Consumer Validation of Innovation Concepts for Mexican Creole Pig Products: Perceptions, Acceptance Drivers and Early-Market Feasibility
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70208/3007.8245.v5.n3.287Palabras clave:
innovation concepts, consumer validation, native pig breeds, acceptance drivers, early-market feasibilityResumen
This article studies how consumers perceive and evaluate early-stage innovation concepts related to Mexican Creole pig products (native breeds). Unlike prior research focused on the generation of ideas through structured creativity methods, the present study is centered on consumer validation. Empirical evidence was gathered through twelve focus groups (n = 71) conducted between August and November 2025 by the research team and trained student teams from both private and public institutions. Participants assessed a wide range of conceptual proposals—including gourmet products, sustainable packaging, premium branding, educational experiences, and cultural events—originally developed in an earlier ideation phase. Findings demonstrate that consumer acceptance depends primarily on perceived hygiene, traceability, packaging quality, and expected flavor attributes. Cultural storytelling and heritage value also increase interest but operate as secondary decision drivers. Cognitive barriers such as unfamiliarity with native breeds, fat-related stigma, and food neophobia were also identified. These insights clarify the conditions under which Creole pig innovations may achieve early-market feasibility in urban segments. By focusing exclusively on consumer attitudes toward conceptual prototypes, this article bridges the gap between creativity-based ideation and applied market sensing, providing actionable guidance for subsequent feasibility studies involving producers and value-chain actors.
Citas
Boettcher, P. J., Hoffmann, I., Baumung, R., Drucker, A. G., McManus, C., Berg, P., Stella, A., Nilsen, L. B., Moran, D., Naves, M., & Thompson, M. C. (2014). Genetic resources and genomics for adaptation of livestock to climate change. Frontiers in Genetics, 5, 461. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2014.00461
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2015). The second report on the state of the world’s animal genetic resources for food and agriculture (B. D. Scherf & D. Pilling, Eds.). FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture Assessments.
Guerrero, L., Guardia, M. D., Xicola, J., Verbeke, W., Vanhonacker, F., & Zakowska-Biemans, S. (2009). Consumer-driven definition of traditional food products and innovation in traditional foods: A qualitative cross-cultural study. Appetite, 52(2), 345–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2008.11.008
Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. BMJ, 311(7000), 299–302. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5th ed.). SAGE.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE.
Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). SAGE.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Rozin, P. (2006). The integration of biological, social, cultural and psychological influences on food choice. In R. Shepherd & M. Raats (Eds.), The psychology of food choice (pp. 19–39). CABI.
Siegrist, M. (2008). Factors influencing public acceptance of innovative food technologies and products. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 19(11), 603–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2008.01.017
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE.













