IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aajs14/174340.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Criteria-Based Evaluation Of Selected European Animal Welfare Labels: Initiatives From The Poultry Meat Sector

Author

Listed:
  • Heise, Heinke
  • Pirsich, Wiebke
  • Theuvsen, Ludwig

Abstract

In recent years the issue of animal welfare in intensive livestock production systems has been subjected to increasing attention from media, politicians and the wider public. This increasing rejection of concerning meat production by western society has placed food manufactures along the meat supply chain in a difficult situation characterized by conflicting demands. On the one hand, the farming and food industries operate economically in a field where cost degression and growth are required in order to remain internationally competitive. Accordingly, in the past the focus of farms and firms has been primarily on the exploitation of economies of scale, whereas to a certain extent aspects of animal welfare have been neglected. On the other hand, consumer awareness of food products is constantly changing, and there has been a continuous trend towards the purchase and consumption of foods that have been produced in a more animal friendly way. But there is a paucity of clearly understandable information on animal welfare standards that would enable consumers to select products of animal origin on the basis of a conscious purchase decision. Besides an increase in legislative regulation, improved animal welfare standards are most frequently achieved through the establishment of so-called animal welfare labels to meet the expectations of society and to allow consumers to make informed purchasing decisions. However, so far, there has been no informed assessment of the various approaches to improve animal welfare. It is, therefore, the aim of this paper to provide an assessment of selected European animal welfare labels for poultry on the basis of a developed set of criteria and thereby to contribute to better informing consumers and to further improve existing approaches. The criteria-based evaluation shows, that there are significant differences between the labels investigated regarding the improvement of animal welfare standards. The results obtained are consequently of far-reaching importance for both consumers and enterprises that are considering entering the market segment for animal welfare products.

Suggested Citation

  • Heise, Heinke & Pirsich, Wiebke & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2014. "Criteria-Based Evaluation Of Selected European Animal Welfare Labels: Initiatives From The Poultry Meat Sector," 2014 AAEA/EAAE/CAES Joint Symposium: Social Networks, Social Media and the Economics of Food, May 29-30, 2014, Montreal, Canada 174340, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aajs14:174340
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.174340
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/174340/files/Heise-Pirsich-Theuvsen_Kanada2014.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.174340?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jekanowski, Mark D. & Williams, Daniel R. & Schiek, William A., 2000. "Consumers’ Willingness to Purchase Locally Produced Agricultural Products: An Analysis of an Indiana Survey," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(1), pages 43-53, April.
    2. Heyder, Matthias & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2009. "Corporate Social Responsibility in Agribusiness: Empirical Findings from Germany," 113th Seminar, September 3-6, 2009, Chania, Crete, Greece 58152, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Gabriele Jahn & Matthias Schramm & Achim Spiller, 2005. "The Reliability of Certification: Quality Labels as a Consumer Policy Tool," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 53-73, December.
    4. Jekanowski, Mark D. & Williams, Daniel R., II & Schiek, William A., 2000. "Consumers' Willingness To Purchase Locally Produced Agricultural Products: An Analysis Of An Indiana Survey," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 29(01), pages 1-11, April.
    5. Christine A. Mallin (ed.), 2009. "Corporate Social Responsibility," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13233.
    6. Franz, Annabell & von Meyer, Marie & Spiller, Achim, 2010. "Prospects for a European Animal Welfare Label from the German Perspective: Supply Chain Barriers," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 1(4), pages 1-12, December.
    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. Heise, Heinke & Pirsich, Wiebke & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2014. "Improved Process Quality through Certification Systems: An Assessment of Selected Animal Welfare Labels," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 5(01), pages 1-11, September.
    2. Kayser, M. & Böhm, J. & Spiller, A., 2012. "Zwischen Markt und Moral – Wie wird die deutsche Land- und Ernährungswirtschaft in der Gesellschaft wahrgenommen?," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 47, March.
    3. Heise, Heinke & Pirsich, Wiebke & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2014. "Improved Process Quality through Certification Systems: An Assessment of Selected Animal Welfare Labels," 2014 International European Forum, February 17-21, 2014, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 199057, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    4. Jennifer Porter & David Conner & Jane Kolodinsky & Amy Trubek, 2017. "Get real: an analysis of student preference for real food," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 921-932, December.
    5. Tegtmeier, Erin M., 2003. "Factors affecting symbolic and use adoption of local foods for consumers in Black Hawk County, Iowa," ISU General Staff Papers 2003010108000018195, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    6. Schulz, Lee L. & Schroeder, Ted C. & White, Katharine L., 2012. "Value of Beef Steak Branding: Hedonic Analysis of Retail Scanner Data," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 41(2), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Mwiti, Florine Karuru & Okelo, Julius & Munei, Kimpei, 2015. "Assessment Of Willingness To Pay For Quality Sweetpotato Planting Materials: The Case Of Smallholder Farmers In Tanzania," Dissertations and Theses 269713, University of Nairobi, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    8. Frank Goedertier & Bert Weijters & Joeri Van den Bergh, 2024. "Are Consumers Equally Willing to Pay More for Brands That Aim for Sustainability, Positive Societal Contribution, and Inclusivity as for Brands That Are Perceived as Exclusive? Generational, Gender, a," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-20, May.
    9. Govindasamy, Ramu & Puduri, Venkata & Kelley, Kathleen & Simon, James E., 2012. "Increased Purchases of Locally Grown Ethnic Greens and Herbs due to Concerns about Food Miles," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 43(3), November.
    10. Grebitus, Carola & Lusk, Jayson L. & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2013. "Effect of distance of transportation on willingness to pay for food," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 67-75.
    11. Minten, Bart & Singh, K.M. & Sutradhar, Rajib, 2011. "Branding in food retail of high value crops in Asia: Case of Makhana from Bihar (India)," MPRA Paper 54334, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 31 Jan 2011.
    12. Kanokwan Chancharoenchai & Wuthiya Saraithong, 2022. "Sustainable Development of Cassava Value Chain through the Promotion of Locally Sourced Chips," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-18, November.
    13. Ilaslan, Gunes & White, Gerald B. & Langhans, Robert W., 2002. "Insights Into the Economic Viability of a New CEA System Producing Hydroponic Lettuce," Staff Papers 121122, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    14. Carlos E. Carpio & Olga Isengildina-Massa, 2009. "Consumer willingness to pay for locally grown products: the case of South Carolina," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(3), pages 412-426.
    15. Yang, Wei & Fang, Di & Thompson, Jada M. & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2024. "Public acceptance of beef carbon tax earmarks," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    16. Minten, Bart & Singh, K.M. & Sutradhar, Rajib, 2010. "The makhana value chain and the fast emergence of branding in food retail: Evidence from Bihar (India)," MPRA Paper 54344, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 14 Jan 2010.
    17. Lydia Zepeda & Anna Reznickova & Willow Russell, 2013. "CSA membership and psychological needs fulfillment: an application of self-determination theory," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 30(4), pages 605-614, December.
    18. Loureiro, Maria L. & Hine, Susan, 2002. "Discovering Niche Markets: A Comparison of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Local (Colorado Grown), Organic, and GMO-Free Products," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(3), pages 477-487, December.
    19. Ying, Jiahui & Shonkwiler, Vanessa P. & Campbell, Benjamin L., 2018. "Willingness to Pay or Not to Pay: Valuing Foods Some Respondents Find Distasteful," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274065, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Loureiro, Maria L., 2003. "Rethinking new wines: implications of local and environmentally friendly labels," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(5-6), pages 547-560.

    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:ags:aajs14:174340. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.