Assessment of satisfaction with the quality and safety of food products in the population of Russian megacities

Introduction. People’s satisfaction with food safety and quality is an important component of overall satisfaction with a sanitary-epidemiological situation on a given territory. It is based on consumer criteria of quality and safety, which do not have the same significance.

The aim of this study was to assess satisfaction with food quality and safety in population in Russian megacities determined relying on consumer criteria.

Materials and methods. The study involved accomplishing a formalized survey, which was conducted in Novosibirsk and Perm among people aged 18 years and older (river sampling, quotas per age, sex and place of residence). Data were collected over the period between October 6, 2024 and November 6, 2024. A specifically designed survey tool was used in the process, which enabled calculating an integral index of satisfaction for each respondent.

Results. Several key criteria were named by consumers to detect a product quality for all product groups such as ‘freshness; expiration date has not been reached’ (this criterion is among top five for all product groups suggested for evaluation); ‘pleasant taste’; ‘conforms to State Standards (GOST), quality standards’. Safety criteria determined by consumers included ‘storage under proper conditions’; ‘absence of any strange taste’; ‘expiration date has not been reached’. Significance of these criteria varied depending on consumers’ sex, age, family situation and economic status. The lowest level of consumer satisfaction with product quality, according to the integral index estimation, was identified for soft drinks (21.4 % of consumers were unsatisfied, the index value was ≤0.4) and vegetables (19.7%); the lowest level of satisfaction with food safety was identified for eggs (27.9% of consumers unsatisfied, the index value was ≤0.4), bread and bakery products (26.6%), poultry (23.9%), meat and meat products (23.8%), milk and milk products (22.6%). Satisfaction with food safety is a) lower than satisfaction with quality, b) is different in various socio-demographic groups.

Limitations. The research object was represented by people who live in cities with their population exceeding 1 million; a sample was created by using non-random techniques and this resulted in its deviation from a total population per several social and demographic parameters (this deviation was partially compensated for by using the weighting procedure).

Conclusion. It is important to consider consumers’ satisfaction with food quality and safety when developing activities aimed at communications with executive regional and local authorities in RF regions as well as with population as regards the existing sanitary-epidemiological situation. Various managerial actions have been recommended depending on how people are distributed per categories of satisfaction, which were created using the results obtained by estimations based on the integral index.

Compliance with ethical standards. The study was accomplished in accordance with the ethical principles stated in The ICC/ESOMAR International Code on Market, Opinion and Social Research and Data Analytics, the Ethical Code of the International Sociological Association (ISA), and the Ethical Code of the Russian Society of Sociologists. All participants gave informed voluntary written consent to participate in the study.

Contribution:
Lebedeva-Nesevria N.A. – the concept and design of the study, writing text, editing;
Barg A.O. – data analysis, writing text;
Sirkovskaya T.V. – literature review, material collection and primary data processing.
All authors are responsible for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript and approval of the manuscript final version.

Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Funding. The study had no sponsorship.

Received: February 19, 2025 / Revised: March 3, 2025 / Accepted: March 26, 2025 / Published: June 27, 2025

1. Petrescu D.C., Vermeir I., Petrescu-Mag R.M. Consumer understanding of food quality, healthiness, and environmental impact: a cross-national perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2019; 17(1): 169. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17010169

2. Sadilek T. Perception of food quality by consumers: literature review. Eur. Res. Stud. J. 2019; 22(1): 52–62. https://doi.org/10.35808/ersj/1407

3. Sari N.T.P., Yulianto E., Sunarti. A literature review: unraveling the dimensions of food quality and its influence on consumer satisfaction. KnE Soc. Sci. 2024; 9(13): 453–67. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v9i11.15835

4. Romir. Russians spoke up about criteria for quality products; 2021. Available at: https://romir.ru/studies/rossiyane-rasskazali-o-kriteriyah-kachestvennyh-produktov (in Russian)

5. Mohaydin G., et al. Effect of food quality on customer perceived satisfaction level and mediating effect of food safety on them. Int. J. New Technol. Res. 2017; 3(1): 34–41.

6. NAFI Research Center. Trends in food consumption among Russians; 2023. Available at: https://nafi.ru/upload/iblock/c54/c546e4ec28e648c64ddfa517f9512c99.pdf (in Russian)

7. Makowska M., Boguszewski R., Hrehorowicz A. Generational differences in food choices and consumer behaviors in the context of sustainable development. Foods. 2024; 13(4): 521. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13040521

8. Public Opinion Foundation (FOM). The quality of nutrition of Russians; 2007. Available at: https://bd.fom.ru/report/cat/business/ec_goods/d071123 (in Russian)

9. Krishtafovich V.I., Krishtafovich D.V. Research of satisfaction with fish products of consumers of the Moscow region. Fundamental’nye i prikladnye issledovaniya kooperativnogo sektora ekonomiki. 2021; (3): 128–35. https://elibrary.ru/aboyiw (in Russian)

10. Russian Public Opinion Research Center (JSC «VCIOM»). Food products: domestic or imported; 2023. Available at: https://wciom.ru/analytical-reviews/analiticheskii-obzor/produkty-pitanija-otechestvennye-ili-importnye (in Russian)

11. Martyshenko N.S. Marketing analysis of consumer meat products market of Primorsky Kray. Azimut nauchnykh issledovanii: ekonomika i upravlenie. 2017; 6(1): 119–122. https://elibrary.ru/yldyod (in Russian)

12. Krishtafovich D.V., Krishtafovich V.I. Consumer preferences of residents of the moscow region for food eggs and egg products. Ptitsa i ptitseprodukty. Yaichnyi mir. Informatsionnoe prilozhenie. 2023; 5: 63–68. https://doi.org/10.30975/2073-4999-2023-25-5-63-68 https://elibrary.ru/kcbqrq (in Russian)

13. Derkanosova N.M., Vasilenko O.A., Zolotareva N.I. Study of consumer preference of bakery products. Tekhnologii i tovarovedenie sel’skokhozyaistvennoi produktsii. 2016; 1(6): 5–9. https://elibrary.ru/whdlkv (in Russian)

14. State Development Corporation «VEB.RF». Quality of Life Index; 2023. Available at: https://citylifeindex.ru/ (in Russian)

15. Gazeta.Ru. Gender issue: who goes shopping in Russia; 2020. Available at: https://gazeta.ru/business/2020/03/04/12989317.shtml (in Russian)

16. AdIndex.ru. How men and women went shopping in 2020; 2020. Available at: https://clck.ru/3GJwsN (in Russian)

17. Dekic Ј. Gender stereotypes: content analysis of advertising in glossy magazines. Vek informatsii. 2018; (2–1): 148–9. https://elibrary.ru/xvxkpz (in Russian)

18. Sheluntsova N.G., Timofeeva V.V., Mazhaeva T.V., Kozubskaya V.I., Sinitsyna S.V. Food quality monitoring results obtained within the implementation of the national demography project in the Sverdlovsk region. Zdorov’e naseleniya i sreda obitaniya – ZNiSO. 2020; (9): 4–9. https://doi.org/10.35627/2219-5238/2020-330-9-4-9 https://elibrary.ru/jumrsj (in Russian)

19. Nagyová Ľ., Golian J., Géci A., Palkovič J., Čapla J., Kádeková Z. Food safety from a consumers´ point of view: food quality. Potravinarstvo Slovak Journal of Food Sciences. 2018; 12(1): 355–63. https://doi.org/10.5219/918

20. Peri C. The universe of food quality. Food Qual. Prefer. 2006; 17(1–2): 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.03.002

21. Meixner O., Katt F. Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on consumer food safety perceptions – a choice-based willingness to pay study. Sustainability. 2020; 12(18): 7270. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187270

22. Miftari I., Imami D., Kaliji S.A., Canavari M., Gjokaj E. Analyzing consumer perceptions about food safety by applying the food-related lifestyle approach. Ital. J. Food Saf. 2024; 13(1): 11315. https://doi.org/10.4081/ijfs.2024.11315

23. Rakhmeeva I.I. Institutional trust in the era of uncertainty. Aktual’nye voprosy sovremennoi ekonomiki. 2024; (7): 178–83. https://elibrary.ru/bbxqow (in Russian)

24. Russian Public Opinion Research Center (JSC "VCIOM"). Trust in Russia: Monitoring; 2024. Available at: https://wciom.ru/analytical-reviews/analiticheskii-obzor/doverie-v-rossii-monitoring (in Russian)

25. Verdú A., Millán R., Saavedra P., Iruzubieta C.J.C., Sanjuán E. Does the consumer sociodemographic profile influence the perception of aspects related and not related to food safety? A study in traditional Spanish street markets. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021; 18: 9794. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18189794

26. Zarubina N.N. Nutrition practices as a marker and factor of social inequality in Russia: history and modernity. Istoricheskaya psikhologiya i sotsiologiya istorii. 2014; 7(2): 46–62. https://elibrary.ru/tewpib (in Russian)

27. Russian Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat). Food consumption in households; 2022. Available at: https://rosstat.gov.ru/compendium/document/13292 (in Russian)

28. Zaitseva N.V., Alekseev V.B., May I.V., Kiryanov D.A., Zemlyanova M.A., Khismatullin D.R., et al. Problem searching approaches to nutrition optimization to increase the potential of life expectancy taking into account bioinformatic signals of the human regulatory system. Gigiena i Sanitaria (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal). 2024; 103(12): 1494–503. https://doi.org/10.47470/0016-9900-2024-103-12-1494-1503 https://elibrary.ru/dmgnfz (in Russian)

29. Zaitseva N.V. Analysis of population health risks in the Russian federation caused by food products contamination. Health Risk Analysis. 2018; (4): 13–23. https://doi.org/10.21668/health.risk/2018.4.02.eng https://elibrary.ru/kqoapp

30. Petrova D., Garcia-Retamero R. How to effectively communicate risks to diverse consumers. Health Risk Analysis. 2018; (4): 114–8. https://doi.org/10.21668/health.risk/2018.4.13.eng https://elibrary.ru/udhlol

31. Baba F.V., Esfandiari Z. Theoretical and practical aspects of risk communication in food safety: A review study. Heliyon. 2023; 9(7): e18141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18141