Urban consumer preferences and sensory evaluation of locally produced and imported rice in West Africa K.I. Tomlins a, * , J.T. Manful b , P. Larwer b , L. Hammond a a Natural Resources Institute, The University of Greenwich at Medway, Central Avenue, Chatham Maritime, Kent ME4 4TB, United Kingdom b Food Research Institute, P.O. Box M20, Accra, Ghana Received 18 January 2002; received in revised form 18 July 2003; accepted 11 February 2004 Available online 16 March 2004 Abstract Parboiled rice produced in Ghana is of poor quality and is being overtaken by imported rice. This study sought to investigate consumer preference and relate sensory attributes with consumer acceptability of rice. The majority of consumers preferred im- ported raw and parboiled rice to that produced locally. Acceptability was influenced by location and gender. Individual preferences of consumers varied and four different segments of consumers with similar liking of the rice samples were identified. The largest three segments (86% of consumers) preferred the imported rice but differed in their preferences for the local rice. A niche segment (14%) mostly preferred traditional local rice. Regression models to predict consumer preference from the sensory panel scores were based on either brown colour of the cooked rice or unshelled paddy in the uncooked form. The models were suitable for three of the consumer segments representing 86% of the consumers. This suggests that while a sensory panel could be used to rapidly monitor consumer acceptability in product development, it was not valid for all consumers. The implications of these findings are discussed. Ó 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Keywords: Consumer acceptability; Sensory evaluation; Rice; Ghana; Africa 1. Introduction Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is an important food for urban consumers in Ghana and West Africa and is taking over from traditional staples, mainly root crops such as yam and cassava (Asafo, 1985). The per capita consumption of rice is second only to maize among cereals in Ghana (Quaye, Greenhalgh, Manful, & Hammond, 2000). About 281,000 tons of milled rice is produced annually in Ghana (Anon, 1998) but it has been estimated that about 200,000 tons of rice is imported (Day, Oldham, Acheampong, Opoku-Apau, & Langyintuo, 1997). While most of the imported rice is in the raw form, it is estimated that 46% of locally produced rice is parboiled. As many as 120,000 women are involved in the pro- duction of parboiled rice, which is, however, of poor quality and trades at about half the price of that im- ported (Quaye et al., 2000). Parboiling is a steam treatment of paddy that allevi- ates the effects of poor drying (cracking) and improves yield quantitatively and qualitatively since the propor- tion of broken grains is reduced (Diop & Wansey, 1990). The cooking quality of parboiled rice is better because the grains stay firm and do not stick together. The rice is also more nutritious because the proteins and vitamins are diffused through the centre of the grain after par- boiling and it stores better thanks to its greater hard- ness. Only its stronger flavour and yellowish colour could be disadvantages (Garibaldi, 1985; Pillaiyar, 1990). In Ghana and Nigeria, parboiling is accom- plished by soaking in hot water, steaming at ambient pressure, drying and milling the rice. Little has been reported on the consumer preference of rice in Ghana. Priestly (1994) reported that cooked grains should be firm and non-sticky. In Brazil, Luz and Treptow (1994) found that consumers preferred par- boiled to milled rice although most consumers generally ate milled rice. In Sri Lanka, factors influencing pref- erence were percentage of head rice, shape of milled rice and aroma (Kotagama & Kapila Jayantha Kumara, 1996). In the Philippines, milled rice that had a soft texture was preferred (Del Mundo & Juliano, 1981). Schutz and Damrell (1974) reported a high correlation * Corresponding author. Fax: +44-01634-883567. E-mail address: k.i.tomlins@gre.ac.uk (K.I. Tomlins). 0950-3293/$ - see front matter Ó 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2004.02.002 Food Quality and Preference 16 (2005) 79–89 www.elsevier.com/locate/foodqual