IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/gewi18/275897.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gesagt, Getan? Zusammenhang Zwischen Einstellung Und Persönlichen Merkmalen Der Landwirte Und Dem Tierwohl-Niveau Auf Milchviehbetrieben

Author

Listed:
  • Heise, Heinke
  • Gieseke, Daniel

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Heise, Heinke & Gieseke, Daniel, 2018. "Gesagt, Getan? Zusammenhang Zwischen Einstellung Und Persönlichen Merkmalen Der Landwirte Und Dem Tierwohl-Niveau Auf Milchviehbetrieben," 58th Annual Conference, Kiel, Germany, September 12-14, 2018 275897, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:gewi18:275897
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.275897
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/275897/files/Vortrag_164.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.275897?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. Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood, 2012. "Speciesism, altruism and the economics of animal welfare," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 39(2), pages 189-212, April.
    2. 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.
    3. Weinrich, Ramona & Kühl, Sarah & Zühlsdorf, Anke & Spiller, Achim, 2014. "Consumer Attitudes in Germany towards Different Dairy Housing Systems and Their Implications for the Marketing of Pasture Raised Milk," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, November.
    4. Matthias Heyder & Ludwig Theuvsen, 2012. "Determinants and Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility in German Agribusiness: A PLS Model," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 400-420, 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. Julia A. Schreiner & Sebastian Hess, 2017. "The Role of Non-Use Values in Dairy Farmers’ Willingness to Accept a Farm Animal Welfare Programme," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(2), pages 553-578, June.
    2. von Hardenberg, Louisa & Heise, Heinke, 2018. "German Pig Farmers’ Attitudes towards Animal Welfare Programs and their Willingness to Participate in these Programs: An Empirical Study," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 9(3), June.
    3. 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.
    4. Pirsich, Wiebke & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2017. "The Pet Food Industry: An Innovative Distribution Channel for Animal Welfare Meat?," 2018 International European Forum (163rd EAAE Seminar), February 5-9, 2018, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 276914, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    5. Antonio Martos-Pedrero & David Jiménez-Castillo & Francisco Joaquín Cortés-García, 2022. "Examining drivers and outcomes of corporate social responsibility in agri-food firms," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(3), pages 79-86.
    6. Tadesse Getacher Engida & Alfons G. J. M. Oude Lansink & Xudong Rao, 2022. "A dynamic by‐production framework for measuring productivity change in the presence of socially responsible and undesirable outputs: Evidence from European food processors," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 279-294, April.
    7. Vivek Pandey & Natalia Vidal & Rajat Panwar & Lubna Nafees, 2019. "Characterization of Sustainability Leaders and Laggards in the Global Food Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-14, September.
    8. Pirsich, Wiebke & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2017. "The Pet Food Industry: An Innovative Distribution Channel for Animal Welfare Meat?," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 2017(1), June.
    9. Johanna Pfeiffer & Andreas Gabriel & Markus Gandorfer, 2021. "Understanding the public attitudinal acceptance of digital farming technologies: a nationwide survey in Germany," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(1), pages 107-128, February.
    10. Capecchi, Stefania & Amato, Mario & Sodano, Valeria & Verneau, Fabio, 2019. "Understanding beliefs and concerns towards palm oil: Empirical evidence and policy implications," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    11. Evensen, Darrick & Demski, Christina & Becker, Sarah & Pidgeon, Nick, 2018. "The relationship between justice and acceptance of energy transition costs in the UK," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 451-459.
    12. Johanna Lena Dahlhausen & Cam Rungie & Jutta Roosen, 2018. "Value of labeling credence attributes—common structures and individual preferences," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 741-751, November.
    13. Enoch Owusu-Sekyere & Helena Hansson & Evgenij Telezhenko, 2022. "Use and non-use values to explain farmers’ motivation for the provision of animal welfare," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(2), pages 499-525.
    14. Pere Mercadé‐Melé & Carmina Fandos‐Herrera & Sofía Velasco‐Gómez, 2021. "How corporate social responsibility influences consumer behavior: An empirical analysis in the Spanish agrifood sector," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(3), pages 590-611, July.
    15. Espinosa, Romain & Treich, Nicolas, 2024. "Animal welfare as a public good," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    16. Brenna Ellison & Kathleen Brooks & Taro Mieno, 2017. "Which livestock production claims matter most to consumers?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 819-831, December.
    17. Owusu-Sekyere, E. & Owusu, V. & Donkor, E. & Jordaan, H., 2018. "Welfare estimates of food safety and quality policy changes in Southern Ghana," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 276939, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Schaak, Henning & Musshoff, Oliver, 2020. "Public preferences for pasture landscapes in Germany—A latent class analysis of a nationwide discrete choice experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    19. Schaak, Henning & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2018. "Public preferences for pasture landscapes and the role of scale heterogeneity," FORLand Working Papers 04 (2018), Humboldt University Berlin, DFG Research Unit 2569 FORLand "Agricultural Land Markets – Efficiency and Regulation".
    20. Ulrich J Frey & Frauke Pirscher, 2018. "Willingness to pay and moral stance: The case of farm animal welfare in Germany," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-20, August.

    More about this item

    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:gewi18:275897. 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.