
(Cacchiarelli et al., 2016), followed in second place by the stamp of “OF” (Aprile et al., 2012).
Lastly, the results of the present study show that consumers also demand other
attributes of quality when buying olive oil: the “bottle” (Wdi ¼ 2.1), “creation of employment”
(Wdi ¼ 1.8), and “maintenance of population in the rural areas” (Wdi ¼ 1.8) (Table I). Despite
these being less important requirements in terms of quality than those mentioned above,
attributes such as the bottle or container can be as important as the product itself in the olive
oil consumer’s choosing and buying processes. In a consumer test, Torres-Ruiz et al. (2010)
analysed the association between the bottle and the perception of quality of the olive oil it
contained, revealing the influence of the bottle on the consumer’s evaluation of oil quality
and the existence of a positive relationship between evaluations of the two. Likewise,
“creation of employment” and “maintenance of the population in the rural areas” are
frequently cited – not directly as a quality requirement, but as relatively important
demands – in studies on the multifunctional role of the Andalusian olive sector (Ruiz Avilés
et al., 2007; Sanz Cañada, 2011; Pérez-y-Pérez et al., 2013).
3.2 Optimal olive-growing practices: the “HOWs”

On the basis of documentary review and group discussions with experts, Table II displays
the farming practices of olive growing considered most able to meet consumer demands (or
requirements) with regard to olive-oil quality. Finally, 47 farming practices were selected.
Each level of practices was then classified into sublevels. The farming practices identified
were arranged into 20 sublevels (see Table II).
Olive variety Picual
A quality
Hojiblanca function
Soil management Bare soil, conventional farming (constant tillage)
Bare soil, no tillage, weed control with herbicides
deployment
Bare soil, little tillage or shallow tillage, weed (QFD) approach
control with herbicides
Soil covered
Irrigation Yes 199
No
Irrigation system Drip irrigation
Other system (Sprinkler, Flooding, etc.)
Timing of irrigation On a fixed calendar basis
Following expert advice
Analysis of the irrigation–water quality Yes
No
Fertilization Yes
No
Fertilizer-application method Direct application to the soil
Spray application to the leaves
Other methods
Fertilizers applied Organic fertilizers (including pruning debris.
compost., etc.)
Inorganic fertilizers
Analysis soil or leaf before fertilization Yes
No
Treatment of pests and diseases Yes
No
Treatment of olive fruit fly (Bactrocera oleae) Mass traps (one trap per tree ¼ pheromones +
glue + pyrethroids)
Biological control (Opius concolor)
Non-biological insecticide
Treatment of olive moth (Prays oleae) Biological control (Bacillus thuringiensis)
Chemical treatments
Timing of phytosanitary treatments On a fixed calendar basis or with the first
symptoms of infestation
When the infestation surpasses a threshold
Location of phytosanitary treatments The whole orchard
Only the infestation source
Timing of harvest According to fruit-ripeness index
On a fixed calendar basis
Method of ground harvest By hand
Mechanical means
No picking from the ground
Method of tree harvest Hand-pole beating
Branch or trunk vibrators
Handpicking
Separation of olives from the ground and the trees Separation
No separation
Transport olives from the orchard to the mill Sacks Table II.
Boxes Optimal olive-growing
In the tractor or lorry trailer practices: producer
Source: Literature review and focus group (2014) voice, WHATs
3.3 QFD
The quality of olive oil begins in the field with the combination and interaction between
genetic factors, soil, climate, variety, irrigation, pest and disease control, cultivation and
harvest techniques, relying on the remaining practices in the extraction process (transport,
storage, processing, and storage of oil) the mission of keeping intact the qualitative
BFJ characteristics of the oil contained in the olive (Montedoro et al., 1992; Jiménez and
119,1 Carpio, 2008; Jiménez-Guerrero et al., 2012). Any agent in the sector that in some way
directly or indirectly alters the natural components of the fruit negatively influences the
final quality of the oil produced.
As stated above in the Methodology section, experts were asked to quantify the existing
relationships between the requirements of Andalusian consumers towards olive-quality
200 attributes and farming practices, thus establishing a QFD matrix (HoQ) for each group of
practices. The basic structure of the matrix is shown in Table III.
The left-hand column of the matrix lists the requirements or consumer voice with regard
to olive-oil quality attributes and its importance (Wdi). The top row of this matrix displays
olive-growing practices which are considered by experts apt to satisfy those requirements.
The central section details the absolute contributions of each practice in satisfying each of
these demands (Wpj,di(groupexp)). The last two rows at the bottom of the matrix indicate both
the total contribution Wpj and the normalized contribution Wpj-norm of each practice for
satisfying the whole set of demands.
Table IV includes the QFD matrix of all olive-growing practices finally constructed after the
calculation of (Wdi), (Wpj,di(groupexp)), Wpj, and Wpj-norm values. This table details the relative
contribution of each olive-growing practice to satisfy consumer requirements individually and
jointly. For example, “the separation of the olives from the ground and trees” is the practice that
most contributes to a “low degree of acidity” (Wpj ¼ 75,4) and all consumer needs regarding
olive oil (Wpj-norm ¼ 7.0). Similarly, “variety Picual” and “the harvest of olives according to a
fruit-ripeness index” proved to be the most suitable practices for ensuring the desired greenish-
yellow colour of the oil (Wpj ¼ 48.0 and Wpj ¼ 53.5, respectively).
Of the total of 47 agricultural practices considered in this study, almost 42 per cent
proved highly relevant[1] to satisfy the demand towards the olive-oil-quality attributes most
demanded by the consumer, since some 19 of these practices had a normalized relative
contribution (Wpj-norm) greater than the mean value, 2.1.
In general, based on the normalized relative contribution (Wpj-norm), the HoQ analysis
clearly showed that the most significant olive-growing practices that determine and affect
the perceived olive-oil quality according to consumer requirements are: “separation of olives
from the ground and the trees”, “timing of harvest”, “method of tree harvest”, “method of
ground harvest”, “olive variety”, “transport of olives from the orchard to the mill”,
“treatment of pests and diseases”, “treatment of the olive fruit fly (Bactrocera oleae),
Farming practices of
olive growing
“HOWs”
Timing of harvest
Average
importance
(Wdi) According to a
fruit ripeness On a fixed
index calendar basis
Fruity flavour 4.3 48.6 33.4
Low degree of acidity 4.1 53.5 36.0
Table III. Price 3.8 6.7 12.8
Consumer
Structure of the QFD
voice ......
matrix in olive oil for wpj,di(grupoexp)
“WHATs” Demands (i) 1.8
group of practices Absolute total contribution (wpj) 719.6 452.0
(partial view)
Relative contribution (wpj-norm) 5.5 3.5
Agricultural practices
Consumers’ Average Olive variety Soil management Irrigation Irrigation system Timing of irrigation Analysis of
requirements importance the
Picual Hojiblanca Bare soil, Bare soil, no Bare soil, little Soil covered Yes No Drip Other On a fixed Following
(Wdi) irrigation–
conventional tillage, tillage or irrigation system calendar expert
water quality
farming weed shallow tillage, (sprinkler, basis advice
(constant control with weed control Flooding, Yes No
tillage) herbicides with herbicides etc.)
Fruity flavour 4.3 54.7 58.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Greenish-yellow
colour 3.3 48.0 25.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Place of
purchase: olive-
oil mills and
cooperatives 3.1 – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Protected
designation of
origin (PDO) 2.9 – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Low degree of
acidity 4.1 4.9 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 2.3 0.0 0.0 3.9 6.0 0.0 0.0
Price 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 1.3
Bottle 2.1 – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Organic
agriculture 2.6 0.0 0.0 34.1 17.5 17.5 49.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.0 30.8 25.9 6.2
Environmentally
friendly
production 2.4 0.0 0.0 13.8 19.1 32.9 62.7 28.8 35.2 66.9 34.0 22.9 61.0 30.5 12.2
Creation of
employment in
the rural areas 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.1 8.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Maintenance of
the rural
population 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Absolute total contribution

(Wpj) 413.6 356.7 121.9 91.5 124.6 280.0 271.1 197.7 160.7 81.6 130.5 251.1 154.6 50.4
Normalized relative
contribution (Wpj-norm) 3.2 2.7 0.9 0.7 1.0 2.2 2.1 1.5 1.2 0.6 1.0 1.9 1.2 0.4
(continued )
201
(QFD) approach
The “House of
Table IV.
function
A quality
deployment
growing practices
Quality” of olive-
BFJ
202
119,1
Table IV.
Average Fertilization Fertilizer-application method Fertilizers applied Analysis soil or leaf before
Consumers’ importance Organic fertilization
requirements (Wdi) fertilizers
Spray (including
Direct application pruning
application to to the debris. Inorganic
Yes No the soil leaves Other method compost. etc.) fertilizers Yes No
Fruity flavour 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Greenish-yellow
colour 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Place of
purchase: olive-
oil mills and
cooperatives 3.1 – – – – – – – – –
Protected
designation of
origin (PDO) 2.9 – – – – – – – – –
Low degree of
acidity 4.1 1.3 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Price 3.8 3.5 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.9 2.3 2.3
Bottle 2.1 – – – – – – – – –
Organic
agriculture 2.6 29.0 39.0 25.3 28.7 16.9 71.0 11.0 40.7 9.7
Environmentally
friendly
production 2.4 22.4 46.7 24.0 49.8 36.0 69.0 17.0 55.8 21.8
Creation of
employment in
the rural areas 1.8 13.6 5.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Maintenance of
the rural
population 1.8 5.6 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

(Wpj) 181.9 257.2 123.4 194.1 130.2 350.2 91.9 248.5 86.3
Normalized relative
contribution (Wpj-norm) 1.4 2.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 2.7 0.7 1.9 0.7
(continued )
Average Treatment of pests and Treatment of olive fruit fly (Bactrocera oleae) Treatment of olive moth Timing of phytosanitary Location of
Consumers’ importance diseases (Prays oleae) treatments phytosanitary
requirements (Wdi) Mass traps (one On a fixed treatments
trap per tree ¼ Biological Biological calendar basis When the
pheromones + control control or with the first infestation Only the
glue + (Opius Non-biological (Bacillus Chemical symptoms of surpasses The whole infestation
Yes No pyrethroids) concolor ) insecticide thuringiensis ) treatments infestation a threshold orchard source
Fruity flavour 4.3 20.3 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Greenish-yellow
colour 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Place of
purchase: olive-
oil mills and
cooperatives 3.1 – – – – – – – – – – –
Protected
Designation of
Origin (PDO) 2.9 – – – – – – – – – – –
Low degree of
acidity 4.1 37.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Price 3.8 3.8 4.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.4 1.7 1.8
Bottle 2.1 – – – – – – – – – – –
Organic
Agriculture 2.6 43.2 13.6 63.8 74.4 11.3 67.0 11.3 11.1 39.7 16.4 28.1
Environmentally
friendly
production 2.4 29.0 36.0 41.0 62.0 26.7 64.7 17.8 16.3 46.4 23.3 61.0
Creation of
employment in
the rural areas 1.8 11.8 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Maintenance of
the rural
population 1.8 7.2 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

(Wpj) 471.4 184.8 264.2 342.2 93.3 329.5 72.2 75.1 220.0 104.9 226.6
Normalized relative
contribution (Wpj-norm) 3.6 1.4 2.0 2.6 0.7 2.5 0.6 0.6 1.7 0.8 1.7
(continued )
203
(QFD) approach
Table IV.
function
A quality
deployment
BFJ
204
119,1
Table IV.
Timing of harvest Method of ground harvest Method of tree harvest Separation of olives Transport olives from the orchard
According from the ground and the to the mill In the
Average to a fruit- On a fixed Branch or trees tractor
Consumers’ importance ripeness calendar Mechanical No picking from Hand-pole trunk No or lorry
requirements (Wdi) index basis By hand means the ground beating vibrators Hand picking Separation separation Sacks Boxes trailer
Fruity flavour 4.3 48.6 33.4 13.4 7.6 33.4 12.3 4.4 14.0 65.8 11.9 15.1 26.8 24.3
Greenish-yellow
colour 3.3 53.5 36.0 7.2 7.2 27.1 3.3 3.3 3.3 45.3 7.0 9.9 6.7 7.3
Place of
purchase: olive-
oil mills and
cooperatives 3.1 – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Protected
designation of
origin (PDO) 2.9 – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Low degree of
acidity 4.1 55.7 16.5 39.1 18.1 50.5 34.9 39.7 51.3 75.4 8.5 14.1 52.3 34.4
Price 3.8 6.7 12.8 15.3 14.3 19.6 12.2 15.4 12.2 8.3 17.5 2.8 4.1 4.1
Bottle 2.1 – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Organic
agriculture 2.6 28.1 27.3 18.9 22.8 39.3 26.0 16.5 21.8 53.1 18.8 22.5 29.6 18.0
Environmentally
friendly
production 2.4 2.9 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Creation of
employment in
the rural areas 1.8 0.0 0.0 37.2 18.9 12.2 60.1 37.4 54.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Maintenance of
the rural
population 1.8 0.0 0.0 29.3 13.5 10.7 51.7 31.7 44.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

(Wpj) 719.6 452.0 468.1 302.6 658.1 521.4 418.6 562.1 911.5 224.4 224.2 444.4 331.6
Normalized relative
contribution (Wpj-norm) 5.5 3.5 3.6 2.3 5.1 4.0 3.2 4.3 7.0 1.7 1.7 3.4 2.6
Note: –, No relationship
“fertilization”, “treatment of the olive moth (Prays oleae)”, “timing of irrigation”, “soil A quality
management”, and “fertilizers applied” are the olive-growing practices that optimally satisfy function
consumer requirements regarding olive-oil quality attributes. Within these previous ones, deployment
the specific practices that most meet consumer demands towards olive-oil quality attributes
are in this order: “separation of olives from the ground and the trees: separation” (QFD) approach
(normalized relative contribution: Wpj-norm ¼ 7); “timing of harvest: according to the fruit-
ripeness index” (Wpj-norm ¼ 5.5); “method of ground harvest: no picking from the ground” 205
(Wpj-norm ¼ 5.1); “method of tree harvest: handpicking” (Wpj-norm ¼ 4.3); “treatment of pests
and diseases: Yes” (Wpj-norm ¼ 3.6) (see Table IV). Below, the results are discussed in
chronological order of the practices in the production cycle of olives.
From the results shown in Table IV, the effect of the “variety” stands out as the most
influential factor in the satisfaction of the overall set of attributes of olive-oil quality, the
variety “Picual” being the most recommended (Wpj-norm ¼ 3.2). In this sense, these results
agree with those reported by Pardo et al. (2013). These authors revealed that the oils from
the variety Picual showed notably high stability, due to its high phenol content. Also, its
composition in fatty acids and its natural antioxidants, polyphenols, and tocopherols,
essentially, make Picual oil fruity and fragrant and give it very high stability and therefore a
longer shelf life (Uceda, 2009; Uceda and Aguilera Herrera, 2010; Uceda and Uceda, 2013).
With respect to the soil-management techniques that most satisfy the requirements of the
consumers with respect to the olive-oil quality attributes, the results of the present study
indicate that the technique of covered soil is the most recommended (Wpj-norm ¼ 2.2). These
results coincide with those of Humanes and Humanes (2009) whose tests have demonstrated
that the management of the plant cover avoids a large part of the drawbacks of tillage and
thereby satisfies the social demand for an ecologically friendly productive system.
On the other hand, water availability during fruit development has been reported as one
of the most important agricultural factors in the later phenolic composition of the virgin
olive oil produced. In this sense, the expert interviews refer to the need of irrigation
“Irrigation: Yes” (Wpj-norm ¼ 2.1), using “Drip irrigation” for the satisfaction of the demand of
the olive-oil quality attributes (Wpj-norm ¼ 1.2). In the works of Pastor (2005) and Salas et al.
(1997) on the influence of irrigation in the quality of the olive oil, similar results were found.
These authors have observed that the mean value of the oleic acid content of the oil from
rainfed olives was lower than that for irrigated orchards. Also, Vega et al. (2009) revealed
that the stability and the extractability of rainfed olives were lower than the values for
irrigated orchards. Also, the research of Servili et al. (2007), Berenguer et al. (2006), and
Romero et al. (2002) reflect a greater content in polyphenols in the irrigated crop, although
some works (Salas et al., 1997; Faci et al., 2000; Dabbou et al., 2011; Rivas et al., 2013)
contradict these results and agree that the concentration of phenolic compounds in oil
diminish as the amount of water applied increases. The sensorial attribute that is affected
most by irrigation is bitterness, showing lower intensities in olives from irrigated crops.
In addition to the irrigation techniques, it bears highlighting that the experts recommend
paying special attention to irrigation timing “following expert advice” (Wpj-norm ¼ 1.9), and,
according to Vega et al. (2009), the irrigation needs of an olive orchard vary greatly
depending on the rainfall and tree characteristics.
Regarding the effect of fertilization to satisfy the demand of olive-oil quality attributes,
the results recommend “fertilization: no” (Wpj-norm ¼ 2.0) and if fertilizer is used “organic
fertilizers, including pruning debris, compost, etc.” (Wpj-norm ¼ 2.7) as fertilizing substances.
These results are in line with those of Tekaya et al. (2013), who indicate that fertilizer leads
to a significant reduction in the phenol content, the main natural antioxidants in olive oil,
which can have a potentially negative effect on oil quality. Similarly, Anastasopoulos et al.
(2011) concluded that olive oils made from ecologically fertilized olives have higher quality
indices than when orchards received industrial fertilizers.
BFJ Also, the results of this study show that the practices in relation to the treatment of pests
119,1 and diseases (olive fly and olive moth) have a significant effect in satisfying the consumer
demand towards the quality attributes of olive oil, since pests and diseases constitute the
agricultural factor that most negatively affects the quality of olive oil (Delgado, 2013).
Specifically, the experts that have participated in this study recommend “treatment of pests
and diseases: yes” (Wpj-norm ¼ 3.6), using “biological control (Opius concolor)” (Wpj-norm ¼ 2.6)
206 to control the olive fruit fly and finally “biological control (Bacillus thuringiensis) at
flowering” (Wpj-norm ¼ 2.5) to control the olive moth. The olive moth (Prays oleae Bern.) and
the olive fruit fly (Bactrocera oleae) are the most intense and widespread olive pests in Spain
and those exerting the greatest impact on olive-oil quality (Ruiz Torres, 2009; Alonso and
García, 2012).
With respect to the treatment of olive moth, the recommendations of the experts agree
with the results of Alvarado et al. (2008) indicating that the bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis is
highly effective in controlling the anthophagous generation of Prays oleae.
The olive fruit fly indirectly affects olive-oil quality, given that the increase in acidity
and the deterioration of the organoleptic characteristics is not due to the attack itself
of the fly, but rather the breakage of the epidermis of the fruit, favouring the implantation of
a complex of pathogenic microorganisms ( Jiménez and Carpio, 2008). Some studies
(Sime et al., 2008; Hegazi et al., 2007) have recommended several types of parasitoids to
biologically combat this fly, such as the release of previously sterilized male flies or the
massive release of enemy insects.
On the other hand, the results of the present study reveal that the practices in relation to
the harvest of olives (harvest method, harvest period, etc.) are the factors that most satisfy
the requirements of the consumers. Specifically, their importance takes the following order:
“separation of olives from the ground and the trees” (Wpj-norm ¼ 7.0); “method of ground
harvest: no picking from the ground” (Wpj-norm ¼ 5.1), and “Method of tree harvest:
handpicking” (Wpj-norm ¼ 4.0). These results concur with those of Tous et al. (2013) and
Uceda and Aguilera Herrera (2010), who clearly show the alteration that occurs when the
olives fall and remain on the ground, in terms of oxidation, hydrolysis, and fermentation.
Also, these authors reveal that the processing of the fruits harvested from the tree under
proper conditions produces oils of quality and in all the cases studied they can be classified
as extra-virgin. Meanwhile, the indiscriminate preparation of the fruits without the
separation into post-harvest and preliminary operations leads to the loss of overall quality.
Apart from the manner of harvesting the olives, the results evidence the importance of
“timing of harvest: according to a fruit-ripeness index” (Wpj-norm ¼ 5.5), since the state of
maturity of the olive is one of the most important factors associated with the sensorial
quality of virgin olive oil (Ben Youssef et al., 2010). In this sense, the works of Tous et al.
(2013), Ben Youssef et al. (2010), and Rotondi and Magli (2004), among others, show the
existence of an inverse relation between fruit ripeness and content in polyphenols and
volatile compounds. As the fruit-ripeness index rises, the content in phenolic compounds
sharply descends especially in those derived from hydroxytyrosol secoiridoids and tyrosol.
In addition, the results of Dabbou et al. (2011) indicate that as the fruit ripens the oil becomes
less stable due to the decline in the polyphenol content, and the quality index as well as the
fatty acid composition are also affected.
Finally, after the harvest of the olives, the “transport of olives from the orchard to the
mill” appears to have a major effect on the quality attributes of olive-oil quality. According
to our results, to ensure the satisfaction of the consumer demand for quality olive oil, the
olives need to be transported in “boxes” (Wpj-norm ¼ 3.4) as recommended also by Tous et al.
(2013). According to these authors, to transport olives in individual 20 kg boxes is the most
appropriate system to ensure that the raw material stays aerated, receives less compression,
and undergoes the least damage possible before processing. In this way, olive fermentation
(called atroje in Spanish), one of the most frequent defects in the oil, is avoided. If the olive A quality
also undergoes compression and crushing which release juices and encourage the function
development of bacteria and fungi, the oil will take on unpleasant flavours that will require deployment
refinement (Tous et al., 2013).
(QFD) approach
4. Conclusion
This paper presents a methodological approach to integrate consumer needs concerning 207
olive-oil quality attributes into the specific olive-growing practices most appropriate to meet
these needs.
The QFD technique, in combination with other qualitative methods, proved useful to
determine which practices have the greatest influence on consumer requirements. In other
words, it permits the design of production strategies to optimally satisfy the “consumer voice”
with regard to olive-oil quality.

Our analyses show that the olive-oil quality attributes most requested by consumers
incorporate organoleptic (acidity, flavour, colour, etc.), sociocultural (creating employment in
rural areas, maintenance of the rural population, etc.) and environmental ones (environmental
externalities). The relevant required quality olive-oil attributes should be clearly described on
the label, to allow consumers to identify the quality features. Additionally, claims about the
above-mentioned perceived attributes give consumers important tools to make an informed
choice. Today, many consumers are aware of different quality schemes, and for this reason,
the olive-oil sector should work more to offer clear information.
The above results represent an opportunity in the market value chain to develop a quality
olive oil which is more oriented towards the consumer and able to face future segmentations in
the market. This is one of the main innovative features of this study, as it offers “good
practice” guidelines to agents of the olive-oil sector from the consumer perspective.
On the other hand, the HoQ analysis has demonstrated that the “separation of
olives from the ground and the trees: separation”, “timing of harvest: according to the
fruit-ripeness index”, “method of tree harvest: handpicking”, “method of ground harvest: no
picking from the ground”, “variety: Picual”, “transport olives from the orchard to the mill: in
boxes”, “treatment of pests and diseases: yes”, “treatment of olive fruit fly (Bactrocera oleae):
biological control”, “fertilization: yes”, “treatment of olive moth (Prays oleae): biological
control”, “timing of irrigation: following expert advice”, “soil management: covered soil”,
and “fertilizers applied: organic fertilizers, including pruning debris, compost, etc.”, are the
olive-growing practices that optimally satisfy consumer requirements regarding olive-oil
quality attributes. Therefore, to meet consumers’ needs, the olive-oil sector should focus on
these practices. Any effective agricultural policy for the olive sector which takes the
preferences of the public into account must be designed to favour the implementation of
these practices. This would help to improve legitimacy and boost public support for the
Common Agricultural Policy subsidies for the agricultural sector in general and the olive
sector in particular.
From an academic standpoint, this study represents a methodological and practical
contribution to existing research, which traditionally tends to approach the problem from a
unidimensional perspective (partial approach), i.e. either from the consumer or from the
business perspective. The proposed methodology was illustrated through the specific case
of olive oil, but it is nonetheless quite versatile. It could also be applied to other agents
involved in the olive sector (processing industries: mills, distribution, and marketing
management, etc.) to more fully investigate the impact of all these practices on consumers’
perceived olive-oil quality attributes. This study highlights that the quality attributes of
olive oil are determined by the different practices performed at the different stages of the
process along the chain. This is the most reliable way to guarantee that the most sought-
after quality characteristics are taken into account, not only in the farming stage, as
BFJ performed in this study, but also in the various different stages of the olive agri-food chain
119,1 (processing, marketing, distribution, etc.). However, the results found here are particularly
valuable in helping policy makers to design marketing strategies and agricultural policies to
improve the sustainability and competitiveness of Spanish olive oil.
208 Note
1. The practices that were considered the most important and significant to satisfy consumer
demand towards the quality attributes of olive-oil quality were those that had a relative normalized
contribution ⩾ the mean value of the normalized relative contribution that in this case is 2.1.
References
Akao, Y. (1997), “QFD: past, present and future”, 2nd International Symposium on QFD’97, Linköping,
1-2 October.
Alba, J., Martínez, F., Moyano, M.J. and Hidaligo, F. (2009), “Tecnología de elaboración de aceite de oliva
virgen”, in Vilar Hernández, J. (Ed.), Algunas contribuciones sobre olivicultura y elaiotecnia desde
la perspectiva de la experiencia, Mechanical Separation-GEA Westfalia Separatror Andalucía,
Jaén, pp. 137-173.
Alonso, A. and García, M. (2012), “Eficacia del trampeo masivo en el control de la mosca del olivo
Bactrocera oleae (Diptera: Tephritidae): determinación del daño al fruto y de la pérdida
económica en cantidad y calidad del aceite”, Boletín de Sanidad Vegetal-Plagas, Vol. 38 No. 2,
pp. 291-309.
Alvarado, M., Civantos, M. and Durán, J.M. (2008), “Plagas”, in Fernandez Escobar, R. and Barranco, D.
(Eds), El cultivo del olivo, Ediciones Mundi-Prensa y Junta de Andalucía, Madrid, pp. 509-593.
Anastasopoulos, E., Kalogeropoulos, N., Kaliora, A.C., Kountouri, A. and Andrikopoulos, N.K. (2011),
“The influence of ripening and crop year on quality indices, polyphenols, terpenic acids,
squalene, fatty acid profile, and sterols in virgin olive oil (Koroneiki cv.) produced by organic
versus non-organic cultivation method”, International Journal of Food Science and Technology,
Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 170-178.
Aprile, M.C., Caputo, V. and Nayga, R.M. (2012), “Consumer’ valuation of food quality labels: the case of
the European geographic indication and organic farming labels”, International Journal of
Consumer Studies, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 158-165.
Baptista, A. and Biswas, P. (2010), “Quality differentiation as a strategy for the viability of traditional
olive farming in Trás os-Montes region”, 116th European Association of Agricultural Economics
Seminar: Spatial Dynamics in Agri-food Systems: Implications for Sustainability and Consumer
Welfare, Parma, 27-30 October.
Belletti, G., Andrea Marescotti, A., Sanz-Cañada, J. and Vakoufarisd, H. (2015), “Linking protection of
geographical indications to the environment: evidence from the European Union olive-oil sector”,
Land Use Policy, Vol. 48, pp. 94-106.
Ben Youssef, N., Zarrouk, W., Carrasco-Pancorbo, A., Ouni, Y., Segura Carretero, A.,
Fernández-Gutiérrez, A. and Zarrouk, M. (2010), “Effect of olive ripeness on chemical
properties and phenolic composition of Chétoui virgin olive oil”, Journal of Science of Food and
Agriculture, Vol. 90 No. 2, pp. 199-204.
Benner, M., Linnemann, A.R., Jongen, W.M.F. and Fostar, P. (2003), “Quality function deployment (QFD) –
can it be used to develop food products?”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 327-339.
Berenguer, M.J., Vossen, P.M., Grattan, S.R., Connell, J.H. and Polito, V.S. (2006), “Tree irrigation levels
for optimum chemical and sensory properties of olive oil”, HortScience, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 427-432.
Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F. and Marchetti, B. (2012), “Development and test of a new fuzzy-QFD
approach for characterizing customers rating of extra virgin olive oil”, Food Quality and
Preference, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 75-84.
Bonnet, C. and Simioni, M. (2001), “Assessing consumer response to protected designation of origin A quality
labelling: a mixed multinomial logit approach”, European Review of Agricultural Economics, function
Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 433-449.
deployment
Cacchiarelli, L., Carbone, A., Laureti, T. and Sorrentino, A. (2016), “The value of the certifications of
origin: a comparison between the Italian olive oil and wine markets”, British Food Journal, (QFD) approach
Vol. 118 No. 4, pp. 824-839.
Cárdenas, R. and Vilar, J. (2012), El sector internacional de elaboración de aceite de oliva, GEA Westfalia 209
Separator Andalucía, Jaén.
Carmona-Torres, C., Parra-López, C., Hinojosa-Rodríguez, A. and Sayadi, S. (2014), “Farm-level
multifunctionality associated with farming techniques in olive growing: an integrated
approach”, Agricultural Systems, Vol. 127, pp. 97-114.
Chen, M.F. (2009), “Attitude toward organic foods among Taiwanese as related to health
consciousness, environmental attitudes, and the mediating effects of a healthy lifestyle”,

British Food Journal, Vol. 111 No. 2, pp. 165-178.
Cicia, G., Caracciolo, F., Del Giudice, T., Sannino, G. and Verneau, F. (2013), International European
Forum on Innovation and System Dynamics in Food Networks, No. 164738, Innsbruck-Igls,
18-22 February.
Dabbou, S., Brahmi, F., Selvaggini, R., Chehab, H., Dabbou, S., Taticchi, A., Servili, M. and Hammami, M.
(2011), “Contribution of irrigation and cultivars to volatile profile and sensory attributes of selected
virgin olive oils produced in Tunisia”, International Journal of Food Science and Technology,
Vol. 46 No. 9, pp. 1964-1976.
Delgado, A. (2013), “Cultivo del olivar”, in Palomeque, F., Martínez, Á., Vílchez, J.L. and Rodríguez, G.
(Eds), El olivar y su aceite, Fundación del Olivar, Jaén, pp. 139-168.
Delgado, C. and Guinard, J.X. (2011), “How do consumer hedonic ratings for extra virgen olive oil relate
to quality ratings by experts and descriptive analysis ratings”, Food Quality and Preference,
Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 213-225.
Diaz-Mendez, C. and Gómez-Benito, C. (2010), “Nutrition and the Mediterranean diet. A historical and
sociological analysis of the concept of ´healthy diet´ in Spanish society”, Food Policy, Vol. 35
No. 5, pp. 437-447.
Dios-Palomares, R. and Martínez-Paz, J.M. (2011), “Technical, quality and environmental efficiency of
the olive oil industry”, Food Policy, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 526-534.
Erraach, Y., Sayadi, S., Gómez, A.C. and Parra-López, C. (2014), “Consumer stated preferences towards
protected designation of origin (PDO) labels in a traditional olive-oil-producing country: the case
of Spain”, New Medit, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 11-19.
Faci, J.M., Berenguer, M.J., Gracia, S. and Espada, J.L. (2000), “Effect of variable water irrigation supply
in olive (Olea europaea L.) cv. Arbequina in Aragón (Spain). II. Extra virgin oil quality
parameters”, IV International Congress on Olive Growing, Bari, 25-30 September.
Fandos, B. and Flavián, C. (2006), “Intrinsic and extrinsic quality attributes, loyalty and buying
intention: an analysis for a PDO Product”, British Food Journal, Vol. 108 No. 8, pp. 646-662.
FAO (2015), FAOSTAT, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Roma, available at:
http://faostat3.fao.org/home/E (accessed 3 April 2016).
Fotopoulos, C. and Krystallis, A. (2001), “Are quality labels a real marketing advantage? A conjoint
application on Greek PDO protected olive oil”, Journal of International Food and Agribusiness
Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Galluzzo, N. (2007), “Prospects of development of quality olive oil for Italian farms: first indications in a
case of study on a focus group”, 105th European Association of Agricultural Economists
Seminar: International Marketing and International Trade of Quality Food Products, Bologna,
8-10 March.
García, M.M., Aragonés, Z. and Poole, N. (2002), “A repositioning strategy for olive oil in the UK
market”, Agribusiness, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 163-180.
BFJ García-Brenes, M.D. and Sanz-Cañada, J. (2012), “Las cadenas de valor en los sistemas agroalimentarios
119,1 locales de aceite de oliva. Una estimación de las rentas de diferenciación en la Denominación de
Origen de Estepa”, Cuadernos de Estudios Agroalimentarios, Vol. 4, pp. 119-143.
García-Valdecasas, C. (2010), “Estudio de mercado. El mercado del aceite de oliva en Francia”, available
at: www.icex.es/icex/cda/controller/pageICEX/0,6558,5518394_5596400_5547593_4311875_10
7_FR_p5712609,00.html (accessed 1 November 2012).
210 Giampietri, E., Finco, A. and Del Giudice, T. (2016), “Exploring consumers’ behaviour towards short
food supply chains”, British Food Journal, Vol. 118 No. 3, pp. 618-631.
Gómez, J.A., Amato, M., Celano, G. and Koubouris, G.C. (2008), “Organic olive orchards on sloping land:
more than a specialty niche production system?”, Journal of Environmental Management,
Vol. 89 No. 2, pp. 99-109.
Gómez-Limón, J.A. and Arriaza-Balmón, M. (2011), “Evaluación de la sostenibilidad de las
explotaciones de olivar en Andalucía”, XIII Premio unicaja de investigación agraria, available

at: www.unicaja.es/resources/1320671483909.pdf (accessed June 2016).
Govers, C.P.M. (1996), “What and how about quality function deployment (QFD)”, International Journal
of Production Economics, Vols 46-47, pp. 575-585.
Grunert, K.G. (2011), “How changes in consumer behaviour and retailing affect competence
requirements for food producers and processors”, Economía Agraria y Recursos Naturales,
Vol. 6 No. 11, pp. 3-22.
Hegazi, E.S., El-Sonbaty, M.R., Eissa, M.A., Dorria, M.A. and El-Sharony, T.F. (2007), “Effect of organic
and biofertilization on vegetative growth and flowering of Picual olive trees”, Journal of
Agriculture Science, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 210-217.
Hinojosa-Rodríguez, A., Parra-López, C., Carmona-Torres, C. and Sayadi, S. (2014), “Protected
designation of origin in the olive growing sector: adoption factors and goodness of practices in
Andalusia, Spain”, New Medit, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 2-12.
Holmen, E. and Kristensen, P.S. (1998), “Supplier roles in product development: interaction versus task
partitioning”, European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, Vol. 4 Nos 2-3,
pp. 185-193.
Humanes, J. and Humanes, M.D. (2009), “Técnicas de cultivo encaminadas a la mejora de la producción
en el olivar y a su desarrollo sostenible”, in Vilar Hernández, J. (Ed.), Algunas contribuciones
sobre olivicultura y elaiotecnia desde la perspectiva de la experiencia, Mechanical Separation –
GEA Westfalia Separatror Andalucía, Jaén, pp. 101-120.
ICEX (2012), “Información sectorial de alimentos: el aceite de oliva”, available at: www.icex.es/icex/cda/
controller/pageICEX/0,6558,5518394_5596400_5547593_4619693_107_ES_p5712609,00.html
(accessed 13 February 2013).
INE: Spanish National Institute of Statistics (2014), “Different statistical data”, available at: www.ine.es
(accessed 16 September 2014).
Jiménez, B. and Carpio, A. (2008), “La cata de aceites”, in Consejería de Agricultura y Pesca (Ed.),
Aceites de oliva virgen. Características organolépticas y análisis sensorial, Junta de Andalucía,
Córdoba, pp. 16-75.
Jiménez-Guerrero, J.F., Gázquez-Abad, J.C., Mondéjar-Jiménez, J.A. and Huertas-García, R. (2012),
“Consumer preferences for olive-oil attributes: a review of the empirical literature using a
conjoint approach”, in Boskou, D. (Ed.), Olive Oil - Constituents, Quality, Health Properties and
Bioconversions, InTech., Rijeka, pp. 233-247.
Junta de Andalucía (2015), “Plan director del Olivar”, available at: http://juntadeandalucia.es/boja/2015/
54/BOJA15-054-00147-4877-01_00066097.pdf (accessed 20 June 2015).
Krystallis, A. and Ness, M. (2005), “Consumer preferences for quality foods from a south European
perspective: a conjoint analysis implementation on Greek olive oil”, International Food and
Agribusiness Management Review, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 62-91.
Lazaridis, P. (2004), “Olive oil consumption in Greece: a microeconometric analysis”, Journal of Family A quality
and Economic Issues, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 411-430. function
Liboreiro, C.P. and Daibert, A.L.P. (2012), “Employment of the quality function deployment (QFD) deployment
method in the development of food products”, in Valdez, B. (Ed.), Scientific, Health and Social
Aspects of the Food Industry, InTech., Rijeka, pp. 439-436. (QFD) approach
MAGRAMA (2014), “Anuario de Estadística 2013”, Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio
Ambiente (MAGRAMA), Madrid, available at: www.magrama.gob.es/estadistica/pags/ 211
anuario/2013/AE_2013_Completo.pdf (accessed 3 September 2015).
Marano Marcolini, C., Parras Rosa, M. and Lopez-Zafra, E. (2014), “Designations and consumer
perceptions: an experimental study and implications for agricultural policy”, British Food
Journal, Vol. 117 No. 3, pp. 1188-1204.
Marbán-Flores, R. (2003), “Posibles estrategias comerciales para el desarrollo local y regional en la
industria de la transformación del aceite de oliva: La región de Castilla-La Mancha”, Problemas

del Desarrollo, Vol. 34 No. 135, pp. 49-64.
Marbán-Flores, R. (2004), “Las denominaciones de origen y las etiquetas ecológicas impulsoras de
estrategias de comercialización, basadas en la calidad, en las almazaras cooperativas de Castilla-
La Mancha”, Revista de Estudios Cooperativos, Vol. 82, pp. 71-88.
Marbán-Flores, R. (2005), “Principales estrategias de gestión de la calidad desarrolladas por las
almazaras cooperativas amparadas en la denominación de origen Montes de Toledo. CIRIEC-
España”, Revista de Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa, Vol. 51, pp. 185-209.
Menapace, L., Colson, G., Grebitus, C. and Facendola, M. (2008), “Consumer preferences for extra virgin
olive oil with country-of-origin and geographical indication labels in Canada”, American
Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Orlando, FL, 27-29 July (New Name 2008:
Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
Mili, S., Júdez, L., De Andrés, R. and Urzainqui, E. (2013), “Evaluating the impacts of policy reforms
under changing market conditions on olive farming in Southern Spain”, New Medit, Vol. 4 No. 1,
pp. 22-36.
Molina Lanzas, J.R. and Moral Pajares, E. (2010), “Mercados estratégicos para la promoción del aceite
de oliva virgen español”, Revista de Estudios Empresariales, Vol. 1, pp. 85-102.
Montedoro, G., Servili, M., Baldiolo, M. and Miniati, E. (1992), “Simple and hydrolizable phenolics
compounds in virgin olive oil. Their extraction, separation and quantitate and semiquantitative
evaluation by HPLC”, Journal of Agricultural Food Chemistry, Vol. 40 No. 9, pp. 1571-1576.
Moyano-Fuentes, J., Bruque-Cámara, S. and Sacristán-Díaz, M. (2002), “Calidad y subsistema
productivo en la industria agroalimentaria. Un estudio empírico aplicado al cooperativismo
oleícola”, Revista Española de Estudios Agrosociales y Pesqueros, Vol. 194, pp. 49-69.
Naspetti, S. and Zanoli, R. (2009), “Organic food quality and safety perception throughout Europe”,
Journal of Food Products Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 249-266.
Naspetti, S., Alberti, F. and Solfanelli, F. (2012), “Quality determinants in the organic cheese supply
chain: a quality function deployment approach”, New Medit, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 62-65.
Naspetti, S., Alberti, F. and Solfanelli, F. (2015), “Quality function deployment in the organic
animal food sector: application to poultry meat”, Italian Journal of Animal Science, Vol. 14 No. 3,
pp. 554-550.
Pardo, J.E., Sena, E., Cuesta, M.A., Granell, J.D., Valiente, J. and Alvarez-Ortí, M. (2013), “Evaluation of
potential and real quality of virgin olive oil from ‘Campos de Hellín’ (Albacete, Spain)”, Journal of
the American Oil Chemists’ Society, Vol. 90 No. 6, pp. 85-862.
Park, S.H., Ham, S. and Lee, M.A. (2012), “How to improve the promotion of Korean beef barbecue,
Bulgogi, for international customers. An application of quality function deployment”, Appetite,
Vol. 59 No. 2, pp. 324-332.
Parra-López, C. and Calatrava-Requena, J. (2005), “Factors related to the adoption of organic farming in
Spanish olive orchards”, Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 5-16.
BFJ Parra-López, C. and Calatrava-Requena, J. (2006), “Comparison of farming techniques actually
119,1 implemented and their rationality in organic and conventional olive groves in Andalusia, Spain”,
Biological Agriculture and Horticulture, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 35-59.
Parra-López, C., Calatrava-Requena, J. and De Haro-Giménez, T. (2007a), “A multi-criteria evaluation of
the environmental performances of conventional, organic and integrated olive-growing systems
in the south of Spain based on experts’ knowledge”, Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems,
Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 189-203.
212
Parra-López, C., De Haro-Giménez, T. and Calatrava-Requena, J. (2007b), “Diffusion and adoption of
organic farming in the southern Spanish olive groves”, Journal of Sustainable Agriculture,
Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 105-151.
Parra-López, C., Groot, J., Carmona, C. and Rossing, W. (2008), “Integrating public demands into model-
based for multifunctional agriculture: an application to intensive Dutch dairy landscapes”,
Ecological Economics, Vol. 67 No. 4, pp. 538-551.

Parra-López, C., Hinojosa-Rodríguez, A., Carmona-Torres, C. and Sayadi, S. (2016), “ISO 9001
implementation and associated manufacturing and marketing practices in the olive oil industry
in southern Spain”, Food Control, Vol. 62, pp. 23-31.
Pastor, M. (2005), Cultivo del olivo con riego localizado, Consejería de Agricultura y Pesca de la Junta de
Andalucía and Ediciones Mundi-Prensa, Madrid.
Pérez-y-Pérez, L., Egea, P. and Sanz-Cañada, J. (2013), “Valoración de externalidades territoriales en
denominaciones de origen de aceite de oliva mediante técnica de Proceso Analítico de Red”,
ITEA, Vol. 2, pp. 239-262.
Platania, M. and Privitera, D. (2006), “Typical products and consumer preferences: the ‘soppressata’
case”, British Food Journal, Vol. 108 No. 5, pp. 385-395.
Ramanathan, R. and Ganesh, L.S. (1994), “Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: an
evaluation and intrinsic process for deriving member’s Wieghayages”, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 79 No. 2, pp. 249-265.
Rivas, A.M., Sánchez, A., Lorenzo, M.L., Callejón, R.M., Jiménez, B. and Úbeda, M. (2013), “Influencia del
riego sobre las características organolépticos y el contenido de compuestos fenólicos del aceite
de oliva virgen”, in Vilar Hernández, J., Higueras Gallardo, P., Velasco Gámez, M.M. and
Puentes Poyatos, R. (Eds), El sector de elaboración de aceite de oliva: Un estudio multidisciplinar,
Centro Internacional de Excelencia para Aceite de Oliva – GEA Westfalia Separatror Andalucía,
Jaén, pp. 13-42.
Rodríguez Cohard, J.C. and Parras Rosa, M. (2012), “Los canales de comercialización de los aceites de
oliva españoles”, Cuaderno de Estudios Agroalimentarios: Las cadenas de valor globales y el
sector agroalimentario, Vol. 4, pp. 93-102.
Romero, M.P., Tovar, M.J., Girona, J. and Motilva, M.J. (2002), “Changes in the HPLC phenolic profile of
virgin olive oil from young trees (Olea europaea L. cv. Arbequina) grown under different deficit
irrigation strategies”, Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, Vol. 50 No. 19, pp. 5349-5354.
Romo Muñoz, R., Lagos Moya, M. and Gil, J.M. (2015), “Market values for olive oil attributes in Chile:
a hedonic price function”, British Food Journal, Vol. 117 No. 1, pp. 358-370.
Rotondi, A. and Magli, M. (2004), “Ripening of olives var. Correggiolo: modification of oxidative
stability of oils during fruit ripening and oil storage”, Journal of Food, Agriculture and
Environment, Vol. 2 Nos 3-4, pp. 193-199.
Rudolph, M.J. (1995), “The food product development process”, British Food Journal, Vol. 97 No. 3,
pp. 3-11.
Ruiz Avilés, P., Navarro, L., Barea, F. and Vázquez, A. (2007), “La calidad de las Denominaciones de
Origen en los aceites de oliva andaluces”, Distribución y Consumo, Vol. 42, pp. 42-50.
Ruiz Torres, M. (2009), “Comentarios a los métodos de control de la mosca del olivo”, Vida Rural,
Vol. 291, pp. 17-20.
Saaty, T.L. (1989), “Group decision making and the AHP”, in Golden, B.L., Wasil, E.A. and Haerker, P.T. A quality
(Eds), The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Applications and Studies, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 59-67. function
Salas, J., Pastor, M., Castro, J. and Vega, V. (1997), “Influencia del riego sobre la composición y deployment
características organolépticas del aceite de oliva”, Grasas y Aceites, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 74-82.
Santosa, M. and Guinard, J.X. (2011), “Means-end chains analysis of extra virgin olive oil purchase and
(QFD) approach
consumption behaviour”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 304-316.
Santosa, M., Abdi, H. and Guinard, J.X. (2010), “A modiﬁed sorting task to investigate consumer 213
perceptions of extra virgin olive oils”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 21 No. 7, pp. 881-892.
Sanz Cañada, J. (2009), “Las Denominaciones de Origen Protegidas de aceite de oliva en España:
sistemas agroalimentarios locales, gobernanza y externalidades territoriales”, in Vilar, J. and
Espinosa, E. (Eds), Algunas contribuciones sobre olivicultura y elaiotecnia desde la perspectiva de
la experiencia, GEA Westfalia Separator Andalucía, Jaén, pp. 225-241.
Sanz Cañada, J. (2011), “Ancrage et identité territoriale des systèmes agroalimentaires localisés”,
Économie Rurale, Vol. 322, pp. 4-10.
Sanz Cañada, J. and Macías Vazquez, A. (2005), “Quality certification, institutions and innovation in
local agro-food systems: protected designations of origin of olive oil in Spain”, Journal of Rural
Studies, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 475-486.
Sanz Cañada, J., García Brenes, M.D. and Alcántara, M.B. (2015), “Value chain and typicity analysis in
Jaén Mountain olive oil, Spain”, New Medit, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 50-60.
Servili, M., Esposto, S., Lodolini, E., Selvaggini, R., Taticchi, A., Urbani, S., Montedoro, G., Serravalle, M.
and Gucci, R. (2007), “Irrigation effects on quality, phenolic composition and selected
volatiles of virgin olive oils cv”, Leccino, Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, Vol. 55
No. 16, pp. 6609-6618.
Silva-Pérez, R. (2005), “Agricultura y competitividad territorial en Andalucía”, Estudios Geográficos,
Vol. 66 No. 259, pp. 689-719.
Sime, K.R., Daane, K.M., Wang, X.G., Johnson, M.W. and Messing, R.H. (2008), “Evaluation of Fopius
arisanus as a biological control agent for the olive fruit fly in California”, Agricultural and Forest
Entomology, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 423-431.
Spanish Interprofesional Olive Oil Association (2010), “Estudio sobre hábitos de uso y consumo de aceite
de oliva en el canal horeca en España”, available at: www.interprofesionaldelaceitedeoliva.com/
portal/descargas/estudios/Estudio_Aceite_Oliva_en_Horeca.pdf (accessed 24 September 2013).
Sweet, T., Balakrishnan, J., Robertson, B., Stolee, J. and Karim, S. (2010), “Applying quality function
deployment in food safety management”, British Food Journal, Vol. 112 No. 6, pp. 624-639.
Tekaya, M., Mechri, B., Bchir, A., Attia, F., Cheheb, H., Daassad, M. and Hammami, M. (2013), “Effect of
nutrient-based fertilisers of olive trees on olive oil quality”, Journal of Science of Food and
Agriculture, Vol. 93 No. 8, pp. 2045-2052.
Torres-Ruiz, F., Murgado, E.M., Vega-Zamora, M. and Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M. (2010), “Efectos del envase
en la percepción de calidad de los aceites de oliva en un contexto de prueba”, Revista de Estudios
Empresariales, Segunda época, Vol. 1, pp. 129-143.
Tous, J., Romero, A. and Hermoso, J.F. (2013), “Influencia de factores agronómicos e industriales en la
producción y calidad del aceite”, in Vilar Hernández, J., Higueras Gallardo, P., Velasco Gámez, M.M.
and Puentes Poyatos, R. (Eds), El sector de elaboración de aceite de oliva: Un estudio multidisciplinar,
Centro Internacional de Excelencia para Aceite de Oliva – GEA Westfalia Separatror Andalucía,
Jaén, pp. 291-309.
Uceda, M. (2009), “Composición y calidad de los aceites de oliva vírgenes extra. Influencia de la
calidad”, in Vilar, J. and Espinosa, E. (Eds), Algunas contribuciones sobre olivicultura y elaiotecnia
desde la perspectiva de la experiencia, GEA Westfalia Separator Andalucía, Jaén, pp. 175-185.
Uceda, M. and Aguilera Herrera, M.P. (2010), “Características sensoriales del aceite de oliva de calidad”,
in Vilar Hernández, J., Velasco Gámez, M.M., Higueras Gallardo, P., Puentes Poyatos, R.,
García Vico, J. and Moreno Doménech, P. (Eds), El patrimonio Oleícola. Análisis desde la
diversidad del conocimiento, GEA Westfalia Separator Andalucía, Jaén, pp. 220-231.
BFJ Uceda, M. and Uceda, M. (2013), “Composición y calidad de los aceites de oliva vírgenes. Influencia de la
119,1 variedad”, in Palomeque, F., Martínez, Á., Vílchez, J.L. and Rodríguez, G. (Eds), El olivar y su
aceite, SpainFundación del Olivar, GEA Westfalia Separator Andalucía, Jaén, pp. 477-499.
Vatthanakul, S., Jangchud, A., Jangchud, K., Therdthai, N. and Wilkinson, B. (2010), “Gold Kiwi Leather
product development using quality function deployment approach”, Food Quality and
Preference, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 339-345.
Vega, V., Hiladago, J. and Hidalgo, J.C. (2009), “Riego y fertirrigación del olivar”, in Vilar, J. (Ed.),
214 Algunas contribuciones sobre olivicultura y elaiotecnia desde la perspectiva de la experiencia,
Mechanical Separation – GEA Westfalia Separatror Andalucía, Jaén, pp. 75-100.
Vermeir, I. and Verbeke, W. (2006), “Sustainable food consumption: exploring the consumer ‘attitude-
behavioral intention’ gap”, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, Vol. 19 No. 2,
pp. 169-194.
Viaene, J. and Januszewska, R. (1999), “Quality function deployment in the chocolate industry”, Food
Quality and Preference, Vol. 10 Nos 4-5, pp. 377-385.

Vilar-Hernández, J., Velasco-Gámez, M.M. and Puentes-Poyatos, R. (2011), “Consequences of implanting
a quality management system in olive oil manufacture: an international study”,
Agroalimentaria, Vol. 15 No. 29, pp. 69-86.
Vinayak, K. and Kodali, R. (2013), “Benchmarking the quality function deployment models”,
Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 825-854.
Corresponding author
Samir Sayadi can be contacted at: samir.sayadi@juntadeandalucia.es
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

Sayadi 2017 (Oliva)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sayadi 2017 (Oliva)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

British Food Journal

Translating consumer’s olive-oil quality-attribute requirements into optimal olive-

Permanent link to this document:

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Institute of Agricultural Research and Training (IFAPA), Granada, Spain

Performace Part Process Production

Design Manufacturing Production

Importance Importance Importance

The four-phase model

Sensorial and chemical Fruity flavour 4.3 0.796

where n is the total number of requirements.

3. Results and discussion

3.2 Optimal olive-growing practices: the “HOWs”

Absolute total contribution

Absolute total contribution

Absolute total contribution

Absolute total contribution

with regard to olive-oil quality.

consciousness, environmental attitudes, and the mediating effects of a healthy lifestyle”,

explotaciones de olivar en Andalucía”, XIII Premio unicaja de investigación agraria, available

industria de la transformación del aceite de oliva: La región de Castilla-La Mancha”, Problemas

Ecological Economics, Vol. 67 No. 4, pp. 538-551.

Quality and Preference, Vol. 10 Nos 4-5, pp. 377-385.

You might also like