Quality” Table 2. Contingency table, column relative frequencies ( percentages): “Do you believe that organic Answers Year healthier Tastier Far more Desirable Larger Quality foods are healthier, tastier, more desirable, or of greater quality”Definitely yes AnswersDefinitely yes Rather yesRather noRather noRather yesDefinitely noDefinitely noI Idon’t know never know2016 Year 2019 2016 2016 2019 2019 2016 2016 2019 2019 2016 2019 2016 2016 2019 2019 2016 2016 201920.Healthier 22.14 20.21 56.86 22.14 56.22 56.86 15.53 56.22 13.78 15.53 13.78 3.53 three.53 3.84 three.84 3.86 3.86 four.01 four.7.72 Tastier ten.11 7.72 33.53 10.11 37.68 33.53 38.29 37.68 32.75 38.29 32.75 7.72 7.72 8.19 8.19 12.74 12.74 11.28 11.4.A lot more Attractive 9.94 four.52 26.13 9.94 31.83 26.13 47.33 31.83 37.43 47.33 37.43 12.24 12.24 10.69 ten.69 9.78 9.78 10.11 ten.27.Higher High quality 24.06 27.36 49.06 24.06 52.05 49.06 15.37 52.05 14.12 15.37 14.12 2.71 2.71 three.93 3.93 five.51 5.51 5.85 5.Supply:Own calculations. Source: Own calculations.2D Plot of Row and Column Sulfinpyrazone Autophagy Coordinates; Dimension: 1 x two Input Table (Rows x Columns): 4 x 5 Standardization: Row and column profiles 0,Dimension 2; Eigenvalue: ,00173 (1,450 of Inertia) 0,ten 0,08 0,06 0,04 0,02 0,00 -0,02 -0,04 -0,06 -0,08 -0,10 -0,12 -0,five -0,4 -0,3 -0,two -0,1 0,0 0,1 0,2 I never know Tastier Definitely yes Healthier Greater Top quality Rather yes Rather not Certainly not Much more Desirable 2D Plot of Row and Column Coordinates; Dimension: 1 x 2 Input Table (Rows x Columns): four x 5 Standardization: Row and column profilesDimension two; Eigenvalue: ,00654 (three,301 of Inertia)0,Healthier Rather yes Unquestionably not More Attractive0,0,00 Tastier -0,05 Higher Top quality Surely yes -0,Rather not-0,I never know-0,20 -0,-0,-0,-0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,Dimension 1; Eigenvalue: ,18675 (94,22 of Inertia)Row.Coords Col.CoordsDimension 1; Eigenvalue: ,11656 (97,54 of Inertia)Row.Coords Col.CoordsFigure 2. Correspondence map: “Do you believe that organic foods are: healthier, tastier, more desirable, of larger quality” 2. Correspondence map: “Do you think that organic foods are: healthier, tastier, more attractive, of larger quality” Year 2016 year year 2019 (proper). Supply: Personal calculations. Year 2016 (left), (left),2019 (appropriate). Supply: Own calculations.Table 2 and Figure 2 (ideal) describe the situation in 2019. According to the survey, organic meals in 2019 was regarded healthier, too as of greater high-quality than conventional food, when not a lot more appealing; see the table plus the correspondence map (p-value is much less than 0.001, chi-square = 572.13, degrees of freedom = 12). The survey revealed a optimistic shift in organic meals reputation, see Table 3. The proportion of respondents who never ever bought organic food plunged to half of its original level. Even so, we recorded an increase in the quantity of respondents who did not care no matter whether it was organic or not. Substantial statistical dependence was confirmed (p-value is significantly less than 0.001, chi-square = 88.02, degrees of freedom = 3).Agriculture 2021, 11,The survey revealed a optimistic shift in organic food reputation, see Table three. The proportion of respondents who by no means purchased organic food plunged to half of its original level. Having said that, we recorded a rise in the quantity of respondents who didn’t care whether it was organic or not. Important statistical dependence was proven (p-value is 7 of 16 much less than 0.001, chi-square = 88.02, degrees of freedom = 3).Table 3. Contingency table, column relative frequencies (percentage.