IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/srlewp/45990.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Public Preferences for Broiler Chicken Welfare: Evidence from Stated Preference Studies

Author

Listed:
  • McVittie, Alistair
  • Moran, Dominic
  • Nevison, Ian

Abstract

Animal welfare presents particular policy challenges. Good welfare provides private productivity benefits to producers and some level of positive external benefits to people who care about animal welfare status. In enacting welfare legislation and setting regulatory standards, government needs to measure costs and benefits of welfare changes. While costs are generally observable, the nature of market failure means that welfare benefits are not truly observed in welfare related transactions. Accordingly non-market benefits assessment methods are required to measure the total economic value of welfare improvement. This paper compares the results of two stated preference methods to measure the policy benefits of the proposed EU broiler Welfare Directive. Contingent valuation presents the welfare improvement as a policy bundle and elicits willingness to pay in a referendum or one-off purchase decision. Choice experiments break down the welfare good into its constituent attributes, which may be of interest in designing policy. The methods provide divergence aggregate benefit estimates, which are an artefact of the methodology and the payment methods.

Suggested Citation

  • McVittie, Alistair & Moran, Dominic & Nevison, Ian, 2006. "Public Preferences for Broiler Chicken Welfare: Evidence from Stated Preference Studies," Working Papers 45990, Scotland's Rural College (formerly Scottish Agricultural College), Land Economy & Environment Research Group.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:srlewp:45990
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.45990
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/45990/files/Work3McVittie.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.45990?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. Sheppard, Andrew & Edge, Stephen, 2005. "Economic and Operational Impacts of the Proposed EU Directive laying down Minimum Standards for the Production of Chickens kept for Meat Production," Research Reports 31749, University of Exeter, Centre for Rural Policy Research.
    2. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521788304 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. M. Tolga Akçura & Füsun F. Gönül & Elina Petrova, 2004. "Consumer Learning and Brand Valuation: An Application on Over-the-Counter Drugs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 156-169, April.
    4. Marian Stamp Dawkins & Christl A. Donnelly & Tracey A. Jones, 2004. "Chicken welfare is influenced more by housing conditions than by stocking density," Nature, Nature, vol. 427(6972), pages 342-344, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jarkko Niemi & Richard Bennett & Beth Clark & Lynn Frewer & Philip Jones & Thomas Rimmler & Richard Tranter, 2020. "A value chain analysis of interventions to control production diseases in the intensive pig production sector," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-25, April.
    2. Clark, Beth & Stewart, Gavin B. & Panzone, Luca A. & Kyriazakis, Ilias & Frewer, Lynn J., 2017. "Citizens, consumers and farm animal welfare: A meta-analysis of willingness-to-pay studies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 112-127.
    3. Tully, Stephanie M. & Winer, Russell S., 2014. "The Role of the Beneficiary in Willingness to Pay for Socially Responsible Products: A Meta-analysis," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 255-274.

    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. S. Sriram & Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Ramya Neelamegham, 2006. "Effects of Brand Preference, Product Attributes, and Marketing Mix Variables in Technology Product Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 440-456, September.
    2. B Bayraktar & E Tekce & H Kaya & M Karaalp & E Turunc, 2020. "The impact of dietary tarragon (Artemisia dracunculus) on serum apelin, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, cardiac troponin concentrations and histopathology of liver tissue in laying hens housed at d," Veterinární medicína, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 65(6), pages 269-279.
    3. Hall, Clare & Sandilands, Victoria, 2006. "Public Attitudes to the Welfare of Broiler Chickens," Working Papers 45998, Scotland's Rural College (formerly Scottish Agricultural College), Land Economy & Environment Research Group.
    4. Suppliet, Moritz, 2020. "Umbrella branding in pharmaceutical markets," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    5. Antonio G. Chessa & Jaap M. J. Murre, 2007. "A Neurocognitive Model of Advertisement Content and Brand Name Recall," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 130-141, 01-02.
    6. Szymanowski, Maciej & Gijsbrechts, Els, 2013. "Patterns in consumption-based learning about brand quality for consumer packaged goods," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 219-235.
    7. Eliseo Bustamante & Fernando-Juan García-Diego & Salvador Calvet & Fernando Estellés & Pedro Beltrán & Antonio Hospitaler & Antonio G. Torres, 2013. "Exploring Ventilation Efficiency in Poultry Buildings: The Validation of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) in a Cross-Mechanically Ventilated Broiler Farm," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(5), pages 1-19, May.
    8. Ye Zhou & Chao Yan & Di Chen & Chengde Zhang & Xingbo Zhao, 2023. "Integration of Grape-Duck Production Pattern Boosts Duck Behavior, Meat Quality, Fecal Microbiota and Soil Microorganisms," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, January.
    9. Jones, Tracey & Feber, Ruth & Hemery, Gabriel & Cook, Paul & James, Katy & Lamberth, Curt & Dawkins, Marian, 2007. "Welfare and environmental benefits of integrating commercially viable free-range broiler chickens into newly planted woodland: A UK case study," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 177-188, May.
    10. Szymanowski, M.G., 2009. "Consumption-based learning about brand quality : Essays on how private labels share and borrow reputation," Other publications TiSEM b12825d8-5e21-4437-adda-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Gerard J. Tellis & Philip Hans Franses, 2006. "Optimal Data Interval for Estimating Advertising Response," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 217-229, 05-06.
    12. S. Sriram & Manohar U. Kalwani, 2007. "Optimal Advertising and Promotion Budgets in Dynamic Markets with Brand Equity as a Mediating Variable," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 46-60, January.
    13. Günter J. Hitsch, 2006. "An Empirical Model of Optimal Dynamic Product Launch and Exit Under Demand Uncertainty," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 25-50, 01-02.
    14. Eliseo Bustamante & Fernando-Juan García-Diego & Salvador Calvet & Antonio G. Torres & Antonio Hospitaler, 2015. "Measurement and Numerical Simulation of Air Velocity in a Tunnel-Ventilated Broiler House," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-20, February.
    15. Jonathan Z. Zhang & Chun-Wei Chang, 2021. "Consumer dynamics: theories, methods, and emerging directions," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 166-196, January.
    16. Luo, Anita & Baker, Andrew & Donthu, Naveen, 2019. "Capturing dynamics in the value for brand recommendations from word-of-mouth conversations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 247-260.
    17. Gocsik, Éva & Brooshooft, Suzanne D. & de Jong, Ingrid C. & Saatkamp, Helmut W., 2016. "Cost-efficiency of animal welfare in broiler production systems: A pilot study using the Welfare Quality® assessment protocol," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 55-69.
    18. Patterson, Jacinta & Mugera, Amin & Burton, Michael, 2015. "Consumer Preferences for Welfare Friendly Production Methods: The Case of Chicken Production in Western Australia," 2015 Conference (59th), February 10-13, 2015, Rotorua, New Zealand 202567, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    19. Song, Lianlian & Shi, Yang & Tso, Geoffrey Kwok Fai & Lo, Hing Po, 2021. "Forecasting week-to-week television ratings using reduced-form and structural dynamic models," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 302-321.
    20. Alessandro Bonatti, 2011. "Menu Pricing and Learning," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 124-163, August.

    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:srlewp:45990. 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/lesacuk.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.