국내 생수 프리미엄화를 위한 선택속성 도출과 지불의사금액 추정, 감각특성에 관한 연구

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The domestic bottled water market in our country has grown to 2.3 trillion won, but domestic bottled water brands are unable to differentiate themselves and are engaged in price competition, creating a red ocean market. They have failed to develop products with clean raw water sources that meet water quality standards and are free from harmful substances, or premium products beneficial to health, indicating a need for business improvement in water companies. Meanwhile, imported bottled water brands are maintaining high selling prices and increasing their market share.

The purpose of this study is to derive attributes for premiumizing domestic bottled water, analyze partial value and importance of these attributes, create a profile bottled water, and estimate how much additional price consumers are willing to pay. This will provide foundational data for premium bottled water development and marketing insights.
To achieve this purpose, the following studies were conducted:
1. Deriving premium water selection attributes through Delphi survey
2. Estimating attribute importance and partial value through conjoint analysis
3. Estimating willingness to pay using Contingent Valuation Method (CVM)
4. Comparing levels through sensory evaluation of the profile bottled water
Study 1 involved a Delphi survey with experts conducted three times, which identified 6 high-level attributes and 12 detailed attributes for premiumization. The Kendall's W values for attribute consensus were all significant, indicating strong agreement. Notably, shortening distribution periods to consume water within a short time after release scored .852, the highest level of consensus, while using glass packaging (not commonly used in domestic products) scored .803. Subsequent priorities included mineral composition attributes, functionality, and uncontaminated bottled water quality.
To create a profile bottled water, detailed attributes were finalized through expert discussions, including:
Water quality (no water quality standard violations, no harmful substances), Packaging (glass bottle, PET bottle), Selling price (3 levels), Functionality (mineral enhancement, maintaining clean raw water source), Drinking timing (within 2 weeks, 2 weeks to 1 month, 1 to 3 months)

Study 2 was conducted with 200 consumers in the metropolitan area through conjoint analysis to estimate the importance of high-level attributes and partial value of detailed attributes. Using the 12 attribute levels derived from Study 1, 72 profiles were created and reduced to 16 attribute combinations through orthogonal method. The full profile method was used, and respondents were asked to rank their preferences. The research model was suitable with a Kendall's tau value of .483, and the importance order was: drinking timing > package material > selling price > clean water quality.
The low importance of clean water quality can be attributed to low awareness of environmental department water quality inspections and the perception that bottled water does not contain harmful chemicals or microplastics. The partial worth of detailed attributes showed: 1-3 months drinking timing at .670, glass bottle at .439, and mineral addition at .391. The optimal attribute combination was: water without harmful substances + glass bottle + mineral addition + 1-3 months drinking timing + selling price over 3,000 won. Based on these results, Profile Water 1 was created using water without harmful chemicals and microplastics that passed quality inspections, while Profile Water 2 was a mixed beverage with minerals added to Profile Water 1 at imported water levels. These two virtual profile waters were used for sensory evaluation in Study 4.

Study 3 aimed to estimate consumers' willingness to pay (WTP) for these premium products. Using the conjoint analysis results, two Profile bottled water products were presented: Profile Water 1 (bottled spring water) and Profile Water 2 (mineral-added). Prices were presented from 1,500 to 6,000 won, with willingness to pay decreasing as price increased, following a typical demand curve. Interestingly, Profile Water 2 showed a higher willingness to pay, indicating a preference for mineral-enhanced products perceived as healthy. For Profile Water 1, the model was statistically significant. The B-value for proposed prices was negative, showing decreased purchase probability with higher prices. Consumers more likely to pay were those with higher household income, frequent department store visitors, imported water drinkers, and those who prioritize minerals. The additional willingness to pay was estimated at 1,465 won above existing domestic water prices.
Profile Water 2 showed similar model characteristics, with additional variables like microplastics being significant. The additional willingness to pay was estimated at 2,225.5 won above domestic water prices, with 759.8 won more than Profile Water 1, attributed to the perception of minerals being beneficial to health.
The bottled water company suggest pricing Profile Water 1 around 2,500 won and Profile Water 2 at 3,000 won or higher, based on the estimated additional willingness to pay.

Study 4 compared the sensory characteristics of profile waters and commercially available bottled waters, evaluating the key premiumization attributes of drinking timing and packaging(bottle) material to assess the competitiveness and appropriateness of the profile waters as premium products. The sensory evaluation was conducted in two parts: professional panel characteristic difference test and consumer preference test.
In the characteristic difference test between profile waters and commercial bottled waters, no significant differences were found in appearance and throat feel of after taste. Significant differences were observed in taste, texture, and after taste persistence. Domestic commercial bottled waters showed superior characteristics in salty and acidic tastes. Overall preference was ranked as: waters with high mineral content > profile waters with clean water quality > imported bottled waters with similar mineral content to domestic bottled waters > domestic bottled waters. The overall preference of profile waters was equivalent to imported bottled waters.
The consumer preference test for profile waters showed no significant differences in appearance, odor, texture, and aftertaste. Taste and overall preference were significant, with the overall preference ranking: high mineral imported bottled water > Profile Water 2 > Domestic commercial bottled water > Profile Water 1 > Low mineral imported bottled water. This indicated that the two profile waters had similar preference levels to imported waters and higher preference than domestic bottled waters, suggesting the possibility of developing premium domestic bottled water.
For the key premiumization attribute of drinking timing, significant differences were found in odor, taste (sweetness), texture (refreshingness), and overall preference. Products with later drinking times showed decreased characteristics and preference. The consumer preference test revealed significant differences in odor and overall preference. Overall preference was highest for samples with shorter drinking times after production, suggesting this could be a competitive advantage for domestic bottled waters over imported bottled waters.
The sensory evaluation of packaging materials (glass vs. PET bottles) showed significant differences in odor, taste, texture, and overall preference, except for appearance. Glass bottle products had significantly higher preference in odor and overall preference. The consumer preference test demonstrated differences in odor, taste, and overall preference, indicating consumer awareness of PET bottles' chemical impact on water quality. Overall preference was glass bottle > PET bottle.

In summary, the study comprehensively examined ways for domestic bottled water companies to diversify and add value to their products. Key findings include:
1. Identified premium water attributes through Delphi and conjoint analyses:
Clean water source (passing quality tests, free from chemicals and microplastics), Glass packaging, Shortened drinking time, Mineral enhancement.
2. Estimated additional pricing potential of 1,500-2,200 won over current products
3. Sensory evaluation confirmed that domestic premium profile waters have equal or superior quality characteristics and preferences compared to imported waters

The bottled water company conclude that by manufacturing and selling such premium bottled waters, domestic water bottled companies can overcome current price-competitive challenges and compete more effectively with imported bottled water brands.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• I. 서 론 1
• 제1절. 연구 배경 1
• 제2절. 연구 목적 5
• 제3절. 연구 방법 7
• 제4절. 연구 구성 9
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 11
• 제1절. 생수의 정의 및 특징 11
• 1. 생수의 정의 11
• 2. 생수의 종류 13
• 제2절. 생수 제조 공정 및 서플라이 체인 14
• 제3절. 생수의 시장 동향 15
• 제4절. 생수의 선택속성 17
• 제5절. 프리미엄 생수의 특징 20
• 1. 프리미엄 생수의 정의 20
• 2. 국내 판매 현황 21
• 3. 선행연구 23
• 제6절. 생수의 미네랄과 인체에 미치는 영향 25
• 1. 생수의 미네랄 25
• 2. 생수의 미네랄이 물 맛과 건강에 미치는 영향 27
• 제7절. 생수의 인체 위해 요인 30
• 1. 생수의 수질 부적합 실태 30
• 2. 생수의 미세플라스틱과 유해 화학물질의 영향 32
• 3. PET 용기의 용출 유해 화학물질 38
• 4. 생수 유통·보관에 따른 수질 문제 39
• 제8절. 지불의사금액(Willingness to Pay: WTP) 41
• 제9절. 연구과제에 사용하는 연구 기법 43
• 1. 델파이기법(Delphi Method) 43
• 2. 컨조인트 분석(Conjoint Analysis) 47
• 3. 조건부가치평가법(Contingent Valuation Method) 50
• 1) 기법의 유형과 추정 방법 51
• 2) 가상 재화의 가치측정 절차 53
• Ⅲ. 연구 방법 54
• 제1절. 연구 범위 및 연구 모형 54
• 1. 연구 범위 54
• 2. 연구 모형 55
• 제2절. 연구과제별 연구 방법 56
• 1. 연구과제 1 : 국내 생수 프리미엄화를 위한 선택속성 도출 및 프로파일 생수용 속성 조합 도출 56
• 1) 델파이 연구 적용 56
• 2) 설문 대상 전문가 선정 57
• 3) 자료 수집 57
• 2. 연구과제 2 : 컨조인트 분석을 이용한 프로파일 생수의 속성 중요도 및 부분 가치에 관한 고찰 59
• 1) 컨조인트 상위 속성과 세부 속성 59
• 2) 컨조인트 디자인 설정 및 설문 구성 60
• 3) 표본 선정 및 분석 방법 61
• 3. 연구과제 3 : 프로파일 생수에 관한 지불의사금액(WTP) 추정 62
• 1) 연구 모형설정 62
• 2) 지불의사금액(WTP) 추정 방법 63
• 3) 변수 정의 66
• 4) 설문 디자인 및 구성 66
• 5) 표본 선정 및 분석 방법 68
• 4. 연구과제 4 : 프로파일 생수와 시판 생수에 관한 감각 비교평가 69
• 1) 특성차이 검사 방법 69
• 2) 소비자 기호도 검사 방법 73
• Ⅳ. 연구 결과 75
• 제1절. 델파이기법을 이용한 국내 프리미엄 생수를 위한 선택속성 도출 75
• 1. 전문가 선정 및 응답 결과 75
• 2. 자료 수집 76
• 3. 델파이 분석 결과 77
• 1) 1차 델파이 분석 결과 77
• 2) 2차 델파이 분석 결과 79
• 3) 3차 델파이 분석 결과 82
• 제2절. 프로파일 생수의 속성 중요도 및 부분 가치 도출 결과 84
• 1. 인구통계학적 특성 및 생수 음용 실태 분석 결과 84
• 2. 프로파일 생수의 중요도 및 부분 가치 추정 86
• 3. 프로파일 생수의 속성 조합 87
• 제3절. CVM을 이용한 프로파일 생수에 관한 지불의사금액(WTP) 추정 88
• 1. 표본의 인구통계학적 특성 및 생수 음용 실태 분석 결과 88
• 2. 응답자 지불의사 비율 90
• 3. 설명 변수에 대한 통계량 91
• 4. 프로파일 생수 2종의 로짓모델 및 지불의사금액(WTP) 추정 결과 92
• 1) 프로파일 생수 1에 관한 추정 결과 92
• 2) 프로파일 생수 2에 관한 추정 결과 93
• 3) 프로파일 생수에 관한 지불의사금액 추정 결과 고찰 94
• 제4절. 프로파일 생수와 시판 생수에 관한 감각 비교평가 결과 95
• 1. 감각검사 유형 및 패널 선정 95
• 2. 프로파일 생수와 시판 생수의 감각 특성차이 및 기호도 평가결과 96
• 1) 감각 특성차이 평가 결과 96
• 2) 소비자 기호도 검사 결과 98
• 3. 생수 출고 후 음용시점에 따른 감각 특성차이 및 기호도 99
• 1) 감각 특성차이 평가 결과 99
• 2) 소비자 기호도 검사 결과 101
• 3. 생수 패키지 재질(병)에 따른 감각 특성차이 및 기호도 102
• 1) 감각 특성차이 평가 결과 102
• 2) 소비자 기호도 검사 결과 104
• 4. 감각검사 결과 분석 105
• V. 결론 106
• 제1절. 연구 결과 요약 106
• 제2절. 시사점 111
• 1. 학문적 시사점 111
• 2. 실무적 시사점 112
• 제3절. 연구의 한계점 및 향후 연구 방향 114
• 참고문헌 116
• Appendix 129
• 1. 델파이기법 설문지(1차, 2차, 3차) 129
• 2. 컨조인트 분석 설문지 145
• 3. 지불의사금액(WTP) 조사 설문서 150
• 4. 감각검사 평가표(특성차이 검사, 소비자 기호도) 156
• ABSTRACT 162