Segmentation Based on Consumers' Perceived Importance and Attitude toward Farm Animal Welfare

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Published Dec 4, 2007
Filiep Vanhonacker Wim Verbeke Els Van Poucke Frank A.M. Tuyttens

Abstract

Animal welfare is subject to increased societal concern and consumer interest. However, not everybody considers animal welfare as equally important or reason of concern. As a consequence, it is relevant from a socio-economic perspective to identify segments differing in public opinion toward animal welfare as well as in animal welfare related behaviour as consumers. In this study, a cluster analysis is performed using a cross-sectional dataset of 459 residents of Flanders, Belgium, gathered in 2006. The perceived importance attached to animal welfare as a product attribute in the food purchasing decision process relative to other product attributes (relative importance; RI) is investigated, as well as the subjective evaluation of the current state of farm animal welfare (evaluation; EV) as segmentation variables. Six clusters are obtained: cluster 1 with moderate RI and positive EV (21.1%); cluster 2 with very low RI and strong positive EV (12.9%); cluster 3 with low RI and moderate EV (18.7%); cluster 4 with moderate RI and low EV (12.6%); cluster 5 with high RI and moderate EV (23.5%); cluster 6 with very high RI and very negative EV (11.1%). The clusters have been characterised in terms of social determinants of attitude toward animal welfare, meat consumption behaviour, knowledge about animal welfare, and interest in information. Based on this segmentation exercise and segment’s profiles, we identified market opportunities for higher animal welfare products.

How to Cite

[1]
Vanhonacker, F., Verbeke, W. , Poucke, E.V. and A.M. Tuyttens, F. 2007. Segmentation Based on Consumers’ Perceived Importance and Attitude toward Farm Animal Welfare . The International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food. 15, 3 (Dec. 2007), 91-107. DOI:https://doi.org/10.48416/ijsaf.v15i3.286.
Abstract 154 | PDF Downloads 108

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

References
Aarts, H. and H. Te Velde. 2001. Eten, maar niet willen weten (Eating, but not willing to know). In N. Poll, L. Sterrenberg, E. Bozkurt, and I. Miedema (Eds.). Hoe oordelen we over de veehouderij? (How do we judge livestock production). Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut.
Bennett, R.M., J. Anderson and R.J.P. Blaney. 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(2): 187-202.
Boogaard, B.K., S.J. Oosting and B.B. Bock. 2006. "Elements of societal perception of farm animal welfare: A quantitative study in The Netherlands." Livestock Science 104(1-2): 13-22.
Burrell, A. and B. Vrieze. 2003. "Ethical motivation of Dutch egg consumers." Tijdschrift voor Sociaal Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek voor de Landbouw 18(1): 30-42.
Carlsson, F., P. Frykblom and C. Lagerkvist. 2004. “Consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare - transportation of farm animals to slaughter versus the use of mobile abattoirs.” http://www.handels.gu.se/epc/archive/00003936/
European Commission. 2005. "Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed animals." http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/eurobarometer25.pdf
Flynn, L.R. and R.E. Goldsmith. 1999. "A short, reliable measure of subjective knowledge." Journal of Business Research 46(1): 57-66.
Frewer, L.J., A. Kole, S.M.A. Van De Kroon and C. De Lauwere. 2005. "Consumer attitudes towards the development of animal-friendly husbandry systems." Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18(4): 345-367.
Grunert, K.G., T. Bech-Larsen and L. Bredahl (2000). Three issues in consumer quality perception and acceptance of dairy products. International Dairy Journal 10(8): 575_584.
Grunert, K.G., L. Bredahl and K. Brunsø. 2004. "Consumer perception of meat quality and implications for product development in the meat sector - a review." Meat Science 66(2): 259-272.
Hansman, H. 1999. De consument gevangen in cijfers: Zoektocht naar het bestaan van consumentenbeelden (The consumer caught in figures: Search for the existence of consumer images). Den Haag: LEI.
Harper, G. and S. Henson 2001. Consumer concerns about animal welfare and the impact on food choice. EU FAIR CT98-3678 Final Report, 38 pp. Available on http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/animal/welfare/eu_fair_project_en.pdf.
Kanis, E., A.F. Groen and K.H. De Greef. 2003. "Societal concerns about pork and pork production and their relationships to the production system." Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16(2): 137-162.
Kendall, H., L. Lobao and J. Sharp. 2006. “Public concern with animal well-being: place, social structural location, and individual experience.” Rural Sociology 71 (3): 399-428.
Korthals, M. 2001. "Taking consumers seriously: Two concepts of consumer sovereignty." Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14(2): 201-215.
Lassen, J., P. Sandoe and B. Forkman. 2006. "Happy pigs are dirty! Conflicting perspectives on animal welfare." Livestock Science 103(3): 221-230.
Liljenstolpe, C. 2005. Valuing animal welfare with choice experiments: an application to Swedish pig production. Contributed Paper European Association of Agricultural Economics 11th Congress, August 23-27, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Maria, G.A. 2006. "Public perception of farm animal welfare in Spain." Livestock Science 103(3): 250-256.
McDonald, B. 2000. “Once you know something, you can’t not know it: an empirical look at becoming vegan.” Society and Animals 8:1-23.
Meuwissen, M. and I. Van der Lans. 2004. Trade-offs between consumer concerns: an application for pork production. Paper presented at the 84th EAAE seminar: Food Safety in a dynamic World, February 8-11, Zeist, The Netherlands. NIS. 2002. Population census data January 1, 2003. Brussels: NIS, National Institute for Statistics.
Seamer, J.H. (1998). “Human stewardship and animal welfare.” Applied Animal Behaviour Science 59(1-3): 201-205.
Te Velde, H.T., N. Aarts and C. Van Woerkum. 2002. "Dealing with ambivalence: Farmers' and consumers' perceptions of animal welfare in livestock breeding." Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15(2): 203-219.
Van Poucke, E., F. Vanhonacker, G. Nijs, J. Braeckman, W. Verbeke and F. Tuyttens. 2006. Defining the concept of animal welfare: integrating the opinion of citizens and other stakeholders. In H.M. Kaiser, & M. Lien (Eds.), Ethics and the politics
of food (pp. 555-559). Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers.
Vanhonacker, F., E. Van Poucke, G. Nijs, J. Braeckman, F. Tuyttens and W. Verbeke. 2006. Defining animal welfare from a citizen and consumer perspective: exploratory findings from Belgium. In H.M. Kaiser, & M. Lien (Eds.), Ethics and the politics of food (pp. 580-582). Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers.
Vanhonacker, F., W. Verbeke, E. Van Poucke and F. Tuyttens. 2007. “Do citizens and farmers interpret the concept of farm animal welfare differently?” Livestock Science, doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2007.09.017
Verbeke, W. and J. Viaene. 1999. "Beliefs, attitude and behaviour towards fresh meat consumption in Belgium: empirical evidence from a consumer survey." Food Quality and Preference 10(6): 437-445.
Verbeke, W. 2002. "A shift in public opinion." Pig Progress 18(2): 25-27.
Verbeke, W.A.J. and J. Viaene. 2000. "Ethical challenges for livestock production: Meeting consumer concerns about meat safety and animal welfare." Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12(2): 141-151.
Verhue, D. and D. Verzeijden. 2003. Burgeroordelen over de veehouding, uitkomsten publieksonderzoek (Citizens’ judgement about livestock production, results of a public research). Research Paper. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Veldkamp.
Section
Articles