a01 br Definition of local product Thilmany et al suggested

Definition of local product Thilmany et al. (2008) suggested that the importance of the ‘local food’ movement was manifested by the selection of ‘Locavores’ in 2007 as the word of the year by the New Oxford American Dictionary, which defines the term as a resident who tries to consume food produced within a 100-mile radius. Locavores preferentially choose local food over non-local food (Edwards-Jones, 2010). Sneed, Dena, Berry, and Fainhurst (2012) noted that the US Congress defined a local agricultural product as one that requires less than 400 miles of travel between its origin and its market or one that is produced within the state where it is sold. For Hand and Martinez (2010), this definition manifests the difficulty of delimiting what a local product is using geographic criteria, especially in a country (the USA) that includes states of varying size (large western states compared with smaller eastern states). Chambers, Lobb, Butler, Harvey, and Traill (2007) considered a local food product to be one that is produced and sold within a maximum radius of 20–50 miles with respect to the consumer\'s residence, although they note that the academic and government literature (United Kingdom) describe local food products as being those cultivated and sold within the same region or county (Edwards-Jones et al., 2008). A number of authors are beginning to question whether definitions of local products based on geographic or spatial criteria properly address the perceptions of consumers. For Edwards-Jones (2010), local food is more related to the type of production than to strict geographical definitions. Hand and Martinez (2010) suggested that a01 who seek local products are concerned with how the products are prepared and who produces them, and these authors indicate two consumer attributes that complement the concept of local products. The first is a desire for personal interaction with producers, which can reduce social distance in production–consumption relative to geographic distance. The second attribute is the environmental and social sustainability associated with the means of production, which is manifested in support for small enterprises and practices associated with animal welfare (Martínez et al., 2010). Currently, there is increasing concern about sustainability (Coley, Howard, & Winter, 2009) and environmental impact (Edwards-Jones, 2010). These factors are being considered as Syntenic genetic loci relate to local food (Edwards-Jones, 2010), specifically concerning the impacts on biodiversity, landscape, water quality, and CO2 emissions (originated by transport but also by production and storage). However, local food does not necessarily mean a lower carbon impact (Coley et al., 2009; Edwards-Jones, 2010). The literature does not offer a universal definition of a local product that can be applied to different regions, companies or consumers. Nevertheless, determining consumer perceptions of local or regional products can be fundamental for companies seeking to emphasize their products’ origin in their marketing strategies (Darby, Batte, Erst, & Roe, 2008) through place-of-origin indication or regional certification labels (PDO labels).
Differing levels of ethnocentrism
Social identity theory Social identity theory, considered a sub-theory of social cognition (Korte, 2007), is “a social psychological analysis of the role of self-conception in group membership, group processes, and intergroup relations” (Hogg, 2006, zx 111). It was developed by Tajfel (1981) to understand the relationship between individual identity and group identity (Korte, 2007). According to Lantz and Loeb (1996), the ‘self-concept’ is composed of two features: (1) personal identity, which refers to the specific attributes of an individual (not shared with other people – Hogg, 2006), such as competency, talent or sociability; and (2) social identity, which is derived from an awareness of belonging to a group and accompanied by the value and emotional importance of belonging. Within the group, individuals have the same definition of who they are, their attributes, and their relations and differences from individuals who do not belong to their group (Hogg, 2006).