IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ifam16/274784.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Determinants of pig farmers’ participation in an animal welfare program

Author

Listed:
  • Purwins, Nina
  • Schulze-Ehlers, Birgit

Abstract

Despite frequent criticism, only few animal welfare attempts have been made towards an increase in terms of a dominant animal solution. Since farmers’ willingness-to-engage in animal welfare attempts is crucial, this study investigates farmers’ willingness-to-participate in an animal welfare program, which comprises a mandatory set of animal welfare measures. Data from a survey among members of a Northern German pig farmer cooperative has been used. With Theory of Planned Behavior as a theoretical framework a particularly analyze how single animal welfare measures influence farmers’ willingness-to-participate has been run. Three groups of farmers are identified, namely, the “refusing” the “undecided” and the “acquiescing”. The multinomial logit regression shows that while the refusing group is significantly more negative than the undecided about at least three of the eight required measures, the acquiescing group does not significantly differ from the undecided with respect to evaluation of measures. Rather, they exhibit a tendency to be more proactive, while the undecided feel more like being victims of societal pressure. The article concludes that it will be crucial to work on farmers’ beliefs, with respect to feasibility as well as with respect to perceived locus of control.

Suggested Citation

  • Purwins, Nina & Schulze-Ehlers, Birgit, 2016. "Determinants of pig farmers’ participation in an animal welfare program," 26th International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA) World Forum, 2016, Aarhus, Denmark 274784, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ifam16:274784
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.274784
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/274784/files/Purwins%20IFAMA2016_final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.274784?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. Deimel, Ingke & Franz, Annabell & Spiller, Achim, 2012. "Animal Welfare: eine empirische Analyse landwirtschaftlicher Frames," Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, vol. 61(2).
    2. Boehm, Justus & Kayser, Maike & Spiller, Achim, 2010. "Two Sides of the Same Coin? Analysis of the Web-Based Social Media with Regard to the Image of the Agri-Food Sector in Germany," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 1(3), pages 1-15, October.
    3. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    4. Hansson, Helena & Lagerkvist, Carl Johan, 2015. "Identifying use and non-use values of animal welfare: Evidence from Swedish dairy agriculture," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 35-42.
    5. J. Scott Long & Jeremy Freese, 2006. "Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables using Stata, 2nd Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, edition 2, number long2, March.
    6. A. Colin Cameron & Pravin K. Trivedi, 2010. "Microeconometrics Using Stata, Revised Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, number musr, March.
    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. Purwins, Nina & Schulze-Ehlers, Birgit, 2018. "Improving market success of animal welfare programs through key stakeholder involvement: heading towards responsible innovation?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(4).
    2. Altorjai, Szilvia, 2013. "Over-qualification of immigrants in the UK," ISER Working Paper Series 2013-11, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    3. Monika Mühlböck & Julia-Rita Warmuth & Marian Holienka & Bernhard Kittel, 2018. "Desperate entrepreneurs: no opportunities, no skills," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 975-997, December.
    4. Sapci, Onur & Considine, Timothy, 2014. "The link between environmental attitudes and energy consumption behavior," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 29-34.
    5. Alexander C. Lewis & Arkangel M. Cordero & Rachael Xiong, 2021. "Too Red for Crowdfunding: The Legitimation and Adoption of Crowdfunding Across Political Cultures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 45(3), pages 471-504, May.
    6. Brandon M. Boylan, 2016. "What drives ethnic terrorist campaigns? A view at the group level of analysis," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 33(3), pages 250-272, July.
    7. Eccarius, Timo & Leung, Abraham & Shen, Chung-Wei & Burke, Matthew & Lu, Chung-Cheng, 2021. "Prospects for shared electric velomobility: Profiling potential adopters at a multi-campus university," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    8. Habibov, Nazim, 2012. "Early childhood care and education attendance in Central Asia," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 798-806.
    9. Saphores, Jean-Daniel M. & Ogunseitan, Oladele A. & Shapiro, Andrew A., 2012. "Willingness to engage in a pro-environmental behavior: An analysis of e-waste recycling based on a national survey of U.S. households," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 49-63.
    10. Richard Williams, 2012. "Using the margins command to estimate and interpret adjusted predictions and marginal effects," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 12(2), pages 308-331, June.
    11. Christian Lippert & Alexander Zorn & Stephan Dabbert, 2014. "Econometric analysis of noncompliance with organic farming standards in Switzerland," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 313-325, May.
    12. Pengfei Li & Yutao Ru & Jianhong Wu, 2023. "Influential Factors Affecting Recycling Behavior toward Cardboard Boxes in the Logistics Sector: An Empirical Analysis from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-20, September.
    13. Kelly, Edel & Heanue, Kevin & Buckley, Cathal & O'Gorman, Colm, 2015. "Proven Science versus Farmer Perception," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 229067, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Läpple, Doris & Kelley, Hugh, 2013. "Understanding the uptake of organic farming: Accounting for heterogeneities among Irish farmers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 11-19.
    15. Schulze, Birgit & Deimel, Ingke, 2012. "Conflicts between agriculture and society: the role of lobby groups in the animal welfare discussion and their impact on meat consumption," 22nd International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA) World Forum, 2012, Shanghai, China 269543, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA).
    16. Cacchiarelli, Luca & Carbone, Anna & Esti, Marco & Laureti, Tiziana & Sorrentino, Alessandro, 2015. "Assessing the Value of Quality in the Italian Wine Market," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211379, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Nazim Habibov & Elvin Afandi, 2015. "Pre- and Post-crisis Life-Satisfaction and Social Trust in Transitional Countries: An Initial Assessment," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 503-524, April.
    18. Maria Andersson & Ola Eriksson & Chris Von Borgstede, 2012. "The Effects of Environmental Management Systems on Source Separation in the Work and Home Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-17, June.
    19. Jinsuk Yang & Qing Hao & Mahmut Yaşar, 2023. "Institutional investors and cross‐border mergers and acquisitions: The 2000–2018 period," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 553-583, September.
    20. Thomas Y. Mathä & Alessandro Porpiglia & Michael Ziegelmeyer, 2014. "Wealth differences across borders and the effect of real estate price dynamics: Evidence from two household surveys," BCL working papers 90, Central Bank of Luxembourg.

    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:ifam16:274784. 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/ifamaea.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.