Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:18:38.759Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stakeholder, citizen and consumer interests in farm animal welfare

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

W Verbeke
W Verbeke*
Affiliation:
Ghent University, Department of Agricultural Economics, Coupure Links 653, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The assessment and improvement of animal welfare are the tasks and joint responsibility of many stakeholders involved in the agro-food chain. This paper first looks at the supply side of the chain, and presents different stakeholder views on farm animal welfare, discussing the potential for market differentiation, communication and labelling related to farm animal welfare standards. From the demand side, the paper then examines the duality that exists between citizens’ attitudes and consumer behaviour in relation to animal welfare and livestock products, and identifies distinct segments of citizens and consumers. Although the importance that citizens claim to attach to animal welfare seems relatively strong, consumers’ interest in information about animal welfare is only moderate compared to other product attributes, and the market shares of products with a distinct animal welfare identity remain small. The paper concludes that while there seems to be substantial consensus between supply chain stakeholders, citizens and consumers about what is relevant for achieving an acceptable level of farm animal welfare, the differentiation and satisfaction potential of increased animal welfare per se as a stand-alone product attribute seems limited to particular niche market segments. It argues that improved farm animal welfare is more likely be realised and valued by consumers when it is integrated within a broader concept of quality, such as quality assurance or sustainability schemes.

Keywords

animal welfarecitizensconsumerslabellingqualitystakeholders
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 18 , Issue 4: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level , November 2009 , pp. 325 - 333
Copyright
© 2009 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Anwander Phan-Huy, S and Badertscher Fawaz, R 2003 Swiss market for meat from animal-friendly production: Responses of public and private actors in Switzerland. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16: 119–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, RM, Anderson, J and Blaney, RJP 2002 Moral intensity and willingness to pay concerning farm animal welfare issues and the implications for agricultural policy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15: 187–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, BB and van Huik, MM 2007 Animal welfare: the attitudes and behaviour of European pig farmers. British Food Journal 109: 931–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bracke, MBM, De Greef, K and Hopster, H 2005 Qualitative stakeholder analysis for the development of sustainable monitoring systems for farm animal welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18: 27–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, KH and Hollingsworth, J 2005 The Food Marketing Institute and the National Council of Chain Restaurants: animal welfare and the retail food industry in the United States of America. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l’Office International des Epizooties 24: 655–663CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, H-S and Kinnucan, H 1991 Advertising, information and product quality: the case of butter. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73: 1195–1203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Greef, K, Stafleu, F and De Lauwere, C 2006 A simple value-distinction approach aids transparency in farm animal welfare debate. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19: 57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edge, MK and Barnett, JL 2008 Development and integration of animal welfare standards into company quality assurance programs in the Australian livestock (meat) processing industry. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48: 1009–1013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission 2006 Special Eurobarometer 238 ‘Risk Issues’. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities: LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
Grunert, KG 2006 Future trends and consumer lifestyles with regard to meat consumption. Meat Science 74: 149–160CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, C and Sandilands, V 2007 Public attitudes to the welfare of broiler chickens. Animal Welfare 16: 499–512Google Scholar
Heleski, CR and Zanella, AJ 2006 Animal science student attitudes to farm animal welfare. Anthrozoos 19: 3–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, C, Bourlakis, M and Garrod, G 2007 Pig in the middle: farmers and the delivery of farm animal welfare standards. British Food Journal 109: 919–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D and Tversky, A 1979 Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47: 263–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D, Knetsch, JL and Thaler, RH 1991 Anomalies, the endowment effect, loss aversion and status-quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5: 193–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendall, H, Lobao, L and Sharp, J 2006 Public concern with animal well-being: place, social structural location, and individual experience. Rural Sociology 71: 399–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korthals, M 2001 Taking consumers seriously: Two concepts of consumer sovereignty. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14: 201–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liljenstolpe, C 2008 Evaluating animal welfare with choice experiments: an application to Swedish pig production. Agribusiness 24: 67–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCluskey, JJ and Swinnen, JFM 2004 Political economy of the media and consumer perceptions of biotechnology. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86: 1230–1237Google Scholar
Meuwissen, MPM, Van Der Lans, IA and Huirne, RBM 2007 Consumer preferences for pork supply chain attributes. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Sciences 54: 293–312Google Scholar
Miele, M and Bock, B 2007 Competing discourses of farm animal welfare and agri-food restructuring. International Journal of Sociology of Food and Agriculture 15: 1–7Google Scholar
Mizerski, R 1982 An attribution explanation of the disproportionate influence of unfavourable information. Journal of Consumer Research 9: 301–310Google Scholar
Petit, J and van der Werf, HMG 2003 Perception of the environmental impacts of current and alternative modes of pig production by stakeholder groups. Journal of Environmental Management 68: 377–386CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pines, MK, Petherick, JC, Gaughan, JB and Phillips, CJC 2007 Stakeholders’ assessment of animal welfare indicators for sheep and cattle exported by sea from Australia. Animal Welfare 16: 489–498Google Scholar
Ransom, E 2007 The rise of agricultural animal welfare standards as understood through a neo-institutional lens. International Journal of Sociology of Food and Agriculture 15: 26–44Google Scholar
Salaün, Y and Flores, K 2001 Information quality: meeting the needs of the consumer. International Journal of Information Management 21: 21–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schnettler, B, Vidal, R, Silva, R, Vallejos, L and Sepulveda, N 2008 Consumer perception of animal welfare and livestock production in the Araucania Region, Chile. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research 68: 80–93Google Scholar
Vanhonacker, F, Verbeke, W, Van Poucke, E and Tuyttens, FAM 2007 Segmentation based on consumers’ perceived importance and attitude toward farm animal welfare. International Journal of Sociology of Food and Agriculture 15: 84–100Google Scholar
Vanhonacker, F, Verbeke, W, Van Poucke, E and Tuyttens, FAM 2008 Do citizens and farmers interpret the concept of farm animal welfare differently? Livestock Science 116: 126–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, W 2005 Agriculture and the food industry in the information age. European Review of Agricultural Economics 32: 347–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, W 2008 Impact of communication on consumers’ food choices. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 67: 281–288CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Verbeke, W and Vackier, I 2004 Profile and effect of consumer involvement in fresh meat. Meat Science 67: 159–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, W and Viaene, J 2000 Ethical challenges for livestock production: Meeting consumer concerns about meat safety and animal welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12: 141–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, W and Ward, RW 2001 A fresh meat almost ideal demand system incorporating negative TV press and advertising impact. Agricultural Economics 25: 349–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, W and Ward, RW 2006 Consumer interest in information cues denoting quality, traceability and origin: an application of ordered probit models to beef labels. Food Quality and Preference 17: 453–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, W, Pieniak, Z, Bruns⊘, K, Scholderer, J and Olsen, SO 2008 Evaluating consumer information needs in the purchase of seafood products. In: B⊘rresen, T (ed) Improving Seafood Products for the Consumer pp 63–84. Woodhead Publishing Limited: Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, W, Vanhonacker, F, Sioen, I, Van Camp, J and De Henauw, S 2007 Perceived importance of fish ethics and sustainability: a consumer behavior perspective. Ambio 36: 580–585CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vermeir, I and Verbeke, W 2006 Sustainable food consumption: exploring the ‘attitude-behavioural intention’ gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19: 169–194Google Scholar
Wilson, TD 1981 On user studies and information needs. Journal of Documentation 37: 3–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar