Considering food market, it is possible to say that except for already mentioned before institutions it also comprises a range of actors who permanently interact with each other. Thus as the key players in the organic food market, for example, consumers, producers, and retailers could be mentioned. However, network interactions that occur here are rather diversified. Thus, it could be interactions among producers only, among producers and retailers, retailers and other distributors, and so on. Thus, some studies demonstrate that communication between consumers and retailers along with their direct communication with producers plays a significant role in the process of trust formation (Zanoli, 2004; Hunt, 2007; U. Kj?rnes, 2007; Schneider, 2009; Lassoued & Hobbs, 2014). At the same time, the problem of consumer-consumer interactions on the market and especially in the organic food market still remains underexplored. There are some studies about influence of consumer networks on food consumption, which show that consumers also depend on relational trust in person networks when provisioning food on daily basis (Halkier, 2001; Woolley & Fishbach, 2016; Sawka et. al, 2015; Hughey, 2016; Pachucki et. al, 2011; U. Kj?rnes, 2007). Nevertheless, when it comes to organic food, a lack of studies concerning consumer interactions in the market should be mentioned. The only research demonstrates the importance of personal information when dealing with uncertainty problem in the food market is the one conducted by Rim Lassoued and Jill E. Hobbs (2014), who eliminated that consumers tend to trust other consumers, especially those from their social circle, in terms of food credence qualities. Moreover, they highlight the increasing role of social networking media as a source of information and means of communication about food (Ibid.). That is why this paper aims to fill current gap about the influence of consumer communication in the process of trust formation in the organic food market.

Thus, as it was defined earlier organic food is food produced by environmentally - and animal friendly techniques, which allow to preserve natural resources and biodiversity; as consequence associated with naturalness and freshness; which are undergone minimal, careful, and sustainable processing what in turn guarantee its higher nutritional value, positive affect on consumer's health and characterized by better sensory attributes. According to this definition and on the base of the most common reasons for buying organic food it could be stated that for a product to be called organic it should correspond 5 basic requirements connected with safety, nutrition, quality, ethics and value for money. Moreover, preferably but not necessary it can carry ecological label. That is why it is possible to state that consumer trust is based on their expectation about a product to correspond these criteria. And to be aware of the fact that a product possesses these qualities consumers need to refer to different sources of information whether it is their personal contacts or some institutions.

To sum up it is possible to say that according to those views, prevailing in sociological thought regarding trust, the latter could be understood both as sensual and rational phenomenon, which combines both elements of calculation and belief and which is necessary for the situations of uncertainty caused by human actions. People can't trust food directly, but instead trust those who provide them information about products that they buy. To be more precise, trust on the organic food market is a bet about future fulfillment of consumer's expectation concerning product to be organic under the conditions of uncertainty caused by other market agents and asymmetrical distribution of information, based on knowledge about organic origin of a product provided by those actors who are believed to give the truthful and reliable information in these terms.

That is why talking about trust on the market it is important to take into account how market is organized in order to understand how the process of information distribution is going on and in this regards neo-institutional and network approach could be reasonably implied to the organic food market, where both institutional arrangements and personal communication could be considered as the base for consumer trust formation as they are known to be the sources of information about organic origin of food. More than that the question of how could the level of consumer trust in organic food measured was investigated and following criteria distinguished: nutrition, quality, safety, ethics, value for money and the duration of consumption. This is due to the fact that exactly these parameters are could show if consumers are sure that products correspond the main qualities prescribed to them as being organic, what means that they are of truly organic origin.

To conclude, it is necessary to say that this part of the work was to reveal theoretical and methodological foundations of the research. First of all, the general concept of organic food based on three major approaches found in current literature on the topic was made. It was stated that definition of organic food, either it is based on process-oriented, agro-ecological or product quality-oriented approach, builds on the opposition between conventional and organic product. Under these circumstances, organic food, in general, could be understood as products produced by environmentally- and animal-friendly techniques, which allow to preserve natural resources and biodiversity; as consequence associated with naturalness and freshness; which are undergone minimal, careful, and sustainable processing what in turn guarantee their higher nutritional value, positive effect on consumer's health and characterized by better sensory attributes. Secondly, analysis of organic production, processing, distribution and labeling in Russia and Germany as well as media coverage of the topic were analyzed to investigate the question of national peculiarities of this concept understanding among Russian and German consumers. It was revealed that understanding of the organic food concept varies significantly within Russian and German consumers mostly due to the differences in legislative regulations and unlike media coverage of the topic. Thus, Russian consumers perceive organic food mostly as beneficial for themselves, while German buyers connect organic food with a sustainable development and preservation of environment. And finally, general definition of trust was done and later specified with the example of organic food. We define trust in organic food as a consumer's bet that a product will fulfill expectations they have on it as being truly organic. Moreover, basic criteria for trust in organic food measurement, such as time of consumption, quality, safety, nutrition, ethics and value for money, were distinguished. And finally, as trust within market for organic food is considered, two basic approaches to defining grounds for trust on the market - institutional and network - were described. The first one stated that information from various market institutions provide necessary information and fill the gap in the lack of important knowledge for consumer, while the second one explains the process of consumer trust formation as based on information received from personal interactions. In other words, consumers tend to receive information about organic origin of a product either by means of ecological labeling, certification; brand name; advertisement and Mass Media or by means of their communication with other organic food consumers. All in all, the basis for further empirical research, which results are presented in Chapter 2, was laid in this part.

Chapter 2. Building trust on the organic food market: comparative analysis of Russian and German cases

The aim of this part is to discuss the choice of data type as well as the methods of data collection, interpretation and analysis; to outline the challenges of the research; and provide the clear overview of the research findings. Thus, first of all, the logic of sampling for online survey and semi-structures interviews is explained; the choice of media sources for qualitative analysis is justified; the current legislative base is briefly discusses; methods of data analysis are reasoned and problems of gaining access to the field and limitations of the study are presented. Then, the analysis of results obtained from Russian and German cases are analysed in comparative perspective with their connection to theoretical concepts discussed in the previous chapter. Finally, general conclusions and suggestions for further investigation are proposed.

2.1 Methods and data collection

The aim of this paragraph is to discuss the choice of data as well as methods of data collection, interpretation and analysis; to outline challenges that were faced in the implementation of the methodology; and to provide a clear overview the research aims and outcomes. In order to describe the reasons lying behind the choice of the methodology, it is necessary to specify the tasks of the empirical research as it was stated in the research program provided in the Appendix I. The first task was to define how the concept of organic food is understood by Russian and German consumers as well as to know their reason for buying these products. The second task was to find out what is the initial source of information consumers get to receive the very first knowledge about organic food. The third task was to understand what the decisive factor is for consumers when making the decision about purchasing an organic item. The next task was to detect what are the major sources of information consumers used to pay attention the most when buying an organic item and to test if there are dependencies between these sources and consumer's level of trust. Along with the tasks mentioned it was necessary to distinguish the main differences in national legislation on organic food in Russian and Germany; and to analyse the differences in media coverage of the topic in both countries mentioned.

According to the aims of the study, it was decided to stick to the mixed methodology of data collection and analysis, which includes both qualitative and quantitative methods. It allows giving the full picture of the analysed object. While quantitative techniques allow providing the clear measurement of chosen categories, which are the level of trust and the importance of information sources, it is hardly possible to know what the real grounds behind these numbers are, and in this case, qualitative techniques were used as an explanatory and sustaining tool. Thus, the data collection was performed by means of an online survey and semi-structured interviews. It is possible to familiarize with the questionnaire and the interview guide in Appendixes II and III correspondingly. It was important for the aim of the study to collect strictly defined information to support the results obtained from the online survey; however, and at the same time it was necessary to collect some in-depth knowledge about the topic and that's why semi-structured interviews were chosen as the supportive tool in the research. It could be mentioned that in some cases respondents went beyond the posed questions and provided additional information, which turned out to be also valuable for the aims of the research and was extremely useful when interpreting the results of the survey. In addition to these methods, qualitative analysis of texts was also implemented during the research when laws and regulations along with media content were examined.

Apparently, Russian and German cases, analysed in this paper, have substantial differences ranging from the understanding of what organic food is and motives for purchasing this kind of commodities to the whole process of organic food market development and the general process of trust formation in modern society. At the same time, two cases have significant similarities. These days organic food is constantly becoming increasingly popular both among Russian and German consumers despite a range of difficulties markets for organic food face in both countries. At the same time, consumer trust has a great role in the process of market development as long as the problem of asymmetric information accompanies both of the cases considered here. Moreover, organic food both is commonly accepted as a credence good due to the fact that it is hardly possible to identify if a product really organic or not even after the process of consumption. It means that both in Russian and Germany consumers could found themselves in rather vulnerable positions because they are not able to recognize that a product is organic unless they are told so. They need to base their trust on the information received about the environmental purity of food. This information could be transmitted in different ways, both through institutional arrangements (labelling, brand name, mass media, advertisement, etc.) and personal interactions (communication between consumers).

Due to the fact that it is rather hard for a single researcher to make an investigation analysing two national markets as a whole and cover all organic food consumers in both countries, which number is even difficult to estimate, the decision was made to focus attention on Russian and German organic food systems, which include two specialized organic food stores and private controlling bodies from each side. Denn's in Bielefeld, Alnatura in Dusseldorf and Organica and Biogarmonica in St. Petersburg were taken as the objects. All of them specialize in organic food sales, offering a quite similar assortment of goods with eco-labels such as Demeter, EU Organic Bio, Bio-Siegel, Bioland. Organica and national Russian logo called Vitality Leaf. All the shops mentioned are considered to be nationwide suppliers, which are rather active on the Internet. They run official websites and also have web pages in Facebook and Vkontakte (only for Russian case). This, in turn, facilitates the access to the target population of our online survey and provides the possibility for the analysis of information circulated within the customers of these stores. At the same time, Bioland in Germany and the Ecological Union in Russia are both private controlling bodies which provide services for organic certification and possess their own eco-label. They implement their own standards which are based on the national legislation. They also have their own web pages in social networks what significantly facilitates access to the target audience. What is more, the research was oriented toward ecologically conscious consumers and analysing these particular object allowing cover those people who consume organic food intentionally and to avoid occasional buyers. As for investigation institutional basis, both governmental and private rules for organic food were analysed. As well as nationwide newspapers and news portals available online in the English language were considered to show how Mass Media influence consumer's perception of organic food.

The research was conducted from the 1st of February till the 31st of March. The pure random sample for online survey was composed of 81 consumers in Russia and 85 in Germany. The link to the questionnaire was published on the pages of earlier mentioned shops and organizations on Facebook and Vkontakte; and those who were willing to participate filled it in. The sample for structured interviews was formatted by snowball technique and include participant of those groups as well with some exceptions. Interviews were conducted both face to face and distantly. Face to face interviews were recorded using a mobile phone voice recorder. Some respondents filled in the list of open questions that was sent by e-mail and then were communicated via messages to make necessary clarifications. In general 6 consumers from Germany and Russia correspondingly were interviewed. Information about respondents is presented in Appendix IV; as well as examples of interview transcripts are shows in Appendixes V and VI.

Furthermore, for the aims of the research following regulations were analysed: European Union law on organic production (Council Regulation No 834/2007/EC of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation № 2092/91/EEC; Commission regulation (EC) №889/2008 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation № 834/2007; Commission regulation № 271/2010); German law on organic production (The Organic Farming Act - ЦLG); Bioland Standards; Demeter Standards; GOST P 56104-2014 on organic food products: terms and definitions; GOST P- 56508-2015 on organic products: rules of production, storage and transportation; GOST Р 57022-2016 on organic production and the procedure of voluntary certification of organic production; and Vitality Leaf standards. Concerning mass media content the following resources were considered: The Local DE, Bild, Taz.archiv, Spiegel и Deutsche Welle in Germany; Gazeta.ru, Arguments and Facts, Komsomolskaya Pravda, Izvestia, RIA news and Rossiya 24 in Russia. Articles regarding organic food in these publications were analyzed for different techniques, rhetoric, and instruments which are used to cover the topic.

Analysis of the collected data was made by means of Excel and Atlas software packages. Excel Analysis ToolPak was used to make a statistical analysis of data obtained from the online survey. This choice was made due to the familiarity with the principles of its working from the course on information technologies and methods in sociology at the University, and in general, it is handier and more convenient to use this particular software. It allows making necessary calculations, conducting correlation and regression analysis, and graphically presenting the results of the analysis. In the course of data analysis acquired from interviews, the ATLAS software package was used as long as it meets the requirements of the research and is highly recommended by numerous researchers who were also able to give advice and instructions on its usage. The process of coding which is required for Atlas analysis was rather demanding and time-consuming. The codes were created on the basis of the theoretical basis used also for the questionnaire. After that, the frequency of their appearance as well as their co-appearance were investigated and used for the description and interpretation of results.

2.2 Trust in organic food among Russian and German consumers: comparative analysis of empirical data

The portrait of a typical consumer: socio-economic characteristics

It is interesting to mention that the choice of products available to consumers in Russia and Germany is different. The results of the survey allow stating that the most popular organic items in both countries are fresh vegetables and fruits, milk, cereals, meat, and eggs. However, Germans tend to choose eggs more often (65%) than Russians (33%), while tend to buy fewer cereals and fish. Nevertheless, interviewees from Russia have more complaints about the choice. It is seen from such statements as: `I buy organic food there where it could be found, due to the limited choice of the products themselves and also shops'; `The choice is limited due to the prices and the lack of sufficient offers' (R1). However, many respondents connect the problem of choice with price issues. It is known that organic food is sold with higher prices in comparison to its conventional counterparts. And this fact could be considered as the main obstacle for those people who want to follow organic diet, especially in Russia. People often refer to the fact that they would like to buy more organic but can hardly afford to because of their current financial situation: `Organic food is much more expensive and at this stage of my life I can't afford it' (AR); `There are not so many people in my surroundings who but organic food purposefully because, people save money in general, they try to' (O). Nevertheless, German consumers also mention that prices for organic food can be higher, but due to the different socio-economic situation for German consumers it's not a big problem. It could be seen from such statements as: `Yes, many of my co-workers and friends started buying organic, since they realized it's not really that much pricier' (N); `the price is at least ok' (S); `the market was cleaned up in one week, it was over and because people had to choose and it was not very more price, price was not so…much higher' (HI). Moreover, it is possible to buy organic food not only at specialized stores but also in discounter shops what make these good even more affordable.

Motives for buying organic food among Russian and German consumers

It is a common knowledge that expectations, which organic food consumers have upon these commodities, largely depend on the motives for purchasing them. Depending on why the consumer decided to buy the product determines what he or she would finally expect from the process of its consumption. As it was defined in the first chapter trust is a bet about the future fulfillment of one's expectations in a situation of uncertainty, caused by other human's actions and underpinned by a lack of important information, based both on rational calculations and people's beliefs. Consequently, the fulfillment of these expectations upon organic food would define consumer trust in the future. If generally, these products meet consumer's expectations it could be assumed that they would be more confident in them and would more likely continue to buy them. It is also necessary to say that based on particular expectations the sources of information people tend to pay more attention could be different. Thus, for example, some sources can provide more trustworthy information about the content of a product, while some of them could better inform about the conditions of production. That's why in order to trace the grounds for consumer trust in is of crucial importance to know, why they decide to buy organic.

Thus, Russian and German consumers vary significantly in terms of reasons to stick to the organic diet. The data demonstrates that Russian consumers follow their personal gain when buying organic food as long as when asking to finish the statement “I buy organic food, because…” the most popular answers were “it is healthy” (70%), “it is safe” (61%), and “it tastes good” (43%). Environmental issues are important only for 42% of respondents what could seem quite a big number. However, in comparison to the data collected from German consumers it could hardly be considered as one of the main motivation factors for Russian consumers because Germans to the same question mostly answered “I want to support local producers” (79%); “animals are treated better” (76%) and “it is produced in environmentally friendly way” (71%).

In these regards, the issues of local production deserve a special attention. For Russian consumers to buy organic food doesn't mean to support local companies, only 23% of surveyed pointed this as the reason why they buy organic food. At the same time, local production moves to the forefront in Germany. Some interviewees reported that for them organic food is mainly locally produced, and this is the way to support small, developing production, and to confront the mass production system which is not always fair and beneficial for consumers and other market agents: `Yes, I think that in the beginning it was that people who try to produce biological stuff, it was very difficult for them because everybody was laughing at the them, hahaha, what are they doing, and products are a little bit more expensive, though, sure, I think it was also to support these people so they can grow up' (HI); `But the main reason for me to buy organic is a political one. I like the idea to support small companies and farmers. And I think by buying organic products I support fair trade and sustainable agriculture' (S).

Nevertheless, the information obtained from interviewees makes it evident that the environmental and animal welfare not of the least importance in both countries, and not only in Germany; organic food still remains the way to preserve national resources and provide animals better treatment. This is reflected in such statements as `I buy organic food because I take care about my health and the health of people around me, animals, plants, and about the ecology in general' (AR); `Consumption of organic food have a great role both people and for the environment. It determines the health and the quality of people's life, the existence of animals, flora, and also clean environment' (AR); `It is important for me to eat safe food, which production furthermore harms the environment less' (AP). It is also confirmed by such utterances as `The main reason for me in buying organic animal products are the living conditions for the animals; living conditions of the animals have always been important for me' (A); `I think with the normal way we in Germany and also in other countries they are producing, for example, meat or vegetable is in a way where they destroy bios, and for me also to buy healthy food is something against this way of producing things. Like, for example, with the animals, I stop eating chicken because when I saw once, many years ago, how chickens are gathered and treated and they are in big houses and one close to the other and it's a way…With antibiotical, it's not for me human way to treat animals and therefore it's this way is a political way, when I am eating healthy food' (HI); `It's not only for our health, I think it's also for to look what is with our environment' (BH).

However, both Russian and German consumers appreciate the taste of organic food and its health benefits. Even if these ideas are not expressed explicitly, they still could be found in combination with some other factors that influence consumer reasons to buy organic. It is reflected in such statements as: `They're also tastier since it's not about the price of a product, but about the quality; this is how you get watery strawberries in winter! My best friend also works in an organic store and I was surprised how tasty a boiled egg could be if it was actually organic!' (N); `Often, but not always organic products differ from normal products in taste and quality. Especially organic vegetables taste better than cheap vegetables which you can buy in the supermarket' (S); `Some friends in Germany gave me to try organic cucumbers and radish and were really much tastier and much more flavored than conventional ones' (E); `I buy organic food, primarily, because of its taste; it's more natural and differs to the better from the taste of conventional food, especially, meat, fish, and dairy products; and, for example, oat flakes with European label are tastier' (O). The fact that consumers connect organic consumption with health issues is also supported by such expressions as `I stick to the concept of healthy food and that's how my interest in organic food was born' (E); `I don't want harmful medicines and pesticides in big amounts to come in my body and potentially influence my health' (O); `For other organic products it is more important that they are more healthy as no chemical pesticides are used. As more and more people in my surroundings have serious illnesses I become more alert about that and I think there might be a connection between pesticides used and certain illnesses. Especially for my little son, I try to buy only organic food' (A); `My body has issues handling conventional stuff. They're healthier to me since they help my skin diseases and my digestive system' (N).

So, as it is possible to observe, Russian and German consumers in their motivation for buying organic food are not as different as the results of the survey shows. However, some differences still can be found what allows saying that German consumers are more ecologically consciousness as long as they strive to get benefits from organic consumption not only for themselves but for the environment, animals, and economy. Sensorial characteristics are also important but they could be named as an additional advantage. At the same time, for Russian consumers, it's vice versa. They start to buy organic food due to its better taste and health benefits, but as the times go they also understand that it could help not only them but the whole environment. One significant difference is only in economical aspect: for Russians, organic food seems to help economic development neither local nor nationwide, while Germans usually connect the development of organic productions with economic benefits.

Motivation is closely related to the way consumers understand the concept of organic food in general. It goes without saying that before starting to buy such items people tend to know something about what organic food is and why is it better to make the choice in favor of this exact foodstuff. It is interesting to mention that from the interviews it is noticeable that Russian consumers tend to use different names for organic food, including ecological, environmental, natural, farmer, etc. what in turn demonstrates that their understanding of the concept is rather vague in comparison to Germans who usually stick to the call such commodities only organic. Generally, the results of the online survey suggest that understanding of the concept do not vary significantly among Russians and Germans. Thus, consumers in both countries keep more to agro-ecological and product quality-oriented approach, because organic food is defined as produced without any chemical additives (94% in Germany and 91% in Russia). However, German consumers give the second place for the definition as produced with environmentally and animal-friendly techniques (82%), while for Russian it is more important that products do not contain any artificial additives (70%). Nevertheless for 74% of German respondents also mentioned that organic food should have natural content and 57% of Russian people marked that expect organic food to be produced in order to preserve the environment and with better treatment with animals. All in all process oriented approach doesn't seem to be popular in terms of defining organic food because not many respondents connect organic qualities of the food with its processing. Moreover, only 37% of Russian and 27% of German consumers reported that organic food is the one labeled as “organic”. Consequently, it contradicts the definition of organic food given by Codex Alimentarius and IFOAM who state that organic food is the one which has the proper label.

To conclude this part it is necessary to say that one and the same understanding of the organic food concept among German and Russian consumers, based on agro-ecological and product quality-oriented approaches, leads to different motivation, which is more altruistic among Germans and more egoistic among Russians, and consequently their expectations about the products. German consumers have more external expectations, while Russian consumers could be named as more self-oriented. That is why in order to be sure that these expectations will be fulfilled consumers could rely on different sources of information which in turn will increase or decrease their level of trust in organic food.

The level of trust and its interrelation with the sources of information about organic food

As it was stated earlier trust is the phenomenon that could hardly be measured by quantitative techniques. However, an attempt to measure the level of trust in organic food following the scheme proposed by a range of Nordic scientists (Kj?rnes et. al. 2007) and which is expressed in the form of trust in organic food index was undertaken in this research. On the base of consumer's degree of agreement with the statements which reflect the difference between conventional and organic food, the general level of their trust was calculated. Depending on whether a consumer agrees that organic food is safer, tastier, contains more nutrients, healthier, less harmful for the environment and deserve to be paid more it is possible to understand to which extent expectations were met and consequently how strong is the trust. Thus the average trust in organic food among Russian and German consumers is rather high and do not differ as much as it was expected. Trust index in Russia as estimated is 4, 10, while in Germany it is 4, 29. In general, it could be defined for both as 4 and called as trust on the scale from total distrust to absolute trust. It allows to state that generally, the level of trust on the German and Russian organic food market is high. However, it is interesting to know what the grounds for trust in both countries under the conditions of a rather different market development are. Why people tend to believe that the products they buy are really organic.

As it was defined in the first chapter, on the market people tend to search for trustful sources of information on which they could rely on in terms of organic food. Nevertheless, every act of purchasing is preceded by the process of choice and the decision-making process as well. Before starting to buy organic food it is necessary to find out some initial information about these commodities which can make a future consumer interested in those products and decide to start buying it. As it turned out personal contacts, as it is highlighted in network approach, and not institutional formations are more significant to make a choice in favor of organic food. It also could be called as the premise for trust or initial trust impulse in words of P. Sztompka (1992). This is what makes peoples start to buy organic food. Thus, the data suggests that 48% of German and 57% of Russian consumers got information about organic food for the first time by the means of so-called “World of mouth” or by means of recommendations from family members, friends, acquaintances, etc.

People often refer to the fact that started to follow organic diet because someone in their surroundings also was buying such things or they heard some discussions on this topic: `For the first time I decided to order organic food on the Internet after I participated in the discussion on its usefulness/harmlessness for children on one of the Internet-forums' (O); `People start to think about it and when you have people in your surroundings, when you see that people are buying this, it's also one thing; I think, when we started, we lived in the community and then somebody bought this and the other one bought this and we tried together' (HI); `Musli it was also one step in the beginning, I ate it when I stayed with my family and my mother, for example, she said oh it's tasty, and I would also eat it. So, I bought it and then she also sometimes ate it' (HI); `But my parents are buying organic from time to time. My flat mates in my first flat were also open-minded about organic food' (S); `It is the everlasting word of mouth: someone bought, someone liked and so on and so forth' (L). What is interesting is that Germans refer to the family as the initial source of information much more often in comparison to Russian consumers. Some of the respondents told that they buy organic food because their family members stick to buy or even produce organic food. However, social networks also play an important part in the decision-making process and a pretty big number of respondents chose exactly this source as an initial for getting information about organic with the slight preponderance on the Russian side with 37% against 16% in Germany. On this stage, thin and thick interpersonal trust moves to the forefront.

After the decision to start buying organic food is made the process of choosing begins. To considering what product to buy in order it can satisfy particular needs it is necessary to be sure that these products possess some characteristics responsible for that. As organic food is known as a credence good (Giannakas K., 2002), as long as it is not possible to define its organic characteristics before purchasing, consumers are not able to understand that a product is organic unless they are told so. There are different ways to notify that some item is organic. One can understand it on the base of labels, content, advertisement, personal pieces of advice, etc. But the most important is what sources consumers believe to be trustworthy in these terms. Thus, non-commercial partnership “Ecological Union” conducted a survey among ecologically oriented consumers during the international exhibitions “Wellness Expo” which took place in September 2015 in Moscow concerning the problem of trust in information about organic food. The results show that specialized mass media, information about content, ecolabels, and information from friends and acquaintances are the most reliable sources of information during the choosing process.

It is also supported by the results obtained from our survey. Correlation and regression analysis was carried out between two variables: trust in organic food index as the dependent variable and the frequency of paying attention to particular sources of information about organic food as independent one. The results show that both in Russian and in Germany high level of trust is positively correlated with the label as the information source consumers tend to pay attention more often when choosing a product. The rank correlation coefficient R for Russian data is 0, 82 and for Germans, it is 0, 75 what shows really strong dependencies between the analyzed variables. Moreover, it could be stated that the more often consumers check the presence of a label the higher level of trust they have. It is possible to observe this on the figure 1 “The dependencies between ecological labels and trust in Russia” and the figure 2 “The dependencies between ecological label and trust in Germany”. In this case, labels could be reasonably considered as a trustworthy source of information about organic qualities of a product.

Figure 1. The dependencies between ecological labels and trust in Russia

Figure 2. The dependencies between ecological labels and trust in Germany

These results are also supported by the following statements of interviewees who quite often recall labels as the base for their trust in organic food: `I know that there is a lot of forgeries and that fair and organic products have different standards, but it is very time-consuming to compare everything and so I mostly rely on the labels' (A); `It is very important that they have labels, if it's controlled, it force produce to respect some laws' (HI); `I can't remember I bought food I considered organic without an organic label. That is because even on the weekend markets organic food is labeled' (S); `I do trust only labeled production. I monitor ecolabels and pay attention to the green washing' (R1); `It is possible to identify whether a product is organic or not on the base of appropriate ecolabeling from verified certification bodies; I can be confident that the product is really organic only in case it has a confirming ecolabel and better several of them' (AR); `If there is a certificate or label it is easier to trust than there is not' (O). However, it is interesting to mention that Russian consumers name the same labels; they usually pay attention to, as German consumers and they are mostly European labels, for example, Demeter, Bioland, and EU organic label (Euroleaf). However, they also refer to Nordic Swan from Finland, what German consumers never do, because they mostly stick to their own national labels, like BIO-Siegel, for example. Similarly, Russian consumers also recalled the only internationally recognized Russian organic label “Vitality Leaf” as a trustworthy one.

However, as it was revealed from interviews not only the presence or the absence of label matters but what stays behind these signs. It means that those products that are marked with these labels are controlled according to the rules of organic production and consequently are able to meet consumer expectations. It is reflected in such statements as: `It is very important that they have labels, if it's controlled, it force produce to respect some laws' (BH); `But there are organizations, like Demeter or Bioland that strictly regulate it, those products. They do test them so that consumer does have some level of assurance that at least what one is buying has been tested according to those specific standards' (HI); `I can suppose though that they have to meet some requirements to have the right to put the label on' (S); `If there is no ecolabel, one can't state that the product is organic because control is needed on all the stages of production' (AR). Basically, it means, that under the conditions of inability to check the production process by them, consumers ground their trust in organic food on a label and thereby trust certification bodies who issue these labels, because they guarantee that the product was produced in accordance with particular organic requirements. It is also interesting to mention that German respondents mentioned private standards as even more strict than national one and tend to rely on private ecological labels, which are Demeter and Bioland, more than on governmental ones. In contrast, for Russian consumers, this characteristic of a label doesn't play such a big role due to the absence of official national labels.

What is more, in terms of foreign labels, they do not distinguish whether it is a private or governmental one. It's just important to have any internationally recognized label. To conclude, it is also necessary to say that respondents were also asked about the level of their agreement with the statement that the products they usually buy are of a truly organic origin. Further, the correlation between this variable as the dependent one and label as information source were analyzed. Coefficient of correlation both for Russian and Germany is pretty high 0, 37 and 0, 39 correspondingly. This allows to state that labels could be considered to be relied on by consumers.

Surprisingly, strong positive correlation between the level of trust in organic food among Russian consumers and information about the content was revealed during the analysis. The rank correlation coefficient R for these variables is 0, 73 and regression analysis proves that respondents who more often tend to look at information about the content. This can be observed in the figure 3 “The dependencies between information about content and trust in Russia”.

Figure 3. The dependencies between information about content and trust in Russia

On the contrary, information about the content does not play such a significant role for German consumers as hardly any correlation between two variables could be found. The correlation coefficient value is 0, 05 what means that these variable are not interdependent. Moreover, during the interviews, no one referred to the content of a product as something that influences the decisions about buying organic food. At the same time, many of Russian consumers report that content is one of the few guarantees they can rely on in terms of a product being organic: `In case if there is no equivalent item with ecolabel, I make my choice based upon the content; I read the content and choose the most natural' (R1); `It is possible to distinguish organic products by the presence of ecological labels issued by verified certification bodies, and it is necessary to read the content on a product's packaging' (AR); `Carefully read the content' (M); `It is also possible to look at the expiry date, content, and the region of production' (O).

It could be the case that Russian consumers tend to rely on the content because they usually define organic products as those which do not contain any harmful additives in them and to look at the content is the simplest way to check if a product is pure with no chemicals inside. At the same time Germans understand the concept of organic food slightly different as it is important that during the process of its production and processing no harm is done to nature or animals; more than that buying organic food is the way to support local producers and develop nation economy in general. That is why other sources on information instead of the content are used by German consumers to check whether a product is really organic.

The same difference appears to be regarding recommendation as the information source about organic food during the process of choosing. As it turned out, people in Russia tend to rely on recommendations more than German consumers in the processing of choosing organic products. Additionally, it could be stated that the level of their trust is positively related to getting these recommendations. It is based on the fact that the correlation coefficient on the Russian data is 0, 32. This could be observed in the figure 4 “The dependencies between recommendations and trust index in Russia”. It shows weak correlation but it still takes place in comparison to Germany where this indicator is just 0, 01. Thus, one of the interviewees points out about recommendations from other consumers: `they can do the same research as I, so why should I ask them?' (S). One of the Russian respondents also highlights: `Acquaintances are the same consumers as I am; this information could not be considered as more reliable because they can't check whether the product is really organic or not either' (O).