IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/gewi15/209188.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Die Teilnahmebereitschaft deutscher Landwirte an Tierwohlprogrammen: Eine empirische Erhebung

Author

Listed:
  • Heise, Heinke
  • Theuvsen, Ludwig

Abstract

Die intensive landwirtschaftliche Tierproduktion gerät seit einigen Jahren hinsichtlich ihrer Tierwohlstandards immer wieder in die öffentliche Kritik. Teile der Gesellschaft wünschen sich ein Mehr an Tierwohl und es gibt eine zunehmende Zahl an Verbrauchern, die Fleisch aus tiergerechteren Haltungssystemen den Vorzug geben. Allerdings sind Produkte aus reinen Tierwohlprogrammen im deutschen Markt bislang kaum vertreten. Landwirte gelten vor die-sem Hintergrund als entscheidende Stakeholder-Gruppe bei der erfolgreichen Implementie-rung von Tierwohlprogrammen. Bislang wurde für Deutschland allerdings noch nicht umfas-send untersucht, welche Einstellung Landwirte zu Tierwohl und Tierwohlprogrammen haben und wie ihre grundsätzliche Teilnahmebereitschaft an derartigen Programmen ist. In der vor-liegenden Studie sind deswegen 1.025 Landwirte mittels einer Online-Umfrage befragt wor-den. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass Landwirte eine sehr differenzierte Wahrnehmung des The-mas Tierwohl haben. Es konnten fünf Landwirtgruppen (Cluster) identifiziert werden, welche Tierwohlprogrammen unterschiedlich aufgeschlossen gegenüberstehen. Auf Basis der ermittel-ten Cluster lassen sich verschiedene Zielgruppen für die Teilnahme an Tierwohlprogrammen ableiten.

Suggested Citation

  • Heise, Heinke & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2015. "Die Teilnahmebereitschaft deutscher Landwirte an Tierwohlprogrammen: Eine empirische Erhebung," 55th Annual Conference, Giessen, Germany, September 23-25, 2015 209188, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:gewi15:209188
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.209188
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/209188/files/A1-157-Heise-Die_Teilnahmebereitschaft_deutscher_Landwirte_an_Tierwohlprogrammen.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.209188?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. Blandford, David & Fulponi, Linda, 1999. "Emerging Public Concerns in Agriculture: Domestic Policies and International Trade Commitments," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 26(3), pages 409-424, August.
    2. Golan, Elise H. & Kuchler, Fred & Mitchell, Lorraine, 2000. "Economics Of Food Labeling," Agricultural Economic Reports 34069, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    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 & 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.
    2. Konduru, Srinivasa & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G. & Magnier, Alexandre, 2009. "GMO Testing Strategies and Implications for Trade: A Game Theoretic Approach," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49594, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Peterson, Jeffrey M. & Boisvert, Richard N. & de Gorter, Harry, 1999. "Multifunctionality and Optimal Environmental Policies for Agriculture in an Open Economy," Working Papers 127701, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    4. Plastina, Alejandro S. & Giannakas, Konstantinos, 2007. "Market And Welfare Effects Of Mandatory Country-Of-Origin Labeling In The Us Specialty Crops Sector," 2007 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, 2007, Portland, Oregon 9735, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    5. Steve Holland, 2016. "Lending credence: motivation, trust, and organic certification," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 4(1), pages 1-18, December.
    6. MacLaren, Donald, 2003. "Consumers’ Preferences, Credence Goods And The Wto Sps Agreement," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57915, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Gaigné, Carl & Laroche Dupraz, Cathie & Matthews, Alan, 2015. "Thirty years of European research on international trade in food and agricultural products," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 91-130, March.
    8. Levidow, L. & Bijman, J., 2002. "Farm inputs under pressure from the European food industry," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 31-45, February.
    9. Crespi, John M. & Marette, Stephan, 2003. "Some Economic Implications Of Public Labeling," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(3), pages 1-12, November.
    10. Bonnet, Céline & Hilger, James & Villas-Boas, Sofia B., 2017. "Reduced Form Evidence on Belief Updating under Asymmetric Information - The Case of Wine Expert Opinions," TSE Working Papers 17-834, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised May 2019.
    11. Lacaze, María Victoria, 2009. "Las preferencias de los consumidores argentinos por alimentos diferenciados por atributos de calidad de procesos: el caso de la leche entera orgánica," Nülan. Deposited Documents 378, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    12. Villas-Boas, Sofia B & Taylor, Rebecca & Krovetz, Hannah, 2016. "Willingness to Pay for Low Water Footprint Food Choices During Drought," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt9vh3x180, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    13. Eaton, Derek J.F. & Bourgeois, J. & Achterbosch, Thom J., 2005. "Product differentiation under the WTO; An analysis of labelling and tariff or tax measures concerning farm animal welfare," Report Series 29123, Wageningen University and Research Center, Agricultural Economics Research Institute.
    14. Zafiriou, Margaret & Robbins, Linda & Karamchandani, D. & Ominsiki, P., 2003. "Changing Consumer Demand And Its Impact On Canadian Agricultural Policy And Trade," Working Papers 14582, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    15. Huffman, Wallace & Rousu, Matthew & Shogren, Jason F. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2002. "Should the United States Regulate Mandatory Labeling for Genetically Modified Foods?," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10047, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    16. GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Biotechnology and the development of food markets: retrospect and prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 35(3), pages 331-355, September.
    17. Blandford, David, 1999. "Globalization And Northeast Agriculture: Implications Of The Upcoming Round Of World Trade Negotiations," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 28(2), pages 1-9, October.
    18. Kyed, Karsten & Kaergard, Niels & Zobbe, Henrik, 2002. "Multifunctionality and the European Common Agricultural Policy: A Theoretical Problem," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24876, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Caputo, Vincenzina & Aprile, Maria Carmela & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr., 2011. "Consumers’ Valuation for European food quality labels: Importance of Label Information Provision," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114324, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Johnson, D. Demcey, 2002. "Issues And Trends In The U.S. Field Crop Sector," Proceedings of the 7th Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshop, 2001: Structural Change as a Source of Trade Disputes Under NAFTA 16876, Farm Foundation, Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshops.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Farm Management; Livestock Production/Industries;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gewi15:209188. 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/gewisea.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.