Ghanaian Consumers Shun Insect-Fortified Tomato Juice but Reward Trusted Certification

A tomato juice that promises better nutrition is not automatically a tomato juice that people will buy. That is the central lesson emerging from a new study of consumer preferences in Ghana, where researchers used a carefully designed survey experiment to measure how much shoppers would be willing to pay for tomato juice fortified with unconventional ingredients. The findings, published in the journal Discover Sustainability, reveal a striking gap between the technical promise of food fortification and the psychology of the consumers who are supposed to embrace it. While trust-building features such as certification raised consumers’ valuations of the product, every fortification ingredient tested—including powder made from edible palm weevil larvae—actually reduced what people were willing to pay.

The research, conducted by Rebecca Owusu and Kofi Atiah of the University of Cape Coast in Ghana together with Yacouba Kagambega of the Institut de l’Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles in Burkina Faso, addresses two intertwined problems. The first is agricultural: tomato farming in Ghana is plagued by substantial post-harvest losses, meaning that a large share of the crop that farmers work hard to grow never reaches consumers in usable form. The second is nutritional: micronutrient deficiencies remain a persistent public health concern across the country, particularly among populations whose diets lack diversity. Value-added processing of tomatoes into products such as juice, combined with fortification, has been proposed as a strategy that could tackle both problems at once—soaking up surplus harvest that would otherwise spoil while delivering concentrated nutrients to consumers.

Whether such a strategy can work, however, depends entirely on whether consumers accept the product, and that is where the study makes its contribution. The team employed a discrete choice experiment, a well-established method in agricultural and health economics that asks respondents to choose repeatedly between hypothetical product alternatives described by different combinations of attributes. By varying attributes such as the fortification ingredients, the presence of health claims, and whether the product carries certification, and by observing the trade-offs people make, researchers can statistically recover the implicit value that consumers place on each attribute. The approach transforms a subjective preference into a quantifiable economic measure expressed in Ghanaian cedis, the local currency.

The analytical machinery behind the study was correspondingly sophisticated. The authors estimated mixed logit models in what economists call preference space, an approach that allows each consumer’s tastes to differ from the average and thereby captures preference heterogeneity across the sample. They also estimated generalized multinomial logit models in willingness-to-pay space, a formulation that directly models the monetary value respondents attach to attributes and helps account for the scale of the random components in choice behavior. Estimating models in both spaces is a robustness strategy: if the substantive conclusions hold across specifications, researchers can be more confident that the results reflect genuine preferences rather than artifacts of a particular statistical assumption.

The headline result concerns certification. Consumers were willing to pay an additional 0.521 Ghanaian cedis for a certified product, and health claims on the packaging were also positively associated with consumer valuation. In other words, signals of quality assurance and official oversight made the juice more attractive and more valuable in shoppers’ eyes. This is a meaningful premium in a market where price sensitivity is high, and it underscores a broader principle in food economics: in settings where regulatory enforcement may be uneven and food safety concerns are real, third-party certification functions as a costly-to-fake signal of trustworthiness that consumers reward.

The fortification ingredients told a very different story. All three were associated with negative willingness to pay, meaning that adding them to the juice made consumers value it less. Turkey berry powder, soy milk, and powder derived from palm weevil larvae—the edible insect—each detracted from the product’s appeal. The pattern is notable because these ingredients were presumably selected for their nutritional merit; turkey berries are locally known and soy is a recognized protein source, while insect powder represents an emerging frontier in sustainable protein and micronutrient supply. Yet nutritional logic did not translate into market demand. The authors interpret this as evidence that trust-related attributes matter more for consumer acceptance than product formulation involving unfamiliar ingredients. A consumer who cannot judge whether an unusual ingredient is safe, palatable, or appropriate may simply discount the entire product.

This asymmetry between trust signals and ingredient content has practical consequences for anyone hoping to bring fortified foods to market in Ghana or similar contexts. The study suggests that the pathway to consumer acceptance may run through credibility rather than through the nutritional profile alone. A fortified juice carrying recognized certification and a credible health claim starts with a positive valuation that fortification then erodes; the net effect depends on whether the trust premium can outweigh the ingredient penalty. For product developers, the implication is that unfamiliar ingredients may need to be introduced gradually, paired with strong certification, or framed in ways that connect them to familiar food traditions, rather than simply listed on a label and expected to sell on merit.

The research also carries weight for the sustainable development agenda. The authors explicitly situate their work within the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 2 on zero hunger, SDG 8 on decent work and economic growth, and SDG 12 on responsible consumption and production. The logic of the connection is straightforward. If nutrition-sensitive food innovations can convert perishable surplus tomatoes into shelf-stable fortified products, farmers capture value that post-harvest losses currently destroy, food processors create employment, and consumers gain access to improved dietary quality. But the entire chain depends on the final link: a consumer willing to buy. Evidence that consumers penalize certain fortification ingredients is therefore not a rejection of the sustainable food systems vision but a map of where the friction lies.

The study was conducted with formal ethical oversight, receiving approval from the University of Cape Coast Institutional Review Board under approval number UCCIRB/CANS/2025/007, and was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Respondents were informed of the study’s purpose, the confidentiality of their answers, and their right to withdraw at any time, with informed consent obtained before the questionnaire was administered. The authors report no competing interests and note that the research received no external funding. In an unusual touch, the acknowledgements credit a supervised student agribusiness project on consumer preferences for non-dairy ice cream in the Cape Coast Metropolis as the inspiration for the tomato juice study—a reminder that graduate training projects can seed publishable research agendas.

Published open access on 5 October 2026 after being received in April and accepted in late September of the same year, the article arrives as a citable early-release version carrying a permanent DOI. Its broader message resonates well beyond Ghana’s tomato sector. Around the world, food scientists are developing fortification strategies that incorporate novel and sustainable ingredients, from insect-derived proteins to plant-based powders, in the pursuit of diets that are both nutritious and environmentally sound. The Ghanaian evidence adds a cautionary but constructive data point: consumers are not blank slates who will adopt nutritionally superior products on command. They respond to trust, familiarity, and credible signals, and they punish unfamiliarity with their wallets. Designing sustainable food innovations that succeed in the market, the study implies, requires as much attention to the economics of belief as to the biochemistry of nutrition.

Subject of Research: Consumer willingness to pay for fortified tomato juice in Ghana

Article Title: Consumer willingness to pay for fortified tomato juice in Ghana and its relevance for sustainable food systems

Article References: Owusu, R., Kagambega, Y., & Atiah, K. (2026). Consumer willingness to pay for fortified tomato juice in Ghana and its relevance for sustainable food systems. Discover Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-026-04888-x

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s43621-026-04888-x

Keywords: food fortification, willingness to pay, discrete choice experiment, Ghana, tomato juice, post-harvest losses, sustainable food systems, micronutrient deficiency, edible insects, consumer preferences, SDGs, mixed logit