Molina 1

Kayla Molina

Dr. Kevin Lindberg

ENGL 1302-102

8 November 2023

Which is better? Inorganic vs Organic products.

What drives a customer to purchase certain products? This question is the most

commonly researched topic that often has different results. The willingness to pay, consumer

trust, social pressure, and health benefits are some factors that can affect data in this research.

One specific product that is often discussed is organic foods. Researchers conduct investigations

to determine whether organic products are genuinely beneficial for customer consumption.

Although there are some benefits to organic foods, it is not always the best option compared to

conventional. Thus, the two food options have little difference, and conventional products are the

cheapest and least pressuring choices.

To begin, when reviewing the rate of purchasability for non-organic foods, it is much

higher than organic. The reason for this is because of the embedded consumer trust, a localized

or personal form of trust (Nuttavthisit and Thogerson 324), in these products. Especially when a

well-known company produces a product that consumers are familiar with. The credibility of

these foods is crucial to a customer’s purchase of that product. They need to believe that what

they are going to buy is authentic. For example, people buy from Takis, a company that sells

spicy chips, because it is a popular chip brand that customers have a history of eating. More

often than not, a customer will not pay for organic food products due to a lack of familiarity with

the company. Organic food brand companies rely on disembedded trust, a universalistic or

institutional trust (Nuttavthisit and Thogerson 324), to sell their products. They use a simple
 Molina 2

label of “green” to persuade customers to purchase the food. However, using only a label can

negatively affect the company economically. Moreover, credibility or trust in inorganic food

products easily surpasses organic food products also because of their accessibility.

Similarly to credibility, the willingness to pay for products varies in each situation. Due

to the premium price of organic foods, it can be inaccessible to people with lower incomes or

limited budgets. A trend shows that individuals only buy organic foods to present themselves as

a person with high social standing (Kim et al. 365). Thus leading low to middle-wage consumers,

which is the majority of the population, to lean more towards conventional foods. Customers

then increase their price search behavior and consciousness, comparing prices more than health

benefits (Aschemann-Witzel and Zielke 214). For example, I have seen parents reject their

child's request to buy organic foods because of their unfamiliarity with the product and its

premium price compared to the conventional food they always bought.

Additionally, the willingness to pay is not the only factor that can affect purchases but

also social pressure. As stated before, organic food is seen as a product for the wealthy or high-

status presenting. This is merely because of celebrity endorsement of organic products (Kim et

al. 364). An example used in an article, Sophia Uliano, an author on the Oprah Winfrey show,

said, “organic farming protects the planet, so it is a win-win” (Kim et al. 364-365). Therefore

creating a social norm where organic food is the “right choice.” The article also performed tests

on a group of consumers, placing inorganic and organic foods in front of them and letting them

decide which one they wanted to buy. The study was done in different environments that

included the presence of others and on their own. After the study, the consumers were more

inclined to buy organic food in front of others than when they were alone. The social pressure
 Molina 3

inflicted on organic foods was the leading cause of purchases, whereas inorganic purchases were

not. Without the pressure of society, almost everyone willingly picked conventional foods.

Furthermore, the debate over organic versus inorganic health benefits was researched.

Typically, organic foods are “grown without pesticides or fertilizers or routine of antibiotics, or

growth hormones” (Smith-Spangler 348). The health benefits of both products have been tested

accordingly. In a report by Smith-Spangler, two independent researchers gathered statistical

information on methods, health outcomes, and nutrient and contaminated levels of both products.

The data shows that at least sixty-eight percent were the same for both groups in harvesting and

processing methods (Smith-Spangler 352), but no significant differences in nutrient and vitamin

levels (Smith-Spangler 353). Yet, when the results of pesticide contamination levels came in,

seven percent of residue was found in organic, and thirty-eight percent was found in inorganic

(Smith-Spangler 352). The bacteria contamination was not drastic, with seven percent in organic

and six percent in inorganic. Though bacteria contamination is standard for both groups, it was at

a higher risk in organic products. Correspondingly, a bacteria-resistant infection in humans is

more prominent in organic foods because of the use of antibiotics. With this data, although the

percentage of residue in both groups has a large gap, they are close statistically.

Contrary to previous information, there is, without a doubt, a slight nutritional benefit in

organic products, with only one comparison that showed this result. The rest of the data was

heterogeneous, or consistently alike, showing no difference between the two options. Inorganic

products are not necessarily “unhealthy” but merely have more residue. However, it should not

be seen as a negative aspect since it has a lower risk for bacteria-resistant infections.

In summary, the controversy over organic and conventional foods is not as complex as it

may seem. There are few differences between the two, which is shocking due to the saying
 Molina 4

“organic is healthier.” Nonetheless, this saying could be debunked throughout the paper because

of the statistical results that proved they are more heterogeneous. Besides that, people are more

likely to purchase conventional products because of the embedded trust in the companies and the

lower price. In terms of organic food, it has a premium price, catering more to customers with a

higher income who are able to purchase the products. But, price does not always prevent people

from buying organic; social pressure is another factor that can increase the customer's

willingness to pay. Overall, inorganic products were the more picked or bought products without

any pressure or increased willingness to pay. Customers were more comfortable choosing

conventional foods because it is the choice they would rather have than organic.
 Molina 5

Works Cited

Aschemann-witzel, Jessica, and Stephan Zielke. “Can’t Buy Me Green? A Review of Consumer

Perceptions of and Behavior Toward the Price of Organic Food.” The Journal of

Consumer Affairs, vol. 51, no. 1, 2017, pp. 211–51, https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12092.

Kim, Seon-Woong, et al. “‘Look at Me, I’m Buying Organic’: The Effects of Social Pressure on

Organic Food Purchases.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, vol. 43, no.

3, 2018, pp. 364–387. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26797526.

Nagy, László Bendegúz, et al. “Is It Really Organic? Credibility Factors of Organic Food-A

Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis.” PloS One, vol. 17, no. 4, 2022, pp.

e0266855–e0266855, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266855.

Nuttavuthisit, Krittinee, and John Thøgersen. "The Importance of Consumer Trust for the

Emergence of a Market for Green Products: The Case of Organic Food: JBE." Journal of

Business Ethics, vol. 140, no. 2, 2017, pp. 323-337. ProQuest,

https://go.openathens.net/redirector/tamiu.edu?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-

journals/importance-consumer-trust-emergence-market-green/docview/1865250016/se-2

Smith-Spangler C, Crystal, et al. “Are Organic Foods Safer or Healthier than Conventional

Alternatives?: A Systematic Review.” EBSCOhost, 2012 American College of Physician,

4 Sept. 2012, web.s.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=347521d1-

2607-4e6b-a24-ddb71064fd34%40redis.
Molina 6