Consumers' valuation of sustainability labels on meat

被引:246
作者
Van Loo, Ellen J. [1 ]
Caputo, Vincenzina [2 ]
Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Verbeke, Wim [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ghent, Dept Agr Econ, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
[2] Korea Univ, Coll Life Sci & Biotechnol, Dept Food & Resource Econ, Seoul, South Korea
[3] Univ Arkansas, Dept Agr Econ & Agribusiness, Fayetteville, AR 72701 USA
[4] Norwegian Agr Econ Res Inst, Trondheim, Norway
关键词
Animal welfare; Carbon footprint; Choice experiment; Food labeling; Free range; Organic food; Sustainable food; Willingness to pay (WTP); WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY; FARM-ANIMAL WELFARE; CHOICE EXPERIMENT; FOOD-CONSUMPTION; PREFERENCES; INFORMATION; QUALITY; ATTITUDES; DISCRETE; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.07.002
中图分类号
F3 [农业经济];
学科分类号
0202 ; 020205 ; 1203 ;
摘要
There are various sustainability certifications and claims for food products that focus on environmental or ethical benefits. These claims empower consumers to make informed purchasing decisions that take environmental and ethical considerations into account. This paper compares consumers' preferences for four types of sustainability claims related to organic meat, free range, animal welfare and carbon footprint. Using a choice experiment on a chicken breast product, our results show that nine in every ten Belgian consumers favor free range claims, which are also valued the most highly, attracting premiums ranging from 43% to 93%. Our study also shows that a vast majority of consumers (87%) would welcome the introduction of an EU level animal welfare label. The carbon footprint labels and the organic labels are less appealing to consumers, who have lower willingness to pay for these labels. Belgian consumers prefer the national Belgian organic food logo, certified by a private organization, to the newly-introduced EU organic food logo. (c) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:137 / 150
页数:14
相关论文
共 86 条
[1]   Personal determinants of organic food consumption: a review [J].
Aertsens, Joris ;
Verbeke, Wim ;
Mondelaers, Koen ;
Van Huylenbroeck, Guido .
BRITISH FOOD JOURNAL, 2009, 111 (10) :1140-1167
[2]  
American Meat Institute (AMI) Food Marketing Institute (FMI), 2010, POW MEAT IN DEPTH LO
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2010, LIF CYCL ASS SUMM RE
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2002, Discrete choice methods with simulation
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2006, ENV ISS OPT
[6]   Consumers' valuation of food quality labels: the case of the European geographic indication and organic farming labels [J].
Aprile, Maria Carmela ;
Caputo, Vincenzina ;
Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONSUMER STUDIES, 2012, 36 (02) :158-165
[7]   A method for the economic valuation of animal welfare benefits using a single welfare score [J].
Bennett, R. ;
Kehlbacher, A. ;
Balcombe, K. .
ANIMAL WELFARE, 2012, 21 :125-130
[8]   Assessing consumer response to Protected Designation of Origin labelling: a mixed multinomial logit approach [J].
Bonnet, C ;
Simioni, M .
EUROPEAN REVIEW OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2001, 28 (04) :433-449
[9]   Qualitative stakeholder analysis for the development of sustainable monitoring systems for farm animal welfare [J].
Bracke, M ;
Greef, K ;
Hopster, H .
JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS, 2005, 18 (01) :27-56
[10]   Preferences for fairness and equity in the food system [J].
Briggeman, Brian C. ;
Lusk, Jayson L. .
EUROPEAN REVIEW OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2011, 38 (01) :1-29