IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i5p2490-d505816.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wild Boar Meat as a Sustainable Substitute for Pork: A Mixed Methods Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Karolina Macháčková

    (Department of Forestry and Wood Economics, Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Jiří Zelený

    (Department of Hotel Management, Institute of Hospitality Management, 182 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Daniel Lang

    (Department of Languages, Institute of Hospitality Management, 182 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Zbyněk Vinš

    (Department of Hotel Management, Institute of Hospitality Management, 182 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Sensory analysis is unusual in sustainability research, although it can offer a neoteric aspect of nature and wild animals’ perception. The study’s objective was to identify consumers’ attitudes towards plant and animal products from wild and conventional foods and put these findings into a broader social context. A blind sensory evaluation with 80 semi-trained assessors was used, segmented by gender, age, education, income, place of origin, family status, number of children, and willingness to pay. Wild boar ( Sus scrofa ) was chosen as an example of an overpopulated animal species occurring in the wild, which could be considered a partial substitute for pork. Statistical testing in these blind evaluations proved that wild boar meat is not considered less tasty. Therefore, wild boar meat could represent a partial substitute, complementing pork, on which consumers are willing to spend the same amount of money. Despite the mostly indifferent sensory evaluation, focus group responses showed considerable barriers to wild food. This paper concludes that possible educational and popularizing procedures are presented, including forest pedagogy, eliminating consumers’ prejudices. A mixed-methods approach within quantitative and qualitative methodology was chosen.

Suggested Citation

  • Karolina Macháčková & Jiří Zelený & Daniel Lang & Zbyněk Vinš, 2021. "Wild Boar Meat as a Sustainable Substitute for Pork: A Mixed Methods Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-21, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:5:p:2490-:d:505816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/5/2490/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/5/2490/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frode Alfnes & Amit Sharma, 2010. "Locally produced food in restaurants: Are the customers willing to pay a premium and why?," International Journal of Revenue Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 4(3/4), pages 238-258.
    2. Bennett, Richard & Blaney, Ralph, 2002. "Social consensus, moral intensity and willingness to pay to address a farm animal welfare issue," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 501-520, August.
    3. Nomasonto M. Xazela & Arno Hugo & Upenyu Marume & Voster Muchenje, 2017. "Perceptions of Rural Consumers on the Aspects of Meat Quality and Health Implications Associated With Meat Consumption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-11, May.
    4. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Frykblom & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2007. "Consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare: mobile abattoirs versus transportation to slaughter," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 34(3), pages 321-344, September.
    5. Klaus G. Grunert, 2005. "Food quality and safety: consumer perception and demand," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(3), pages 369-391, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giuseppe Nocella & Lionel Hubbard & Riccardo Scarpa, 2010. "Farm Animal Welfare, Consumer Willingness to Pay, and Trust: Results of a Cross-National Survey," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 275-297.
    2. Lombardini, Chiara & Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Kulmala, Soile & Lindroos, Marko, 2011. "Is there a Finnish Animal Welfare Kuznets Curve?," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114379, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Naald, Brian Vander & Cameron, Trudy Ann, 2011. "Willingness to pay for other species' well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1325-1335, May.
    4. Marescotti, Maria Elena & Caputo, Vincenzina & Demartini, Eugenio & Gaviglio, Anna, 2020. "Consumer preferences for wild game cured meat label: do attitudes towards animal welfare matter?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 23(4), June.
    5. Heise, Heinke & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2016. "What do consumers think about farm animal welfare in modern agriculture? Attitudes and shopping behaviour," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 20(3), November.
    6. Loureiro, Maria L. & Gracia, Azucena & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2013. "Do experimental auction estimates pass the scope test?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 7-17.
    7. Babatunde Oluwasegun Alao & Andrew Bamidele Falowo & Amanda Chulayo & Voster Muchenje, 2018. "Consumers’ Preference and Factors Influencing Offal Consumption in Amathole District Eastern Cape, South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-13, September.
    8. Malik Orou Seko & Andrée Prisca Ndjoug Ndour & Walter Ossebi & Jasmina Saric & Katharina Kreppel & Daouda Dao & Bassirou Bonfoh, 2020. "Consumer Perception on Purchase Decision Factors and Health Indicators Related to the Quality and Safety of Meat Sold in Dibiteries in Dakar, Senegal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-17, September.
    9. Tingqiang Chen & Lei Wang & Jining Wang & Qi Yang, 2017. "A Network Diffusion Model of Food Safety Scare Behavior considering Information Transparency," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-16, December.
    10. Jabbar, Mohammad A. & Admassu, Samuel A., 2009. "Assessing consumer preferences for quality and safety attributes of food in the absence of official standards: the case of beef in Ethiopia," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 50120, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Hattori, Keisuke & Higashida, Keisaku, 2014. "Misleading advertising and minimum quality standards," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 1-14.
    12. Katarina Arvidsson Segerkvist & Helena Hansson & Ulf Sonesson & Stefan Gunnarsson, 2021. "A Systematic Mapping of Current Literature on Sustainability at Farm-Level in Beef and Lamb Meat Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-14, February.
    13. Meyer, Christian H. & Fritz, Melanie & Schiefer, Gerhard, 2010. "Customer Communication of Regional Quality Efforts: A Case From the Grain Sector," 2010 International European Forum, February 8-12, 2010, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 100595, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    14. Curzi, Daniele & Raimondi, Valentina & Olper, Alessandro, 2013. "Quality Upgrading, Competition and Trade Policy: Evidence from the Agri-Food Sector," 2013: Productivity and Its Impacts on Global Trade, June 2-4, 2013. Seville, Spain 152386, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    15. Jayson Lusk, 2011. "The market for animal welfare," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(4), pages 561-575, December.
    16. Karen Thome & Birgit Meade & Stacey Rosen & John C. Beghin, 2016. "Assessing Food Security in Ethiopia with USDA ERS's New Food Security Modeling Approach," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 16-wp567, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    17. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren Bøye Olsen & Suzanne E. Vedel & John Kinyuru & Kennedy O. Pambo, 2016. "Integrating sensory evaluations in incentivized discrete choice experiments to assess consumer demand for cricket flour buns in Kenya," IFRO Working Paper 2016/02, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    18. Marco Costanigro & Yuko Onozaka, 2020. "A Belief‐Preference Model of Choice for Experience and Credence Goods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 70-95, February.
    19. Naphtal Habiyaremye & Nadhem Mtimet & Emily A. Ouma & Gideon A. Obare, 2023. "Consumers' willingness to pay for safe and quality milk: Evidence from experimental auctions in Rwanda," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1049-1074, October.
    20. Zoltán Lakner & Brigitta Plasek & Gyula Kasza & Anna Kiss & Sándor Soós & Ágoston Temesi, 2021. "Towards Understanding the Food Consumer Behavior–Food Safety–Sustainability Triangle: A Bibliometric Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:5:p:2490-:d:505816. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.