community supported fishery marketing research

7/28/2019 Community Supported Fishery Marketing Research

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/community-supported-fishery-marketing-research 1/84

ex Corwin

zabeth Frey

bel Gachou

eghana Indurtiarmen Leung

Community Support

Fish



Table of ContentsSecondary Research 3

Stage One Research Objectives & Questions 4

Method: Procedure & Rationale 4

Recruiting & Participant Profiles 5

Data Reduction Process 5

Appendices 13

Stage 1 A-E

Stage 2 F-H

Summary of Findings & Supporting Examples 5 - 7

Survey Questions 7

Stage Two Research Objectives & Questions 8

Method: Procedure & Rationale 8

Recruiting & Participant Profiles 8

First Order Analysis 9 - 11

Second Order Analysis 12

Executive Summary 2



Executive Summary

“Would a Community Supported Fishery work in Virginia?” Communityupported Fisheries like Community Supported Agriculture programs guarantee producmarket for their product while giving customers access to fresh local foods. CSFs haveen successfully launched in Durham, North Carolina and Boston, Massachusetts. Inollaboration with Virginia Sea Grant our research team has set out to determining the idSF design with which to target the William and Mary faculty and staff in order to

acilitate an assessment of the feasibility of a CSF in the Williamsburg area. An onlineurvey was deployed, from which we were able to analyze the responses on 88 members

he William and Mary faculty and staff on eight questions regarding the ideal CSFmarketing mix. We found that participants want variety and prefer common finfish,callops, shrimp, and crab over other species. The ideal CSF program would consist of alf-share (1-3 lbs) of filleted or pan ready fish delivered bi-weekly over a six-montheriod with a P.M. pickup time between Monday and Thursday. Share options should briced to reflect a 10% premium and should include recommended recipes to go with thsh. In the event of shortages, participants will accept up to a third of their share as frozeafood. Though participants are already likely to join a Williamsburg CSF they would

ven more likely to do so if they had the option of a one-month trial period. In additionound that household size does not affect share size preferences, nor does income affectkeness to join. Adherence to the above recommendations we believe would provide th

deal marketing mix to specifically target William and Mary faculty and staff.



BACKGROUND RESEARCH OVERVIEW:

Through our secondary research we aimed to

gain a better understanding of the CSF program. We

examined various CSF initiatives along with current

existing programs. With this background research we

were able to design an interview guide that was used

to structure the conversation during our seven in-

depth interviews. Ultimately we hope the qualitative

insights we gained from these interviews will helpinform future decisions made about creating a

sustainable CSF in Williamsburg.

CSF Overview: A community-supported

fishery (CSF) is a shore-side community of people

collaborating with the local fishing industry,

connecting fishermen directly to local markets. CSF

members pay for a “share” of the fishermen’s catch,

giving the fishing community financial support in

advance of the season, and in return receive a shareof seafood on a regular basis. CSF is tailored after

the community-supported agriculture (CSA) model,

which provides subscribers with farm-fresh shares of

produce and other local food products. CSFs aim to

support local fishermen, improve sustainability,

connect consumers to a fresh and healthy supply of

local seafood, and foster a rewarding relationship

between the local fishermen and consumers.

Existing CSF Programs: The first

Community Supported Fishery and Aquaculture

program was launched in Port Clyde, Maine in 2007.

Since then, CSF projects have been a growing trend

throughout the nation. There are now dozens of CSF

programs across the country. To get a better idea of

the possibilities for structuring a CSF program in

Williamsburg, our group looked into various existing

CSFs, including the Walking Fish CSF at Duke

University, the Port Clyde CSF in Maine,

Charlottesville CSF in Virginia, Monterey in Santa

Cruz, and Off The Hook in Atlantic Canada.

(i) Existing options/packages and pricing: In

the Walking Fish program, consumers have two

processing options, headed and gutted, or filleted.

These share options were priced at $10.25/lb for

filleted and $9.25/lb for headed and gutted. Shares

are delivered in 1-2 or 3-5 lb packages. Other CSFs

are much pricier. Local catch in Monterey Bay for

example charges $20 for 1-1.5lbs of fish fillets.

!

! (ii) How fish is prepared and delivered: One

the main goals of a CSF is to establish a transparent

efficient chain of custody from boat to fork. In the P

Clyde CSF, Co-op fishermen take extra steps to impro

their product quality. They have adopted new pract

that greatly reduce bacteria count, which make

significant difference in seafood quality, especially w

fishermen are at sea several days at a time. CSFs a

create flexible delivery schedules that give lo

members options for when to pick up their share.

! (iii) Existing environmental concerns

consumers: For many species of commonly eaten f

such as haddock, cod, and flounder, the rate

consumption exceeds the rate at which the fish

reproduce. Some consumers are also worried about w

pollution in local bays and rivers, which may affect

quality of the catch.

! (iv) Seafood from safe, trusted sources:

United States imports 80% of its consumed fish. Of

the FDA only checks 2%, making the safety

consuming fish highly questionable. In contrast, lo

fishermen in CSF programs provide CSF members wi

safer, more sustainable source of fresh and hea

seafood. Members who partake in this initiative

know where the seafood came from, and how and w

it is caught.

Secondary Research



Research Objectives & Questio GOAL: We designed specific questions aimed at gaining de

information from our interview participants regarding the feasibility of launch

local CSF initiative in Williamsburg. Our research questions are structured a

the four marketing mix elements of Product, Price, Place and Promotion. Thr

our findings and discoveries, we hope to be able to identify ways to garner in

and commitment from a target consumer group. Moving forward, we ai

constructing a sustainable local CSF with the goal of connecting local fishermtheir market in Williamsburg.

Through these research questions below we hope to gain insig

information for our objectives of each category. Our primary objective

“Product” questions are to get an understanding of clients’ expectations for

packages. For example, what types of fish do they want, and in what quantities

“Place” we aim to identify the location and delivery methods most convenien

potential CSF customers. In examining “Price”, our objectives are to identif

value consumers place on the combination of goods and services that make up a

Our “Promotion” objectives are to seek out the perceived benefits of a CSF a

find the best communication channels to reach our target markets.Research Questions

Our overarching question is, assuming people were to subscribe to a

program in Williamsburg, how should we design the marketing mix in order to a

the most interest and commitment from local customers?

The following are preliminary questions and concerns we had about ea

the four elements of the marketing mix:

1.) What product qualities and specifications are most desirable for potentialparticipants? E.g. Variety, quantity, duration, flexibility, level of processing (cle

vs. fillets) and information about food preparations and recipes

2.) When, where, and how a potential customer would desire to receive or othe products they have purchased?

3.) Compared to other methods of purchasing fish, what is an appropriate pridifferent products and services that could be provided through the CSF?

4.) What type of information is needed to properly promote the CSF?

Method:

Procedure &

RationaleInterview method- (in person): Based on our research objectives, we felt that in-depth interviews were the

method to gain the information that we needed. A few factors account for our choice to opt for one-on-one inter

in person. For one, we were facing considerable budget and time constraints. With only a two-week window w

which to plan and conduct our interviews, we opted to keep things as simple as possible for ourselves. Furthermor

interviewers are relatively inexperienced. From this standpoint, in-depth interviews are much more manageab

beginning researchers in comparison to say focus group interviews. Additionally in-depth interviews ensure

participants could respond freely since they were away from social pressures. This became very important as we

out, since each of our participants had very different lifestyles that impacted their answers. For example, one o

participants until recently had been a devout vegan. Finally, by conducting the interviews in person, usually

participant’s office or classroom, we were able to connect with them on a more personal level, and incorporate a

association activity into our interviews. All interviews were video recorded with the participant’s permission and

transcribed to word documents.



Recruiting & Participant ProfilesIn an attempt to identify other potential target

markets for the CSF, William and Mary faculty and

staff members were interviewed. Faculty members

are an ideal category because they are not only

representative of the W&M Community, but are in

addition a representation of the local community of

Williamsburg as well. By choosing to interviewW&M faculty and staff, it allows us easy access to

obtain an outlook on the older demographic

surrounding this area. By finding faculty and staff

from the business school, physical sciences and

athletic department, we were able to gain multiple

perspectives on our CSF initiative and project.

In total we interviewed seven W&

faculty and staff members. From the sev

interviewees, four were male and three w

female. Their ages’ ranged from the m

20’s to the early 70’s. The majority of

interviewees live in a suburban area. Four

those interviewed were Mason SchoolBusiness Faculty, two were coaches fr

the athletic department, and the fi

participant was a Physical Scien

professor.

Summary of Findings & Supporting Examples

From our multiple interviews, our group had atremendous amount of data and information to sort

through regarding our respondents’ opinions on their

ideal CSF marketing mixes. To reduce, categorize,

and consolidate all of our data, we used an

impressionistic approach by dividing a large poster

paper into the categories of product, place, price, and

promotion. At this point we reviewed each interview

transcript, jotting down key insights and factors onto

sticky notes. We then placed each sticky note in its

relevant category.

Afterwards, we combined similar data entr

and further categorized them under lar

themes. This process allowed us to visua

construct our findings into the beginnings

a functioning conceptual model. In additi

we kept track of the correlations in

participants’ responses. For example,

found a positive relationship between amo

of participants’ knowledge of local f

varieties and magnitude of selectivity of f

types.

Data Reduction Process

PRODUCT

People liked variety but some were wary: We asked a few

questions in order to get an overall sense of potential

product preferences. We found that our participants want

to have a variety of fish. This includes both shellfish and

fin-fish. They also expressed a desire for both oily fish

and flaky fish, especially those who are conscious of thehealth benefits of Omega 3’s. When asked how they felt

about having no prior knowledge of the type of fish they

would be receiving, most participants stated that they like

the surprise. Respondents are drawn to the idea of

branching out and trying new foods and new recipes.

However, some of the people we interviewed expressed a

desire for limited variety or a “selected variety,” whereby

they could be given a list of potential species and choose

the ones they want to receive. One of these participants is

much more knowledgeable of the local seafood selection,while two others are allergic to certain types of shellfish.

Those who were less choosy seem to hav

relatively limited knowledge of local f

species, and thus welcomed the idea

surprise and the idea of someone with m

expertise making the decision for them.

People prefer fillets: Most of our participa

expressed a desire to have their fish fille

When asked if they would be willing to fi

their own fish, if someone showed them h

people were hesitant. We found that

primary issue at hand is not a matter of kno

how, but rather that people prefer

convenience of less prep work and clean

not to mention the odor caused by undesi

fish parts. This finding seems to correspo

with the experiences of several existing CS

Both Off the Hook and Walking F

incorporate fillets into their options.



Household size determines portion size, but flexibility is a plus!: We found that household size was the number

one determinant for preferred share size. Those with larger families tended to want more fish, such as 3-5 lbs of

whole fish. Single participants or couples without kids were wary of committing to share sizes above 2 pounds.

Respondents also want the ability to occasionally buy extra fish, especially for when they have company. In our

primary research, we found that other CSFs such as Off the Hook were able to incorporate this service. We

recommend that any CSF established in Williamsburg offer the same flexibility.

Alternative lifestyles might be an attractive target for a CSF: Lifestyles of the participants also correlate with

the amount of fish they lean towards. Those who have had minimal experience with fish are hesitant to committo larger portions. However one of our participants was a vegan who recently turned vegetarian, and admitted

that fish has become an important source of protein in her diet. This individual wants a disproportionately larger

share of fish and is especially enthusiastic about the prospect of a “more ethical source of meat”. From this, we

infer that vegetarians may make a small but enthusiastic core group to target.

PLACE

Pickup should combine grocery store accessibility with drive-through efficiency: We found that our

participants expect their pickup experience to be comparable with their grocery store experience. Many are not

willing to drive further than 5-10 miles from their house. Respondents emphasized that the location should be a

familiar public place that is convenient to get to, and should be a quick-in and quick-out.

Most people want to pick up their share on a weekday afternoon after work. Several want their pick-up

early in the week, either on a Monday or Tuesday. These participants want to consume their share throughout the

week as their weekends are usually unpredictable. These respondents fit into the younger and unmarried

demographic. However, one of our older interviewees said he would prefer to have his share over the weekend.

To our amusement, this person also took his garbage collection day into consideration.

Tendencies toward a bi-weekly schedule: In terms of pickup schedules, we found that four of our participants

want a biweekly schedule. Some lean towards this schedule as a way to mitigate the risks involved with long-

term commitments. However one participant did predict that it would be more convenient for his share deliveryto correspond with his bi-weekly pay schedule, stating that it would also align with his family’s grocery

shopping habits. On this note it is interesting to observe that the two participants who are interested in a weekly

delivery are both young and without families.

PROMOTION

Make it credible and authentic: The most popular means to getting the interviewees to subscribe to the CSF

programs appears to be Word of Mouth. Many indicated that there is more credibility attached when the message

flows from a friend, family member or acquaintance. Many participants also liked what social media, such as

Facebook and Twitter, as well more conventional methods like email, would bring. If the CSF were to partner

with other local organizations whose primary objective was sustainability, this would give them a sense of

credibility as well as an established audience to promote to. Developing a presence at farmer’s markets, Trader

Joe’s, CSA pick-ups and other similar eco-friendly sites would help reach a receptive market. Finally, direct

mail would be a more targeted form of promoting to those less connected with the Internet.

Let ‘em try it out: Many respondents also indicated an interest in a trial period before committing to a schedule.

Generally people view a subscription as a very large commitment, especially one that they are uncertain about

due to a lack of familiarity and perceived risk.

A trial period might be an effective way before deciding on what share they prefer. By first doing a trial period,

the concerns regarding serving size and quality of fish may be addressed.



“Feel good benefits” and a “more ethical form of

meat”: Participants mentioned a number of

perceived benefits that we believe should be

stressed in the promotion of a Williamsburg CSF.

The first of these are the healthy advantages one

would receive from fresh seafood. Participants

talked about the benefits of Omega 3s, lean protein,

and mercury-free fish. Additionally, there are a

whole host of feel-good benefits attached to this

subscription, such as the feeling of strengtheninglocal community ties, reducing the carbon

footprint, and building a long-term and rewarding

relationship between local consumers and their

fishermen.

PRICE

Six out of our seven interview participants said they be willing to pay a premium (usually 5%-10%) over grocer

prices for the seafood they receive through a CSF. None

respondents expect to pay a price lower than store prices fo

products. However no one was willing to pay a premium

25%. It is clear that this price tag reflect perceptions of

quality and the extra “feel good benefits” associated wi

product. Admittedly, some of our respondents value thes

benefits more so than others. This translated into a

willingness to be inconvenienced. Our vegetarian participa

willing to drive much farther (25 min) and spend more timmin) at the pickup location than our non-vegetarian participan

1. What type of schedule would you prefer?

a.) Weekly (receive a share once a week)

b.) Bi-weekly (receive a share once every 2

weeks)

2. On a scale of 1-10, how easy is it to incorporate

shellfish into a family meal in terms of how convenient

it is to cook? On a scale of 1-10, how easy is it to

incorporate finfish into a family meal in terms of how

convenient it is to cook?

3. When would you like to have your share delivered?

a.) On a Monday or Tuesday so that you could

have your fish throughout the week

b.) Later in the week, such as on a Thursday or

Friday so you can have your share on the weekend

4. Would you be interested in purchasing a two-week trial period before committing to a full season?

Survey

Questions5. If you were interested in a trial period, and n

taking into consideration the schedule, how ma

shipment orders would make you feel comfortab

to committing to a CSF program?

a.) 1 c.) 3 e.) not interested

b.) 2 d.) 4

6. How much more of a premium will you pay ffish from a CSF program?

a.) 5-10% c.) 25-30%

b.) 15-20% d.) 35-40%

7. Do you think that you would be more likely

join a CSF if you had a trial period?

8. Are you a vegetarian or vegan?

9. Would you consider turning to a CSF to fill yoregular diet needs? (e.g.: vitamins, protein, etc.)



Research Objectives

Method & Rationale

Participant Recruiting

Our second stage of research involved a joint online survey created inQualtrics that was distributed to the William & Mary and VIMS community via

the VIMS website. Participants from the William & Mary Faculty and Staff community were mainly recruited via email. This approach enabled us to ensurethat we collectively addressed all research questions while simplifyingrecruitment, guaranteeing that we had enough participants to run a reliablestatistical analysis.

We sought to determine the ideal CSF marketing mix based on the preferences of the William & Mary Faculty and Staff. Our survey containedeight total questions in which participants were given the opportunity to constructtheir “ideal CSF” by selecting their prefered product options, indicating their

price expectations, choosing their most convenient time of pickup and also providing feedback on potential promotional programs.

Participants were recruited from the William & Mary faculty and staff.Everyone within this group had some level of college education, with the majorityhaving obtained a 4-year or Master’s degree. The largest income group was the75,001-100,000 bracket and the majority of those surveyed lived in a Williamsburgzip code. A 67% majority of those surveyed were female (Exhibits 1- 4).



1.

2.

3.

First Order Analysis

Participants were asked to indicate what seafood species they would like included in a

Williamsburg CSF. The options given were common finfish, less common finfish, scallops, clams,

oysters, shrimp, and crab (Exhibit 5). Participants were allowed to select as many options as they

wished. With this question, we gained a better understanding of what types of seafood our 88

respondents would like to see in their CSF share. Results from our frequency distribution test

showed that of the 7 seafood options we provided, common finfish, scallops, and shrimp were the

top three choices while clams and oysters appeared to be the least popular options. 95.5% of our

respondents chose common finfish, 86.4% chose scallops, 85.2% chose shrimp, 73.9% chose crab,

56.8% chose less common finfish, 50% chose clams, and 50% chose oysters (Exhibit 6 & 7).Additionally, we ran a nonparametric related-samples test to look for statistical significance in the

data results, with the null hypothesis that participants are indifferent towards the seafood options.

Our results suggest that there is statistical significance, p<.00l, in the options our respondents

chose (Exhibit 8).

Respondents were asked to indicate the variation in species they wished to receive on a week

to week basis (Exhibit 9). In this research question, we used a univariate t-test to analyze

people’s attitude towards desired variety in their CSF seafood share from one delivery to the

next. Responses generated a mean value of 4.82/7.00 which is higher than the neutral midpoint

of 4.0 and is statistically significant, p<.001, suggesting that overall participants do lean

towards a larger variety of seafood species from one delivery to the next (Exhibit 10).

This question aimed to assess the respondents’ desired level of processing, assuming that more

processing would cost more. Respondents were asked to select one of three options: minimally processed, pan ready, or filleted (Exhibit 11). Our frequency distribution test shows that of our 88

respondents, 45 preferred moderate processing, 25 preferred highest-degree processing, and 18

preferred minimally-processed seafood (Exhibit 12). These results demonstrate that a vast majorit

(79.5%) of our participants prefer a pan-dressed or fully filleted fish, suggesting that they desire a

moderate to high amount of processing in their CSF share. Furthermore, we ran a univariate chi

square and determined there was statistically significance in the difference in count of selection

with a p<0.05 (Exhibit 13).



We sought to determine the amount of frozen seafood customers would be willing to accept to

supplement a lack of fresh seafood in the event of shortages. Participants were asked to indicate their

preference on a scale of 0% to 50% with options given at 10% increments (Exhibit 14). We ran a

univariate t-test on the data obtained. We expected respondents to have high expectations on CSF

shares, and would lean towards 0% frozen seafood in their delivery. Surprisingly, test results

suggested otherwise. A vast majority of participants, 89.7%, chose 20% or above (Exhibit 15). Themean rating of 4.09/6, p<.001 (where 1→0%, 6→50%) is statistically significant, suggesting that

overall participants are willing to accept an average of 34% of frozen seafood as part of their delivery

(Exhibit 16 & 17).

There was a comprised set of questions used to gain input on preferred pickup frequency, seafood

amount, day of the week, and time of day, as well as the ideal duration for the subscription period

(Exhibit 18). By running a related samples test on the groups of answers, we were able to

determine the preferences of our participants are statistically significant with a p<0.05. Out of the

88 participants, over twice as many would prefer to pick up their seafood bi-weekly rather than

weekly (Exhibits 19). In addition, 84% of our participants believe a half share (1-3 lbs) is the ideal

amount per seafood pick-up compared to 18% for a full share (4-5 lbs) (Exhibit 20). For pickup-

time of week, 61% of our participants would prefer to pick up their seafood between Monday and

Thursday compared to picking up their product on Friday, Saturday, or Sunday (Exhibit 21). Our

question regarding pickup time-of-day yielded more varied results; 48% prefered an evening

pickup, 47% preferred an afternoon pickup, and 25% preferred a morning pickup (Exhibit 22).The final part inquiring about subscription duration revealed that 50% would prefer a 6-month

subscription period, 34% of participants would prefer a 3-month subscription period, 20% would

prefer a 12-month subscription period, and 11% would prefer a 9-month subscription period

(Exhibit 23).

We set out to determine the ideal price position for a Williamsburg CSF by asking participants toindicate how much they would be willing to pay for the CSF program compared to prices they

would pay at the grocery store. (Exhibit 24) The mean percentage when sought through a

univariate t-test is 108.89, which is higher than the neutral testing value we used of 100 (Exhibit

25) . At p<.001, this mean is significant (Exhibit 26). 100 was used as the neutral testing value

because the CSF would equal the grocery store price of fish.We believe that this question caused

some confusion as seven of our participants answered the question with a “1” which in the survey

is taken to mean a price set at 1% of grocery store prices. In order to account for this error, we

deleted the outliers. From our data, we can presume that customers would be willing to pay nearly

9% more for the seafood from a CSF.

4.

5.

6.



We wanted to gauge the appeal that additional aspects of a CSF (such as weekly recipes and

cooking demonstrations) might have within the Williamsburg community. Participants wereasked to select as many of these programs as they wished from a list of 9 options. A tenthoption allowed participants to add their own recommendation (Exhibit 27). To examine our responses we ran a related-samples t-test and set the null hypothesis as “participants areindifferent towards any additional aspects to the CSF.” The results were significant (p<.001)suggesting that people do indeed prefer certain additional incentives (Exhibit 28). Theseincentives can be a critical addition to promotional factors of the CSF. The top three choiceswere at least 50% of our participants who desired options such as: recommended recipes toaccompany specific seafood at each pick up, seafood preparation and handling during pickup,

and seafood cooking demonstrations during pick up. The most desired of which was recipeswith 77% of respondents selecting that option.

7.

8. Participants were first asked to gauge their likeliness of joining a CSF designed toaccommodate their preferences indicated in question one through seven. Participantswere then asked to gauge their likeliness of joining this same CSF if they had the

option of a one month trial period (Exhibit 30). From these two inquiries we wereable to determine the potential effect of a trial period on influencing people’slikeliness to join. We subjected the responses to part one to a one-sample t-test toobtain a mean value of 5.48/7.00 that was significantly higher than the neutralmidpoint of 4.00, p<.01, revealing that participants on average fall somewhere

between “somewhat likely” and “likely” to participate in a Williamsburg CSF(Exhibit 31). Using a one-sample t-test for the second part we obtained a mean valueof 6.39/7.00 which was significantly higher than the neutral midpoint of 4.00, p<.01,suggesting that participants are “likely” to “very likely” to participate in a one monthCSF trial with the option of cancelling after the subscription ended (Exhibit 32). Wetested the statistical significance of the impact of a trial period has on our participant

joining the CSF, without the trial period with a paired sample t-test, and found that thedifference in means between 6.39 and 5.48 is statistically significant. From that wecan draw the conclusion that respondents are more likely to join the CSF if they havea trial period (Exhibit 33).



Second Order AnalysisWe decided to run an analysis with total household size, which we arrived at by adding the

total number of people in each respondent’s household, and the ideal amount per weekly pickup. We ran

a correlation in order to see whether a household with a larger size would want to pick up a larger

amount per week. We had to retain our null hypothesis in this case because it turned out that the

relationship between them was not significant. With p > 0.1, in this case 0.394, there is no relationship

between the household size and the amount of share a respondent would prefer in a week (Exhibit 34and 35). A possible explanation could be that seafood consumption is treated as a special event in the

house and the size of household has no impact on how much of it they buy. Children 4-12 and infants

and toddlers are also not likely to make a difference when considering household size. We ran another

correlation analysis using only the “Adults 20 and over” with the ideal amount preferred per weekly

pick-up and calculated that it is marginally significant with p = 0.07 (Exhibit 36). Further, we ran a

regression analysis to see if the relationship could be predicted, but with an R-squared of 0.041, the

relationship is quite weak (Exhibit 37). This shows that while there is some relationship between the

number of adults over 20 and the amount of shares a household prefers, it’s not entirely predictive. The

relationship is probably weak because the number of Adults over 20 is going to change depending on

how much a household purchases, but at the same time, the excess amount purchased for each adult is based more primarily on other varying factors, such as current consumption of seafood, interest in

seafood and portion size the household consumes.

Another analysis we decided to conduct was to see if income affected a person’s decision to join the

CSF. This analysis is critical because it is important to know whether someone’s financial situation is a

significant factor in his or her participation. Through our analysis with a one-way ANOVA we have come to

the conclusion that income for the William & Mary Faculty and Staff members is not a significant factor in

whether or not they will join the CSF program, with a p>.1 (Exhibit 38 and 39). One thing to keep in mind is

that the William & Mary Faculty and Staff have incomes that could allow them to be more flexible with their spending. From those surveyed, the majority of Faculty and Staff had income in the fourth bracket, which is an

income level of $75,001-100,000.

Since income was not a significant factor in determining a faculty and staff members’ decision to

join the CSF we decided to run a correlation analysis to see what might be a factor to join the CSF. Instead

of income, we analysed if the amount of seafood typically consumed could be influential in their decision

to join. We found that there was a correlation (p<.05) between the amount of seafood typically consumed

and a faculty and staff member’s willingness to join (Exhibit 40). The more seafood that a faculty and staff member consumed the more likely he or she would join the CSF program (Exhibit 41). We ran a

regression analysis and found that although this correlation is significant, it cannot be said that it is a

predicting factor for their willingness to join. With an R square of 0.092, there is no relationship (Exhibit

42). Therefore, solely the amount of seafood typically consumed, is not significant enough to say a faculty

and staff member will join the CSF, and other factors can influence one’s desire to join.



Appendix A: Word Association



Question Answer0Choices TallyHow!many!servings!are!you!willing!to!

! !152!lbs 4! ! ! ! ! !

commit!to?! 35!lbs 3What!obstacles!are!preventing!you!

! ! ! ! !None 3! ! ! !

from!committing!to!a!share!plan? I!don’t!each!much!Cish 1

! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !

Don’t!want!too!much!variety 1

! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !

Flexibility!of!program 1

! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !

Lack!of!funds!to!afford!program 1Would you prefer a share that delivered Whole 0 finfish to you whole, headed and gutted, Headed!and!Gutted 1

or filleted? Filleted 6How much are you willing to pay for No!more 1

CSF fish compared to fish you would 510%!more 1

purchase at a grocery store? 105!20%!more! 2

More!(unspeciCied!amount) 3How far would you be willing to drive Biking!distance 1 to pick up your share from CSF? 10!–!1!minutes 2

No!more!than!20!minutes 1

!–!10!miles 3What day is best for you during the Monday 2 week to pick up your seafood? Wednesday 1

Friday 2

Any!day!works 2Where is the most convenient place for Workplace 2

you to pick up your seafood: your Home 1

workplace, home, or near a localgrocery store?

Near!a!Local!Grocery!Store 4

What characteristics of a CSF appeal to Local 3 you? Important!to!ommunity 1

Sustainable! 1

Healthier 2What would draw your attention to a Word!of!Mouth program like this, in terms of different Direct!Mail 1

promot ng c anne s u t p e, s ng e Social!Media 4

answers a owe Free!Trial 2

Local!Initiatives 1

E5mail 1What about CSF discourages you from Lack!of!Funds 1 subscribing to this program? Not!fully!comfortable!with!idea!yet 1

onvenience 1

Quality/Health!Safety!of!Seafood 1

It!is!a!serious!commitment 1

Nothing 2

Appendix B: Consumer Preferences



Question Answer Choices Tally

Gender? Male 4

Female 3

How would you describe the areaA!city 0 ere you curren y ve

A!suburban!area 7

A!small!town 0

A!rural!area 0

Don’t!know/not!sure 0

Which part of W&M are you W&M!Arts!&!Sciences 1 a a e w

W&M!School!of!Education 0

W&M!Mason!School!of!Business

4

W&M!School!of!Law 0

W&M!Athletics 2

VIMS 0

What is your position? Faculty

Staff 2

Undergraduate!Student 0

Graduate!Student 0

Appendix C: Consumer Profile



2

Appendix D: Interview Guide



Appendix E: Interview Transcripts



Interview)#1)

INTERVIEW # 1

STANDARDIZED BACKGROUND QUESTIONS

1. Gender?

MALEFEMALE

2. How would you describe the area where you currently live?

A CITY

A SUBURBAN AREA

A SMALL TOWN

A RURAL AREA

DON’T KNOW /NOT SURE

3. Which part of W&M are you affiliated with?

W&M Arts & SciencesW&M School of Education

W&M Mason School of Business

W&M School of Law

W&M Other: Atheletes

VIMS

4. What is your position?

FACULTY

STAFF

GRADUATE STUDENT

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT



Interview)#1)

PRODUCT

1.) Do you think that you would be willing to commit to something like this where you had a

share option that delivered fresh fish to you on a weekly basis?

Respondent: Because all the fish that I consume right now unfortunately comes from Thailand or something, so not only would it be domestic but it would be local, so that would be awesome, you know

that brings us back to our own roots.

2.) Do you have any preferences as far as scheduling goes? Could you imagine yourself

incorporating something like this into your weekly schedule or would you rather have it be

biweekly? Or would you rather have it be multiple times a week?

Respondent: Um I'd say at least weekly, multiple times a week would be okay... but I don't personally...

if I had a family I would probably want multiple times a week. The only meat I eat is fish so I would

prefer weekly.

3.) You said the only meat you eat is fish. Is that any certain kind of diet preferences? Respondent: Um yeah, well I used to be a very hard core vegan until a couple months ago. It’s been a

process of discovery trying to promote, you know I'm not against eating meat, but I try to be as ethical

as possible with my choices and I don't believe in how food is produced today. but I do believe in grassfed and local agriculture. So right now I'm eating fish and eggs, and that’s so that I can get some sort of

protein into my diet that is not a carbohydrate as well.

4.) Okay so if you were to sign up for one of these would you be interested in a share that

delivered finfish only shellfish only or both?

Respondent: Combination

5.) Are there any kinds of species that are in particular your favorites or that you would expect?

Respondent: I would say a variety of oily fishes versus [flaky fish]. SO if that’s available, i know its

also due to season, but it would be really cool if there was some sort of variety.

6.) What is it about the oily fish that you are in particularly interested in?

Respondent: Um, I mean like the health benefits of the oily fish, like the Omega 3s, but I would also

prefer the non oily fish because it is not as much fat. so just a balance, having both the oily vs the non

oily fish.

7.) If you were going to commit to a share option like this would you prefer a share option that

consisted of one to two pounds of fish per pick up or three to five pounds. 1 pound of fish istwo servings.

Respondent: I guess I would do one to two pounds, I travel a lot so that would probably be plenty for

me.

8.) Would you prefer a share that delivered finfish to you whole, headed and gutted or filleted?

Respondent: I guess I would prefer filet, because I'm a diva and I don't feel like doing that, I know I

should and if I had more time I would actually do, not the whole but the headed and gutted and I would

filet it, but ideally I would like it filleted.



Interview)#1)

9.) Would you be willing to clean and filet your own fish if someone showed you how?

Respondent: I already know how.

10.) Are there any other factors that account for that preference for filleted fish?

Respondent: The convenience, er I guess it’s gross to have to put it in your trash can. Interviewer: Okay so it’s less prep work and less clean up. Respondent: Yeah and fish stinks, especially to have to debone a fish, thats like, [gross]

11.) How do you feel about committing to this idea of purchasing fish every week before you

know what type of fish it is?

Respondent: I like that, i can see how others wouldn't but I feel like, but I would prefer like, surprise!

12.) And how do you feel about trying new varieties of local fish that maybe you have never tried

before?

Respondent: I’m down, variety is the spice of life

PRICE

1.) How much would you be willing to pay for fish through a CSF compared to fish you would

pay through a grocery store?

Respondent: I would be willing to pay more, it depends on the amount, but I would be willing to paymore for a better product and overall a better system.

2.) Is there a limit to how much you would be willing to pay?

Respondent: Yeah, I guess there would be a limit, I don't know as far as a number figure, but I wouldn't

go double the amount that I would pay at trader joes.. I don't know.

3.) If you could image the price tag of a single meal for yourself how mush compared to that?

Respondent: If my regular meal was $4 I’d be willing to pay like $5

4.) Would you be willing to pay extra for extra programs that come with the CSF, such as

community outreach programs, recipes, info sessions? Would you be interested in any of those

things?

Respondent: yeah.

PLACE

1.) How far away would you be willing to drive to pick up your share from the CSF?

Respondent: No more than 20 minutes.

2.) How much time would you consider reasonable to be spending at the pickup location

Respondent: 15 minutes



Interview)#1)

3.) Is there any particular day of the week that works best for you in terms of working that into

your schedule?

Respondent: I would usually prefer some time at the beginning of the week like Monday or Tuesday.

4.) What time of day would be most convenient for you? Respondent: I guess any time, maybe around 3 or 4? I’m really all over the place, i don't have a cookie

cutter schedule.

5.) Where would be the best place to pick up your seafood? Would you rather have it close to

your work place or your house or a local grocery store or school or other destination that is

important to your schedule?

Respondent: I guess having it close to work and having it close to a grocery store would be convenient.

Just so i wouldn't have to go to some random house to pick up my sea food.

6.) So are there any ways in which you see this affecting your routine or your lifestyle? Do you

see any obstacles in incorporating this?

Respondent: I guess the only obstacle would be, is if I were out of town and couldn't pick up my fish.

But something like this as far as scheduling would be great because it would be a sort of reminder of thisis what i have to due this week, so the discipline would be nice. but the negative would be if I do have to

travel or if something comes up and I can't make the pickup location, where does it go, do i get mymoney back.

Interviewer: So one of your concerns would be flexibility of the program and fitting it in. Respondent: yeah.

Interviewer: You said that it would discipline your schedule, can you elaborate on that? Respondent: Yeah, so like it’s a good thing, I would go out of my way to make the dates and work it into my daily

routine, so it would discipline me. Interviewer: Are there any other benefits or negative impacts to your lifestyle that you can think of

when you think of a program like this? Respondent: I guess positively, I think there would be a sense of community established by people who

were also a part of the CSF and like knowing the fisherman and establishing a relationship with themand reconnecting back to how food was once produced. It would be pretty cool to connect with people

who share the same values and beliefs, so a sense of community is one, and the health benefits.

PROMOTION

1.) If you could pick one word from the list that most descibes a CSF, what would it be?

Respondent: I guess local

2.) If we were trying to reach people like you, what would be the most effective way?

Respondent: I think something like at a farmers market, like a food demo would be fun, like letting

people try your product. I think face time would be really good as well as social media. Using facebook

you could advertise to people with similar interests.



! Interview!#2!

INTERVIEW # 2


1. Gender?

MALE

FEMALE


A CITY

A SUBURBAN AREA

A SMALL TOWN

A RURAL AREA



W&M Arts & Sciences

W&M School of Education


W&M School of Law


VIMS


FACULTY

STAFF

GRADUATE STUDENT




! Interview!#2!

PRODUCT

1.) Would you be willing to commit to a share option that delivered fresh fish to you on

a weekly basis? Or would you be more interested in a share option that delivered less

frequently? If so, what schedule would you prefer?

Respondent: First of all, I am not in charge of the meals in my house, so my husband would

have strong feelings about which way this goes. I am generally in favor of this kind of thing.

I have kids, I am in a family of 6, so I am wondering about mercury levels and all that kind

of stuff in the fish. So, that would depend on how often I got it…there are certain amounts of

these in the fish. They are safe, but you still don’t want to consume them in large quantities.

I don’t know if weekly will be best or a little less often. But in general, I like the idea of it!

Would I do it every week though, I am not sure.

2.) Are there any obstacles that prevent you from committing to a share option?

Respondent: Um… I only like certain kinds of fish, so preferences, right? And you would

definitely want to be doing this in a way where you are getting whatever kind of fish or

shellfish is available. Assuming it is fished from the same area, it’s still the same kinds of

fish being caught? I don’t even know. I don’t think that changes as much? But I guess, over

the seasons maybe there are different kinds of fish, so it depends. That would the only thing

that prevents me from committing. That and again, how toxic is the water the fish comes in.

Interviewer: Right, so you like the limited variety, and prefer to be able to choose.

Respondent: Right, I think that’s it, yeah, that’s right.

3.Are you interested in a share that delivers

a)finfish, b)shellfish, c)finfish and shellfish, d)other options

Respondent: Hmm. So shellfish we are talking about muscles and oysters and

clams…Probably just finfish.

Interviewer: Is there a reason why you only chose finfish?

Respondent: Yeah, because my family doesn’t love shellfish. It’s a preference thing.

4a.)Would you be willing to commit to a share option that delivered shares consisting

of_______ finfish? *(Whole fish: one pound per person; fillets: ½ pound per person)

1 to 2 lbs (1 to 2 servings)


Respondent: Probably 3 to 5 lbs.



! Interview!#2!

4b.)What considerations account for your choice?

Respondent: I have a 6-person family.

5a.)Would you prefer a share that delivered finfish to you whole, headed and gutted, or

filleted? 5b.)What factors account for your preference?

Respondent: Filleted, haha. We don’t like to clean fish, although my Dad would be upset

with that. He cleans his own, he is a scuba diver so he cleans his own. With me doing it, it’s

like Ughhhh Yuck! So yeah, I prefer it filleted.

6.) Would you be willing to clean and fillet your own fish if someone showed you how?

Respondent: Well, I mean I have been taught how to do it, I don’t know if I can still do

it…but I am sure I can learn pretty quickly…yeah no, I prefer not to do it though haha. If

you’ve been doing it your whole life it’s no big deal you know, I mean, my father grew upon a farm, so for him, handling fish after living on a farm, it’s no big deal. But for me, these

days, it’s like Ewww! We only cut chicken!

7.) How do you feel about committing to purchasing a fish every week before you know

what type of fish it’ll be?

Respondent: Yeah…more hesitant? I can see that you know, it can be an adventure. Other

members of my family would eat it. It’s just me personally… I may skip out on it. So… I

think I’d probably try it and see how it went. When you say “commit to,” what is thecommitment? Is it you commit for a season, for a year, what is it? So depending on the

length, that would also affect my commitment. If you have a shorter-range option where you

could try it out, like a trial period. I mean you could still prepay, it can still be like six weeks,

that’s fine, but I would definitely not just go into a full-year contract and be like, let’s check

it out.

PRICE

1.) How much are you willing to pay for CSF fish compared to fish you would purchase

at a grocery store?

Respondent: Right, obviously you would be willing to pay a premium. How much…? We

pay a premium for organic food already. Right? You pay a premium for organic eggs or milk

that doesn’t have BSD hormone in it, so I am fine with paying a premium. Now how much

the premium? That I don’t know, that I have to have my husband here. He knows the prices

on everything, which I don’t.



! Interview!#2!

2.) Would it help to know that the objective of purchasing CSF seafood is community

outreach? Like, you are buying it to help local fishermen, would you be more

committed to this program knowing so, and be more willing to purchase CSF seafood?

Respondent: Yeah certainly. I mean that is sort of the big push right now, is for stuff like

that. I am well aware of it, you wouldn’t have to tell me that, I would know it, but in general

if you wanted to market that, yeah that makes sense. It’s like Farmer’s Market, that’s the big

push right now. It will be like a Fish Farmer’s Market.

3.) Would you be willing to pay more or less to be educated in how to handle and

prepare the fish? For example: recipes, e-mail notifications and contacts for extra help.

Respondent: Yeah, that’d be excellent

PLACE

1.) How far would you be willing to drive to pick up your share from CSF?

Respondent: Do I have ranges here..?

Interview: For example, 5-10 minutes, 10-15 minutes…

Respondent: Yeah, all of that would be fine. Up to 15 minutes

2.) How much time do you consider reasonable at the pickup location to collect your

purchase?

Respondent: I would expecting to, I guess, just pick it up. There should be a destinated time

for me to come get my fish, between like, 4 and 6, or you know whatever.

3.) What day is best for you during the week to pick up your seafood?

Respondent: Probably over the weekend.

4.) What time of day would be most convenient for you to pick up your seafood?

Respondent: Anytime works.



! Interview!#2!

5.) Would you rather pick up your seafood at your workplace or at home, or would it

be most convenient for the pickup location to be near a local grocery store?

Respondent: To have it dropped off, or near a local grocery store definitely.

6.) How do you think subscribing to the CSF program would affect your routine and or

lifestyle?

Respondent: We’d eat more fish. I mean, that would definitely be one. Um, whether that’s

good or not will again depend on the levels of the potential toxic substances that could be in

there. But yeah, we cook every meal at home, we don’t eat out, so for us it doesn’t make us

cook more at home, but what changes is we will eat fish more often. We definitely eat fish, a

reasonable amount, but that will obviously up our fish intake, because we will be committed

to eating fish.

PROMOTION

1.) Take a couple minutes to write down what words come to mind when talking about

the CSF program in general.

Respondent wrote down:

Local;

Farmer’s Market;

Sustainability;

Community;

Healthy

Other meat local organizations supporting local farmers

Respondent: You know what comes to mind is, you know they have done something similar

to this with meats, not with actual fish, but with meats in this area. I did not do it at the time

because, I want to say, where you got your meat from was a little bit more difficult. Um,

maybe it was out of Virginia Beach… Whatever it was it was coming out of DC, and you

know they were coming through Northern Virginia areas, and then bringing it down… I

don’t think they had a stock right here in Williamsburg, so, my friend talked about doing itwith me, I was like..um, it was just too complicated. That’s something that comes to mind. I

don’t know how well they did, I don’t know if it’s still up and running. As an economist and

finance person, I’m already curious to know how is that business sustaining itself? I would

want to draw parallels. What are the problems they have run into…you might find similar

things (when working on starting the CSF Program in Williamsburg).



! Interview!#2!

1.) What is the most attractive feature of a CSF?

Respondent: I am a big proponent of..I don’t know if you are familiar with Alice Waters?

It’s the philosophy of eating local, eating what’s in season, all that kind of stuff. I believe

that’s what we all should be doing. So that’s one. I think it’s the right choice. Assuming the

fish were all healthy and you don’t have to worry about anything, it does force you to eating

fish more often. It’s a healthy choice, the right thing to do, a better choice for us all.

2.) What characteristics of a CSF appeal to you? Is it unique, singular, important,

sustainable, alternative, healthier etc?

Respondent: It’s a philosophy, I think it’s what we should be doing, eating local foods in

season, be it vegetables or fish.

3.) What would draw your attention to a program like this, in terms of different

promoting channels? For example, word of mouth, from friends, online, newspaper, tv,

radio, facebook, twitter, free trial, info sessions (taking place at schools, hotels, colleges,

etc.), pamphlets distribution, different promotion/incentive packages

Respondent: I wouldn’t promote through word of mouth. I’d try to do something better,

maybe linking with Trader Joe’s. Focus on who is your target audience, and where do they

already shop. My guess is a lot of people that may be interested in that kind of thing are

shopping at a place like Trader Joe’s.

Interviewer: So, like local initiatives?

Respondent: That’s right. That’s why when you suggested setting up near a local grocery

store, you know that’s probably pretty smart, because they could also publicize it through

those channels. I am sure Facebook would also help reach some people. It would not reach

me, but I am sure it would reach most people. TV, not so much…Radio, maybe.

Interviewer: Earlier, you mentioned having a trial, so would a free trial help promotion?

Respondent: It wouldn’t have to be a free trial, it would just have to be a shorter trial. Like

you wouldn’t want to just say, come in and try to do this and do it for a year or 3 months. I

mean, you might want to let someone try it for a month. Maybe they can do it each week for a month or whatever, but I would definitely give people a trial period before you commit

them into some sort of long term contract so they can make adjustments. Like maybe, “Oh

this is working out so great I want more fish” or like “You know what, I can learn new

recipes to cook these fish every week, it’s too stressful” something like that.



! Interview!#2!

4.) Is there anything else about CSF discourages you from subscribing to this program?

Respondent: I think we have hit on it all. It would be possible toxins. It’d be the type of

contract that I can start with, and it’d definitely be the convenience too. Like how easy it is.

Because whatever they did with the meat program, the pork and beef and all that stuff, it just

seemed like too much work and it was like Ugh. So I didn’t do it, despite I did think it was a

great idea. So you might want to check out what they did.

Interviewer: And maybe look for a simplified process of that?

Respondent: Yeah, people do want simple. It’s so hard to get people to cook, because most

of my friends and most people, seriously, don’t sit at home and cook meals. Most of my

friends are out and about and they eat in the car. Well fish isn’t easy to eat the car right? I

mean, so those are the things I would think about…how to encourage that. That may be a big

challenge. It is sort of a lifestyle change that people and some families might have to make

and they might not be willing or able to do that.



! Interview!#3!

INTERVIEW # 3


1. Gender?

MALE

FEMALE


A CITY

A SUBURBAN AREA

A SMALL TOWN

A RURAL AREA



W&M Arts & Sciences



W&M School of Law


VIMS


FACULTY

STAFF

GRADUATE STUDENT




! Interview!#3!

PRODUCT

1.) Do you think you would be willing to commit to a share option like this where you would have

to pick up the product on a weekly basis?

Respondent: Yeah well I guess it would depend on how far away it was. I once joined a CSA and i had

to go pick it up, that was only a mile away, i mean as opposed to delivery

2.) How do you feel about having to integrate that kind of a routine into your weekly schedule?

Respondent: I’d be okay

3.) Would you prefer a routine that delivered less frequently or more frequently?

Respondent: It’s going be fresh fish? Once a week.

4.) Would you be interested in a share that delivers finfish or shellfish or a combination?

Respondent: both

5a.) What proportion of fish would you be more interested in, 1 to 2 pounds or 2 to five pounds?

Respondent: 3 sounds perfect.

5b.) What considerations account for your preference?

Respondent: How often I want to eat fish every week

3 pounds would be six servings a week, I might back that up to two pounds.

Interviewer: Are you just cooking for yourself?

Respondent: No, my girlfriend and I.

6.) Would you be interested in fish whole, headed and gutted or filleted?

Respondent: Filleted

7.) Would you be willing to fillet your own fish if someone showed you how? Respondent: Yeah

PRICE

1.) How do you feel about committing to pay up front for fish every week before you know what



! Interview!#3!

type of fish it is?

Respondent: That’s fine, I like the surprise, but I was thinking that I would probably order more fish in

the summer so that I could grill it for larger groups of people. I like to grill so I would probably order

more fish during the summer.

2.) How much would you be willing to pay for fish compared to in a grocery store?

Respondent: I don't know, 120%? 20% more.

3.) Would you be willing to pay a higher price for other services that came with the product,

recipes, info sessions, community outreach programs?

Respondent: No, I am not interested in that, but I’m sure some people would though.

PLACE

1.) How far would you be willing to drive to pick up your fish?

Respondent: Not very far, 5 miles maybe.

2.) How much time do you consider reasonable at the pickup location to pick up your purchase?

Respondent: 5 ten minutes.

3.) Is there a day of the week that would be preferable to pick up your share?

Respondent: Mondays would be good.

Interveiwer: Why is that?

Respondent: So that then I can prepare it throughout the week. My weekends tend to have more

randomness involved.

4.) What time of day would be most convenient?

Respondent: 4 to 6 o'clock

5.) Is there a central location that would be most convenient for you to pick up your share?

Respondent: Close to home would be fine, or close to work. some place with easy access.

Interviewer: Where you can get in and get out?

Respondent: Yeah.

6.) How do you think subscribing to something like this would affect your daily routine?



! Interview!#3!

Respondent: I think I would eat a lot more fish.

Interviewer: Do you see that as a good thing?

Respondent: Yeah

Interviewer: Why is that?

Respondent: I always like more fish, you know, low in bad fats, high in good fats and good protein.

7.) What about the routine or schedule of it? Do you see that as having any kind of impact on your

lifestyle, the fact that you are paying up front and then getting fish every week?

Respondent: No I kind of like that.

8.) Would you be interested in trying new kinds of fish and learning new ways of cooking it?

Respondent: Yeah. Hopefully the idea would be that I would get all this fish so I would have to try all

this stuff. Interviewer: So you like the idea that it is a new experience and that it is pushing you to learn new

things.

Respondent: yeah

PROMOTION

1.) Take a couple minutes to write down what words come to mind when talking about the CSF

program in general.


Fish tacos;

Fishermen;

Community;

Water;

Fish;

Omega-3;

2.) What about fishermen interests you?

Respondent: I don't know, I like the idea of salty crusty fishermen. Like the dude from Jaws, catching

fish and bringing them in. I'd like to support that. You know, I have a big vision in my head of what that

would look like.

Interviewer: So are you interested in programs that would connect you more to the local fishermen?

Respondent: Yeah sure, that sounds good.

Interviewer: So why omega threes?



! Interview!#3!

Respondent: I've heard you’re supposed to eat a lot of omega threes

3.) If you were in charge of a promotion program that was trying to reach more people like you

what kind of channels would you target? For example would you try to use radio

advertisements or newspaper articles?

Respondent: Yes

Interviewer: What about social media?

Respondent: I would try to use social media and you know try to get word of mouth and email you

know, through stuff like this.

Interviewer: Okay, so like trying to get people to talk to each other and pass things along?

Respondent: Yeah, I think that would be more effective.

!



! ! Interview!#4!

INTERVIEW #4


1. Gender?

MALEFEMALE


A CITY

A SUBURBAN AREA

A SMALL TOWN

A RURAL AREA





W&M School of Law


VIMS


FACULTY

STAFF

GRADUATE STUDENT




! ! Interview!#4!

PRODUCT

1a.) Would you be willing to commit to a share option that delivered fresh fish to you on a weekly

basis?

Respondent: No

1b.) Or would you be more interested in a share option that delivered less frequently? If so, what

schedule would you prefer?

Respondent: No, maybe if there were community supported meat products.


Respondent: Allergies to fish and preference for meat products

3.) Are you interested in a share that delivers

a)finfish

b)shellfish

c)finfish and shellfishd)other options; if so, elaborate.

Respondent: Allergic to shellfish; would prefer meat product delivery if it was available

4) a.) Would you be willing to commit to a share option that delivered shares consisting




Respondent: Wouldn’t commit, but if had to choose, then 1 to 2 lbs

4 b.) What considerations account for your choice?

Respondent: Lack of funds

5.) a.) Would you prefer a share that delivered finfish to you whole, headed and gutted, or

filleted?

Respondent: N/A – wouldn’t commit to a share

b.) What factors account for your preference?

Respondent: N/A – can’t afford it

6. Would you be willing to clean and fillet your own fish if someone showed you how?

Respondent: Yes, if I had the money to purchase the product I wouldn’t mind.

7. How do you feel about committing to purchasing a fish every week before you know what type

of fish it’ll be?

Respondent: I won’t be committing.



! ! Interview!#4!

PRICE

1.) How much are you willing to pay for CSF fish compared to fish you would purchase at a grocery

store?

Respondent: No more than what I pay at a grocery store.

2.) Would you be willing to pay more or less, knowing that the objective is community outreach andinfo sessions about the CSF?

Respondent: No, it doesn’t make a difference to me.

3.) Would you be willing to pay more or less to be educated in how to handle and prepare the fish? For example: recipes, e-mail notifications and contacts for extra help.

Respondent: No, I’m not interested.

PLACE


Respondent: Biking distance

2.) How much time do you consider reasonable at the pickup location to collect your purchase?

Respondent: 5 minutes


Respondent: Friday through Sunday


Respondent: Around lunchtime

5.) Would you rather pick up your seafood at your workplace or at home, or would it be most convenient

for the pickup location to be near a local grocery store?

Respondent: Grocery store such as food lion

6.) How do you think subscribing to the CSF program would affect your routine and or lifestyle?

Respondent: Would eat more fish and be somewhat healthier

PROMOTION


Respondent: Delivering what fish you want; if you are really into seafood then this is great



! ! Interview!#4!

FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS: How much would ______ (quality) play a part in your

involvement in a CSF

a) quality of seafood

b) convienence

c) varietyd) sustainability

e) supporting of community

f) source of seafood

Respondent: Quality of seafood, convenience, and source of seafood are the most important qualities

that would affect my decision. Variety of the seafood I get somewhat matters, but I am not too

concerned about sustainability issues and supporting the community.

2.) What characteristics of a CSF appeal to you?

Respondent: It is pretty unique and alternative, and definitely healthier.

3.) What would draw your attention to a program like this, in terms of different promoting

channels?

word of mouth, from friends

online

newspaper

tv

radio

facebook

twitter

free trial

info sessions

pamphlets distribution

different promotion/incentive packages

Respondent: I think Word of Mouth would catch my attention the most. Promotion methods like online,

newspaper, TV/radio ads, facebook/twitter, and pamphlet distributions would annoy and deter me. A

free trial would catch some attention, and different promotion packages might be quite effective too.

4.) What about CSF discourages you from subscribing to this program?

Respondent: I don’t really eat seafood and I can’t afford it. I would be more interested and probably

would commit if I could afford it



! Interview!#5!

INTERVIEW # 5


1. Gender?

MALE

FEMALE


A CITY

A SUBURBAN AREA

A SMALL TOWN

A RURAL AREA



W&M Arts & Sciences



W&M School of Law


VIMS


FACULTY

STAFF

GRADUATE STUDENT




! Interview!#5!

PRODUCT

1.) How do you feel about committing to a share option that delivered fresh fish to you

on a weekly basis? Or would you be more interested in a share option that delivered

less frequently? If so, what schedule would you prefer?

Respondent: I think I’d be fine with that. One, is my wife usually makes those decisions.

Not that I’m not involved with those decisions. We like fish, I think we would be more

consistent if we bought it that way, we would eat it more consistently. And I like supporting

the local fisheries and fishermen too. On a broad level, I think this is a really nice idea.

Interviewer: Okay. How do you feel about the schedule of it. Are you okay with the idea of

a weekly basis, or would you have a preference for a bi-weekly schedule, or even a schedule

that allows you to pick up fish multiple times a week?

Respondent: Ugh, I get paid every other week haha, and usually, groceries are bought everyother week, you know, so for me, two weeks works well with my schedule.


Respondent: Ugh, I don’t think so. I mean, you’ve got enough options, with delivery every

two weeks. It’d be nice to always eat it fresh, but you can always freeze it if you need to, it

doesn’t bother me at all.

3.Are you interested in a share that delivers

a)finfish, b)shellfish, c)finfish and shellfish, d)other options

Respondent: I think a combination. I always prefer variety. It’s always the fun of it—to see

what you get, and then my wife’s a good cook, so…

4a.)Would you be willing to commit to a share option that delivered shares consisting




Respondent: 5 pounds. I think it would have to be 5lbs.

4b.)What considerations account for your choice?

Respondent: I mean our family is big, so just one pound would feed just one son hahaha.

5a.)Would you prefer a share that delivered finfish to you whole, headed and gutted, or

filleted? 5b.)What factors account for your preference?



! Interview!#5!

Respondent: I think my wife would prefer it filleted. Not that we…I fished most of my life,

so it’s not a problem for me to clean and do all that kind of stuff, but I’m often not home by

the time she makes dinner, so I think she prefers it filleted. But you know if it’s shellfish, it

wouldn’t have to be shelled, but if it has scales, or a really large fish, you got to have to do

something with it anyways. It depends, with finfish, I prefer it at least scaled and beheaded

and be-gutted.

6.) Would you be willing to clean and fillet your own fish if you either had been shown

a demonstration on how to do it, or if provided with recipes that involved cooking your

fish whole?

Respondent: I don’t think demonstrating how to do it is the problem. Her dad was a major

fisherman too, and she went fishing with him. I just don’t think she likes to do it. I think she

can do it, she just has no interest in doing it. And then from a recipe standpoint, she hastaken classes in Thailand on cooking things like that. I think she knows the recipes, and she

loves that kind of food. But on a normal basis, we just don’t cook with the heads on. She

understands that a possibility, it’s just she’d rather not do that. I had done it before though.

7.) How do you feel about committing to purchasing a fish every week before you know

what type of fish it’ll be?

Respondent: I don’t think that’s a problem. My only concern is there are some fish that are

really soft and really fishy tasting, and I wouldn’t be happy if that’s what I got. I prefer solid

fish. I can eat a lot of different kinds of fish, and shellfish, and squid and whatever else. My

preference is to not have mushy and fishy-tasting fish. I don’t have a problem with variety. I

like variety, but that’s one variety that I would probably try to avoid.

PRICE

1.) How much are you willing to pay for CSF fish compared to fish you would purchase

at a grocery store?

Respondent: As a percentage of what over I pay at a grocery store or just how much I’d

pay..?

Interviewer: Yeah. The latter.

Respondent: I would think some more, somewhere around the 10-20% range premium.

2,3.) Would you be willing to pay more if certain educational services such as recipes



! Interview!#5!

that came with the fish, or community outreach programs that connected you, the

consumer to the fisherman providing the fish, or provided with contacts for extra help?

Respondent: Ugh, probably not too much. I think… my wife is a good cook you know.

There are certain places she goes for recipes. She does a lot of that kind of stuff, I don’t

know if they would add anything to what she can already do. If I’m already paying a

premium, I’m not sure if I will pay more of a premium because of community outreach. I

understand that it’s not a big chain; that I’m getting it fresh and I’m buying it from a local

community. So at some level, I’m already paying a premium for what I think I’m getting.

PLACE

1.) How far would you be willing to drive to pick up your share from CSF if you are

picking up on a weekly basis? Respondent: Probably to Newport News…

Interviewer: So, around 20 minutes?

Respondent: I think that’s probably it. We are in a number of co-ops for food, and they are

generally delivered 10 minutes away. That’s generally what we have committed to. But my

wife goes down to Sam’s for groceries, so for 5 pounds of fish and driving 20 minutes for 5

pounds of fish, I wouldn’t…Probably a 10-minute drive is more likely.

2.) How much time do you consider reasonable at the pickup location to collect your

purchase?

Respondent: A couple minutes. I mean, they should usually have a person to call you when

it’s delivered. So you go there, and it’s already put in coolers or whatever, you pick it up and

move on.


Respondent: Probably Wednesday. Not Tuesday. I’d be somewhat flexible, but just not

Tuesdays.

Interviewer: Is there a particular reason for that?

Respondent: Our kids are involved in a lot of things on Tuesday.


Respondent: (For me) It depends on the semester...For my wife I don’t think it matters that

much



! Interview!#5!

5.) Would you rather pick up your seafood at your workplace or at home, or would it

be most convenient for the pickup location to be near a local grocery store?

Respondent: Probably home. But it could be near my work, or routine. I don’t know if it

matters that much, but home would be number one. The other ones would be fine too.

Although all those places I go pass on my way home anyways, I mean, Williamsburg is

really small.

6.) How do you think subscribing to the CSF program would affect your routine and or

lifestyle?

Respondent: I think we’d eat fish more consistently, and I think it’s something we’d like to

do. If it’s part of our budget and we get it. I think my wife just doesn’t go and get fresh fish

that often, not in every couple of weeks. You will get in the habit too. She mostly buysfrozen fish, just because it’s reasonably good, reasonably available. To try to find stuff that’s

fresh, we just don’t get it that often.

PROMOTION

1.) Take a couple minutes to write down what words come to mind when talking about

the CSF program in general.


Co-op;

Community Involvement/ Support;

Fresh;

Bulk;

Good Prices for High Quality Food.

Respondent: These are the ones that strike me right now.


Respondent: Well I do like supporting local. It’s um… there is a sense that you like to

support your community. There’s a sense that it should be fresher that way. You are getting

fresh stuff over something that has been frozen or delivered over a day or two. For seafood

it’s critical. I guess those are the two more important features.



! Interview!#5!

3.) What would draw your attention to a program like this, in terms of different

promoting channels? For example, word of mouth, from friends, online, newspaper, tv,

radio, facebook, twitter, free trial, info sessions (taking place at schools, hotels, colleges,

etc.), pamphlets distribution, different promotion/incentive packages

Respondent: Well I’ve never seen anything with fish. So my guess is, you partner with some

of these other places. At some level you are competing against them, because if you are

eating fish you are not eating beef, or pork, or chicken or something like that. But you know,

the people who have already bought into these ideas would seem to be the easiest people to

get at. So you can get a list of those kinds of people, or partner in some way, or buy the list

off of those arrangements, I think that will be a good way with promotion. Stores are not

going to partner with you or allow you to do this, um... I am trying to think, maybe other

groups with meat or cooking clubs.

Interviewer: For you as a consumer, if you have heard about something like this, would you be more likely to take an interest in it and pursue it if you have heard through either

friends-WOM, or from newspaper, or TV/radio ad…What would be more compelling to get

you to look into doing something like this?

Respondent: I don’t think radio or TV ads are going to do it. It has got to come from Word

of Mouth, join the other ones who have been involved. Or you try it, that’s the other thing.

Like someone has given us something, and you realize the quality is so good, we don’t have

a problem paying more for good quality, but you need some kind of sample or event, getting

people to try it and see what it’s like. I mean, there is risk, certainly with fish. You can’t

immediately convince people it’s high quality and fresh, and that they would be getting

something better than what they get in the frozen section of the fridge in a local store.



! Interview!#6!

INTERVIEW # 6


1. Gender?

MALEFEMALE


A CITY

A SUBURBAN AREA

A SMALL TOWN

A RURAL AREA





W&M School of Law


VIMS


FACULTY

STAFF

GRADUATE STUDENT




! Interview!#6!

WARM-UP QUESTIONS

1.) When you think of community-supported fishery, what sort of words come into mind?

Respondent: Well it sounds like an interesting concept; you know I like the idea of getting fresh

produce at local markets. So I guess it sounds green, local,

2.) Would you say it’s something you’d be interested in doing?

Respondent: To be honest, I don’t eat so often that I really benefit from the subscription service. It

would certainly be something I’d be interested in time to time, you know maybe a week at a time. But Iwouldn’t see myself buying it for long, long periods of time.

PRODUCT

1.) Ok well I’m doing the marketing mix. I have to analyze the product, and the promotion for

W&M faculty. In terms of product, would you be willing to commit to a share option that

delivered fish to you on a weekly basis?

Respondent: I would commit to a week at a time but having to do it on a weekly basis for months at atime, I would be hesitant to commit to that. Certainly without trying it out first on a temporary basis.

2.) So you would want like a temporary basis to see whether you want to continue or not?

Respondent: Yeah.

3.) Would you be more interested if it was less frequent?

Respondent: Yeah

4.) So what type of schedule would you prefer? Would you like a schedule or would you like it to

be more optional? Respondent: I would like it to be more optional. If I want to buy in on a particular week, I’d prefer it if I

had that opportunity instead of having to buy it every week for three months or whatever.


Respondent: I wouldn’t really say obstacle, it’s really just my lifestyle, I don’t eat that much fish

6.) What sort of fish would you want? Finfish or shellfish?

Respondent: I would go for both. When I go to restaurants, I go for shellfish and then when I eat at

home, I eat finfish.

7.) So you would want an option that would include both?

Respondent: Yeah

8.) Would you be willing to commit to a share option that consisting of 1-2 servings or 3-5

servings?

Respondent: Probably 1-2



! Interview!#6!

9.) What sort of considerations account for your choice?

Respondent: There’s only 2 of us. No kids. Family size.

10.) Would you prefer fish that was whole, headed and gutted or filleted?

Respondent: Filleted.

11.) What factors account for your preferences?

Respondent: I wouldn’t know what to do with a whole fish.

12.) So you wouldn’t be willing to clean your fish if someone showed you how?

Respondent: No. Just not interested in it.

13.) How would you feel about committing to purchasing fish every week before you know what

type of fish it’ll be?

Respondent: I would be ok with that. I’d like the surprise.

PRICE

1.) How much would you be willing to pay for a fish compared to how much you would pay at a

grocery store?

Respondent: I guess I would be willing to pay at least equal, if not a little bit more considering that it

would be fresh.

2.) So you feel that it is slightly a more superior product since it’s fresher?

Respondent: Yeah but how much more, I would be hard-pressed to say not 50% more, might be closer

to 10% more

3.) Would you be willing to pay more or less, knowing that the objective is community outreach

and info sessions about the CSF?

Respondent: Um, yes that would contribute to the little bit more that I would pay.

4.) Would you be willing to pay more or less in being educated on how to handle and prepare the

fish? Example: weekly recipes, e-mail notifications and call-in-help

Respondent: Recipes, sure. That would be useful.

5.) If you were interested in having the initial services performed on your fish, headed and gutted

and all that, would you be willing to pay extra for that or do you feel like it should be included

in the service?

Respondent: I would be willing to pay more than people were paying for the not-prepared fish, but

again it would have to be just a little bit more than the supermarket. Especially around here, I think youcan get some pretty nice fish at the supermarket.

PLACE

1.) How long would you be willing to drive to pick it up?



! Interview!#6!

So it might be interesting to have this sort of service in conjunction with a produce service. You go to

one place to get your fish and your farm fresh produce. That might make it more convenient. One stop toget multiple things. I tend to favor close-by, I don’t like driving very far.



Interview)#7)

INTERVIEW # 7


1. Gender?

MALEFEMALE


A CITY

A SUBURBAN AREA

A SMALL TOWN

A RURAL AREA



W&M Arts & Sciences

W&M School of EducationW&M Mason School of Business

W&M School of Law


VIMS


FACULTY

STAFF

GRADUATE STUDENT




Interview)#7)

PRODUCT

1a.) Would you be willing to commit to a share option that delivered fresh fish to you on a weekly

basis?

Respondent: Probably not. I eat fish, but as soon as I subscribe to something like this I feel obligated to

use whatever I have commited to and I’m not that discipline to doing that. If I want to eat hamburgers,

I’ll eat hamburgers. Spaghetti, Spaghetti. I’m probably not your ideal profile in something like this.

1b.) Or would you be more interested in a share option that delivered less frequently? If so, what

schedule would you prefer?

Respondent: “On demand kind instead of a formal subscription. Yea I might be part of a market thatwhere rather then feeling obligated because I have parted with my cash, but I have an option that gives

me guaranteed fresh fish and supports the local fisheries I would probably respond to something like thatmuch more than a subscription. Real question is how many people think like I do, versus the number of

people who are like I eat fish all the time and I love this. Yes, I would think more about a less frequentrotation then every other week”


Respondent: No. I mean I eat fish, it’s just the question of frequency.

3.) Are you interested in a share that delivers

a)finfish b)shellfish c)finfish and shellfish d)other options; if so, elaborate.

Respondent: Both finfish and shellfish.

4a.) Would you be willing to commit to a share option that delivered shares consisting of_______

finfish? *(Whole fish: one pound per person; fillets: ½ pound per person)



Respondent: 1-2 lbs.

4b.) What considerations account for your choice?

Respondent: Family composition is the reason behind. My ideal situation would be to subscribe to thenorm, 1-2 servings, but if you have guests over, or people who are staying over for an extended periodof time, to be able to customize that and be able to call in and say I may need a little more this week.

People don’t like to be pinned down, I don’t think. I’m probably one of those when it comes to predictable behavior. I can give you 80% of my behavior will be, I can’t give you the other 20%.

5a.) Would you prefer a share that delivered finfish to you whole, headed and gutted, or filleted?



Interview)#7)

Respondent: I would like it beheaded, and I would like it cleaned and filleted.

5b.) What factors account for your preference?

Respondent: Less labor intensive and saves time. Disposing is an issue! spoilage and order can be anissue.

6. Would you be willing to clean and fillet your own fish if someone showed you how?

Respondent: Probably not, because I’ve done a lot of fishing and I still do some fishing today so I

understand how to do it. I wouldn’t want to waste my time doing something that I know how to do.

7. How do you feel about committing to purchasing a fish every week before you know what type

of fish it’ll be?

Respondent: I would be less inclined to purchase under that scenario then I would be if it was

predictable because there are certain types of fish and their flavor that I prefer. If I subscribe to a servicelike this I would prefer here’s a category, or several categories (talopia, salmon, dover) with a variety of

choices but with my choices. It would be limited choices, but my choices. Flexibility would be great.

PRICE

1.) How much are you willing to pay for CSF fish compared to fish you would purchase at a

grocery store?

Respondent: If it’s guaranteed fresh and delivered on time, because that’s the other criteria I measured,

the delivery of fish because its spoilage, I could probably pay a 5-10% premium for that

2.) Would you be willing to pay more or less, knowing that the objective is community outreach

and info sessions about the CSF?

Respondent: That would help. I like the idea that there is a feel a good benefit to this, and the fact that I

am helping someone else with my food choices. I would certainly considered going to a community

outreach info session

3.) Would you be willing to pay more or less to be educated in how to handle and prepare the fish?

For example: recipes, e-mail notifications and contacts for extra help.

Respondent: I wouldn’t no, primarily because my wife is a very good cook. She likes to do that kind of

thing.

PLACE


Respondent: 5-10 miles. About the area to how far my grocery store is.

2.) How much time do you consider reasonable at the pickup location to collect your purchase?

Respondent: Well it will be preordered right? So it should be ready. I’m not going to shop around the

fish market. So I will just pick up and go right? Anywhere from 5-10 minutes.



Interview)#7)


Respondent: Probably, I would prefer to pick it up on a Friday. Because I would then have the weekend

to use it. I would actually think about also picking it up on a Monday, or early Tuesday cause I could use

it throughout the week. What’s interesting about the question to me is I would almost think about that as

when I could get rid of the residue. So I would think about my garbage collection schedule because you

don’t want that stuff hanging around because of how quickly it will spoil, it gets pretty sharp and odory.


Respondent: I would probably pick it up when I’m going home at night. I almost said in the morning, but I wouldn’t do it in the morning. I would do it sometime where I can pick it up then could take it back

home immediately and refrigerate it.

5.) Would you rather pick up your seafood at your workplace or at home, or would it be most

convenient for the pickup location to be near a local grocery store?

Respondent: I would probably do it around a local grocery store. Because there is refrigeration there.

6.) How do you think subscribing to the CSF program would affect your routine and or lifestyle?

Respondent: Well it will certainly reduce my purchases a grocery store. I would do a switch off, I would

have a behavior change, at least for the product”

PROMOTION


FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS: How much would ______ (quality) play a part in your

involvement in a CSFa) quality of seafood

b) convienence

c) variety (chance to try new foods)

d) sustainability

e) supporting of community

f) source of seafood

Respondent: Ugh, well a couple things: doing good to the local community. Second, I like fish, so if I

can get it fresh and a higher quality I would go a little out of my way to do that. And if I had theopportunity to be flexible in terms of your earlier question about what types of fish, those are all pluses

for me”

2.) What characteristics of a CSF appeal to you? Unique; Singular; Important; Sustainable;

Alternative; Healthier

Respondent: Yea, you don’t know how long a fish has been sitting in a cage at grocery stores. You are

helping a local business, rather then a chain that is less vulnerable then a local business”



Appendix F: Demographic DataExhibit 1:

Exhibit 2:



Exhibit 3:

Exhibit 4:



Appendix G: First Order Analysis



Exhibit 5: Research Question #1

Exhibit 6: SPSS Frequency Distribution on Seafood Types



Exhibit 7: Bar chart showing respondents’ seafood preferences

Exhibit 8: SPSS; testing for statistical significance in data results

Null Hypothesis: People are indifferent towards the various seafood options providedResults: p<.001; Reject null hypothesis. There is statistical significance in options people chose.




Exhibit 10: Univariate t-test results on Q2

Null Hypothesis: People are indifferent towards the amount of product variety they expect from one

delivery to the next.

Results: Responses generated a mean value of 4.82/7.00 is significantly higher than the neutral midpoint of 4.0, t(87)= 5.71, p<.001, suggesting that overall participants do lean towards a larger variety of seafood

species from one delivery to the next




Exhibit 12: SPSS Frequency Distribution test on Q3

Exhibit 13: Univariate chi-square test on Q3




Exhibit 15: SPSS Frequency Distribution Test on Q4



Exhibit 16: One-sample t-test on Q4

Assumption: We expected our respondents to have high expectations on the freshness of CSF shares, and

would lean towards a close to 0% frozen seafood in their delivery. Surprisingly, the test results suggested

otherwise.

Exhibit 17: Calculations for Average % of Frozen Seafood People Are Willing to Accept

Mean Rating: 4.09/6, p<.001 (1! 0%; 6!50%; 4.09!?%)

4.09 = X_

6 50%

6X = 4.09 * 0.5

X= 0.34 = 34%

Conclusion: Participants are willing to accept 34% of frozen seafood as part of their delivery.



Exhibit 19: Results on preferred pickup frequency

29#

64#

0#

10#

20#

30#

40#

50#

60#

70#

Weekly# Biweekly#

Preferred&Pickup&Frequency&&

Frequency#Choice#Was#

Selected#

Weekly&

Bi)weekly&



Exhibit 20: Results on ideal amount per pickup

74#

16#

0#

10#

20#

30#

40#

50#

60#

70#

80#

13#lbs#(half#share)# 45#lbs#(full#share)#

Ideal&Amount&Per&Pickup&

Frequency#Choice#

Was#Selected#

4)5&lbs&(full&share&

1)3&lbs&(half&share&



Exhibit 21: Results on preferred pickup time of the week

54#

29# 30#

16#

0#

10#

20#

30#

40#

50#

60#

Monday##Thursday#

Friday# Saturday# Sunday#

Pickup&Time8of8Week&&

Frequency#Choice#Was#

Selected#

Monday)&Thursday&

Friday&

Saturday&

Sunday&



Exhibit 23: Results on preferred subscription period

30#

44#

10#18#

0#

20#

40#

60#

3#months# 6#months# 9#months# 12#months#

Subscription&Period&&

Frequency#Choice#Was#Selected#

3&months&

6&months&

9&months&

12&months&




Exhibit 25: Mean and range on average willingness to pay

Exhibit 26: One-sample t-test on Q6’s statistical significance

Conclusion: At p <.001, the mean of 108.89 is significant.




Exhibit 28: SPSS results on Q7’s statistical significance

Null Hypothesis: Participants are indifferent towards any additional aspects to the CSF

Results: Reject null hypothesis. Data is statistically significant, p<.001; suggesting that people do indeed prefer certain additional incentives

Exhibit 29: Bar graph showing people’s preferences on additional incentives

68#

54#

44#

43#

43#

40#37#

35#

35#

3#

0# 10# 20# 30# 40# 50# 60# 70# 80#

Recommended#recipes#to#accompany#the#speciPic#seafood#at#each#pickup#

Seafood#preparation#and#handling#demonstrations#during#pickup#

Seafood#cooking#demonstrations#during#pickup#

Literature#on#Pisheries#and#seafood#included#with#share#

Membersonly#educational#opportunities#outside#of#regular#pickup#time#

Detailed#shopping#list#of#ingredients,#with#recipes,#to#accompany#the#speciPic#seafood#

General#information#to#promote#community#dialogue#about#

sustainability#

Online#community#(e.g.,#Facebook#or#website)#that#provides#informational#resources#

Membersonly#social#activities#outside#of#regular#pickup#time#

Other#

Additional#aspects#of#a#potential#CSF#program#are#personally#most#appealing&&




Exhibit 31: One-sample t-test results on Q8, part 1

Results: Respondents are in between “somewhat likely” and “likely” to join given the selections they madefrom Q1-Q7.

Exhibit 32: One-sample t-test results on Q8, part 2

Results: Respondents are in between “likely” and “very likely” to join after having a 1-month CSF trial.



Exhibit 33: Paired sample t-test on Q8 parts 1&2

Results: Difference in means between 6.39 and 5.48 (likelihood to join before and after being offered a 1-month trial period) is statistically significant; t (87)= 10, p<.001

From that, we can draw the conclusion that respondents are more likely to join the CSF if they have a trial period.



Appendix H: Second Order Analysis



Exhibit 34: SPSS; Correlation on Household Size and Share Amount Per Week !Correlations

HouseholdSize ShareAmoutPe

rWeek

HouseholdSize

Pearson Correlation 1 .096

Sig. (2-tailed) .394

N 81 81

ShareAmoutPerWeek

Pearson Correlation .096 1


N 81 81

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Exhibit!35:!Binned!Scatterplot!on!Household!Size!and!Share!Amount!Per!Week!

!

!!

!

Exhibit!36:!Correlation!on!Adults!20!and!Over!and!Share!Amount!Per!Week!

!

Correlations

ShareAmoutPe

rWeek

Adults20andOv

er

ShareAmoutPerWeek

Pearson Correlation 1 .202


N 81 81

Adults20andOver

Pearson Correlation .202 1


N 81 88

!

!

!

!

!

!

!



Exhibit!37:!Regression!on!Adults!20!and!Over!and!Share!Amount!Per!Week!

!

Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate

1 .202a .041 .028 .15645

a. Predictors: (Constant), Adults20andOver !

ANOVAa

Model Sum of

Squares

df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression .082 1 .082 3.344 .071b

Residual 1.934 79 .024

Total 2.015 80

a. Dependent Variable: ShareAmoutPerWeek

b. Predictors: (Constant), Adults20andOver !

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1

(Constant) .285 .051 5.539 .000

Adults20andOve

r .047 .026 .202 1.829 .071

a. Dependent Variable: ShareAmoutPerWeek



Exhibit!38:!OneIway!ANOVA!between!likeliness!to!join!and!ncome!

!

!

ANOVA

join1

Sum of

Squares

df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 10.753 8 1.344 1.047 .410

Within Groups 93.747 73 1.284

Total 104.500 81

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Descriptives

join1

N Mean Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

95% Confidence Interval

for Mean

Minimu

m

Maxi

m

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

1 2 6.00 1.414 1.000 -6.71 18.71 5

2 11 5.36 1.629 .491 4.27 6.46 2

3 13 5.38 .650 .180 4.99 5.78 4

4 18 5.33 .907 .214 4.88 5.78 3

5 17 6.00 1.118 .271 5.43 6.57 3

6 8 5.13 .991 .350 4.30 5.95 4

7 7 5.00 1.414 .535 3.69 6.31 3 8 4 6.25 1.500 .750 3.86 8.64 4

9 2 5.50 .707 .500 -.85 11.85 5

Total 82 5.50 1.136 .125 5.25 5.75 2



Exhibit!39:!Means!Plot!of!likeliness!to!join!and!income!

!

!!

Exhibit!40:!Correlation!between!likeliness!to!join!with!a!trial!period!and!current!consumption!

Correlations

join2 freq

join2

Pearson Correlation 1 .213*


N 88 88

freq

Pearson Correlation .213* 1


N 88 88

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

!



Exhibit!41:!Line!Graph!between!likeliness!to!join!with!a!trial!period!and!current!

consumption!

!

!!

Exhibit!42:!Regression!between!likeliness!to!join!with!a!trial!period!and!current!

consumption!

!

Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate

1 .304a .092 .082 1.125

a. Predictors: (Constant), freq

!

Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate



1 .304a .092 .082 1.125

a. Predictors: (Constant), freq!Coefficients

a

Model Unstandardized Coefficients StandardizedCoefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1(Constant) 4.248 .433 9.818 .0

freq .325 .110 .304 2.956 .0

a. Dependent Variable: join1!

community supported fishery marketing research

Documents