Search for Institutions

143 entries found on 8 pages. starting on record 141 ending on 143

Sort by: Title, Year, Author (Corp. Body),

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
« Previous
Next »
Title: Study on the coverage, functioning and consumer use of comparison tools and third-party verification schemes for such
tools : Final report
Abstract
In March 2013 the Report from the Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue on Comparison Tools was presented at the European Consumer Summit. The report highlighted challenges and shortcomings in the functioning of comparison tools, particularly with regards to the transparency and impartiality of comparisons, the quality of information provided, the comprehensiveness and user-friendliness of comparison tools, the reliability of user reviews, consumer redress and enforcement of existing provisions.In September 2013, Ipsos, London Economics and Deloitte were commissioned to conduct a study on the comparison tool sector in order to:Explore consumer behavioural patterns in the use of comparison tools and their influence on consumers’ decision-making;Conduct an extensive mapping exercise of the comparison tools available in the EU accompanied by a survey on consumer perception and experience of comparison tools (analysis by sector and by country); Carry-out an analysis of existing accreditation and trustmark schemes for comparison tools; Highlight how improvements can be made to ensure comparison tools are reliable, transparent and user-friendly and benefit consumers.[Author vide copyright]
Table of Contents
Executive summary
1 Introduction and background
2 Methodology
2.1 Mapping and evaluation of comparison tools
2.1.1 Identification of comparison tools
2.1.2 Notes on search strings
2.1.3 Evaluation of the comparison tools
2.1.4 Limits to the approach to the evaluation of the comparison tools
2.2 Methodology for mapping Third-Party Verification Schemes
.2.1 Mapping and analysis of Third-Party Verification Schemes
2.2.2 Limits of the evaluation of Third-Party Verification Schemes
2.3 Methodology for consultation with stakeholders
2.4 Methodology of the consumer survey
2.5 Behavioural experiments
2.5.1 Experiment 1
2.5.2 Experiment 2
2.5.3 Experiment 3
2.6 Methodology of the mystery shopping exercise
2.6. Markets and countries covered in the exercise
2.6.2 Type of research
2.6.3 Number of price comparisons websites and mystery shops
2.6.4 Supplier website visits
2.6.5 Personalised pricing
2.6.6 Analysis of the results of the mystery shopping exercise
3 General perception of comparison tools
3.1 Usage and perception of comparison tools
3.1.1 E-commerce shortfalls
3.1.2 Comparison tool shortfalls
3.2 Decision-making biases and consumer behaviour in the context of comparison tools
4 Mapping of comparison tools and third-party verification schemes
4.1 Results from the mapping exercise
4.1.1 Breakdown of multi-sector comparison tools by sector combination
4.1.2 What do these results tell us about the commercial aspects of comparison tools?
4.1.3 Whooperates comparison tool websites, and what do they do?
4.1.4 Ranking values given on comparison tools
4.1.5 Important consumer information available on comparison tools
4.1.6 The great unknowns
4.2 Further analysis of comparison tool revenue streams and sourcing of data
4.2.1 Revenue streams
4.2.2 Sourcing of data
4.2.3 Summary
| 4.3 Mapping and evaluation of comparison tool third-party verification schemes
4.3.1 Trustmarks for e-commerce websites
4.3.2 Sector and national initiatives to create third-party verification for comparison tools
4.3.3 European initiatives to create third-party verification of comparison tools
4.3.4 Mapping of third-party verification schemes
4.3.5 Description of third-party verification schemes
4.3.6 Stakeholder perspectives of third-party verification schemes
4.3.7 Summary
5 Consumer perception and use of comparison tools
5.1 Awareness, frequency of use and motivations
5.1.1 Online purchasing
5.1.2 Awareness of comparison tools
5.1.3 Ways of getting informed about comparison tools
5.1.4 Frequency of using comparisons tools
5.1.5 Types of products/services for which comparison tools were used
5.1.6 Reasons for using comparison tools
5.1.7 Reasons for not using comparison tools
5.2 Consumer pathway to comparison tools
5.2.1 Online purchase intentions
5.2.2 Experiment 1 analysis
5.2.3 Results for the electricity sector
5.2.4 Results for the travel sector
5.3 Characteristics of importance for consumers
5.3.1 Most important characteristics of comparison tools
5.3.2 Observations from experiment 2
5.4 Consumer’s perception of comparison tools
5.4.1 Type of comparisons tools used
5.4.2 Perceptions of three different types of comparisons tools
5.4.3 Consumers’ experiences when using comparison tools
5.4.4 Users’ perception of comparison tools
5.4.5 Most appropriate way to protect consumers when using comparison tools
5.5 Understanding and impact of third-party verification schemes
5.5.1 Characteristics that should be guaranteed by verification schemes
5.5.2 Most suitable organisation to run verification schemes
5.5.3 Most suitable organisation to run comparison tools
5.5.4 Observations from experiment 2 on the impact of verification schemes
5.6 Impact of comparison tools on purchasing decisions
| 5.6.1 Impact of comparison tools on the online purchase intention
5.6.2 Observations from experiment 3
6 Practical functioning of comparison tools and shortcomings identified
6.1 Feedback from consumers on main problems encountered
6.1.1 Types of problems encountered when using comparison tools
6.1.2 Consumer’s response when experiencing an issue
6.1.3 Reasons for not taking any actions to solve the issue encountered
6.2 Results of the mystery shopping
6.2.1 Business model and compliance with existing legislation
6.2.2 Accessibility and user-friendliness
6.2.3 Ranking and search functions
6.2.4 Quality of information provided
6.2.5 Personalised pricing
7 EU consumer law and comparison tools
7.1 List of applicable consumer protection legislation and official guidance documents
7.2 General Remarks on applicability
7.2.1 Business/trader
7.2.2 Public bodies
7.2.3 Consumer organisations
7.3 Horizontal measures
7.3.1 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (+Guidance on UCPD –2009)
7.3.2 Consumer Rights Directive and the Guidelines to the Directive (2014)
7.3.3 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive
7.3.4 E-Commerce Directive
7.3.5 Price Indication Directive
7.3.6 Unfair Contract Terms Directive
7.4Vertical measures and sectoral legislation
7.5 Summary
8 Study conclusions and recommendations
8.1 Comparison of findings with MSDCT recommendations
8.2 Overall study recommendations
Annex 1: Consumer Survey -Sample Profile
Annex 2: Behavioural experiment
Annex 3: Consumer Survey -Tables
Author (Corp. Body): ECME Consortium
Contributer: Europäische Kommission / Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency | DELOITTE
Year: 2014
ISBN / ISSN / Kat.Nr: EAHC/FWC/2013 85 07
Language: en
Ressource: Einzelne Berichte, Studien
Keyword: counselingcounseling techniqueevaluationEUconsumerconsumer counselingconsumer protection
Subject: Consumption. Consumer protection
Countries Scheme: Europe. General Resources
Online Ressource: vorübergehend nicht erreichbar!
Bitte beachten Sie die urheberrechtlichen Bedingungen der Dokumentenbenutzung / Please observe the copyright when accessing the document | Quelle / Source: Europäische Kommission (http://ec.europa.eu/)
Title: Organisation chart : European Commission, Directorate-General Agriculture and Rural Development (16.04.2019)
Title (other): Juncker Commission
Author (Corp. Body): Europäische Kommission / Generaldirektion Landwirtschaft und Ländliche Entwicklung
Year: 2019
Language: en
Ressource: Unternehmens- und Institutionenverzeichnisse
Keyword: Organizational structure
Subject: European Community institutions
Countries Scheme: Europe. General Resources
Online Ressource: vorübergehend nicht erreichbar!
Bitte beachten Sie die urheberrechtlichen Bedingungen der Dokumentenbenutzung / Please observe the copyright when accessing the documentQuelle / Source: Europäische Kommission
Title: Organisation chart : European Commission, Directorate-General Agriculture and Rural Development (01.07.2019)
Title (other): Juncker Commission
Author (Corp. Body): Europäische Kommission / Generaldirektion Landwirtschaft und Ländliche Entwicklung
Year: 2019
Language: en
Ressource: Unternehmens- und Institutionenverzeichnisse
Keyword: Organizational structure
Subject: European Community institutions
Countries Scheme: Europe. General Resources
Online Ressource: vorübergehend nicht erreichbar!
Bitte beachten Sie die urheberrechtlichen Bedingungen der Dokumentenbenutzung / Please observe the copyright when accessing the documentQuelle / Source: Europäische Kommission
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
« Previous
Next »
Copyright (C) 2003-2019 European Documentation Centres / Update: 09.10.2019