Advertisement

Determinants of Individual Attitudes Toward Animal Welfare-Friendly Food Products

  • L. Cembalo
  • F. Caracciolo
  • A. Lombardi
  • T. Del Giudice
  • K. G. Grunert
  • G. Cicia
Articles

Abstract

Animal welfare involves societal and human values, ethical concerns and moral considerations since it incorporates the belief of what is right or what is wrong in animal treatment and care. This paper aims to ascertain whether the different dimensions of individual attitudes toward animal welfare in food choices may be characterized by general human values, as identified by Schwartz. For this purpose, an EU-wide survey was carried out, covering almost 2500 nationally representative individuals from five European countries. Compared with the previous literature this study shows a twofold novelty: (1) it develops a general framework to link individual enduring beliefs and attitudes toward animal welfare attributes in food choices; (2) the framework is analyzed within a broad-based cross-country study. Our empirical results prove that human values related to self-transcendence are strongly associated to overall animal welfare attitudes and especially to those explicitly related to food choices, while values related to the spheres of self-enhancement and conservatism are significantly associated to less sensitive attitudes to animal welfare. Moreover, our results appear to indicate that a determinant of animal welfarism in food choices is potentially associated to individual concerns regarding food safety issues.

Keywords

Portrait Value Questionnaire European cross-country study Confirmatory factor analysis Livestock production 

JEL Classification

Q13 D12 

References

  1. Abbate, C. (2014). Virtues and animals: A minimally decent ethic for practical living in a non-ideal world. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 27(6), 909–929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Becker, B. W., & Connor, P. E. (1981). Personal values of the heavy user of mass media. Journal of Advertising Research, 21, 37–43.Google Scholar
  4. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Broom, D. M. (1986). Indicators of poor welfare. British Veterinary Journal, 142, 524–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Broom, D. M. (1991). Animal-welfare: Concepts and measurement. Journal of Animal Science, 69, 4167–4175.Google Scholar
  7. Broom, D. M. (2001). Coping, stress and welfare. In D. M. Broom (Ed.), Coping with challenge: Welfare in animals including humans (pp. 1–9). Berlin: Dahlem University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sage Focus Editions, 154, 136.Google Scholar
  9. Brunsø, K., Scholderer, J., & Grunert, K. G. (2004). Closing the gap between values and behaviour. A means-end theory of lifestyle. Journal of Business Research, 57, 665–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Caracciolo, F., Cicia, G., Del Giudice, T., Cembalo, L., Krystallis, A., Grunert, K. G., & Lombardi, P. (2016). Human values and preferences for cleaner livestock production. Journal of Cleaner Production. 112(1), 121–130. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cembalo, L., Lombardi, A., Pascucci, S., Dentoni, D., Migliore, G., Verneau, F., & Schifani, G. (2015). “Rationally local”: Consumer participation in alternative food chains. Agribusiness, 31(3), 330–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Christensen, T., Lawrence, A., Lund, M., Stott, A., & Sandoe, P. (2012). How can economists help to improve animal welfare? Animal Welfare, 21, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cicia, G., Caracciolo, F., Cembalo, L., Del Giudice, T., Grunert, K. G., Krystallis, A., et al. (2016). Food safety concerns in urban China: Consumer preferences for pig process attributes. Food Control, 60, 166–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davidson, A., Schröder, M. J., & Bower, J. A. (2003). The importance of origin as a quality attribute for beef: Results from a Scottish consumer survey. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27(2), 91–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dawkins, M. S. (2006). A user’s guide to animal welfare science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 21, 77–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de Vries, M., & de Boer, I. J. M. (2010). Comparing environmental impacts for livestock products: A review of life cycle assessments. Livestock Science, 128, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dreezens, E., Martijn, C., Tenbült, P., Kok, G., & De Vries, N. K. (2005). Food and values: An examination of values underlying attitudes toward genetically modified-and organically grown food products. Appetite, 44(1), 115–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Duncan, I. J. H. (1996). Animal welfare defined in terms of feelings. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, 27, 29–35.Google Scholar
  19. Duncan, I. J. H., & Fraser, D. (1997). Understanding animal welfare. In M. A. Appleby & B. O. Hughes (Eds.), Animal welfare (pp. 19–31). Wallingford: CABI Publ.Google Scholar
  20. Fisher, M. W. (2009). Defining animal welfare—does consistency matter? New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 57, 71–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fraser, D., Weary, D. M., Pajor, E. A., & Milligan, B. N. (1997). A scientific conception of animal welfare that reflects ethical concerns. Animal Welfare, 6, 187–205.Google Scholar
  22. Frewer, L., Kole, A., Van De Kroon, S., & De Lauwere, C. (2005). Consumer attitudes towards the development of animal-friendly husbandry systems. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 18(4), 345–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gracia, A., Barreiro-Hurlé, J., & Galán, B. L. (2014). Are local and organic claims complements or substitutes? A consumer preferences study for eggs. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 65(1), 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grunert, K. G., Hieke, S., & Wills, J. (2014). Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use. Food Policy, 44, 177–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Harper, G., & Henson, S. (2001). Consumer concerns about animal welfare and the impact on food choice. Final report EU FAIR CT98-3678. UK, Department of Agricultural and Food Economics, University of Reading.Google Scholar
  26. Harper, G. C., & Makatouni, A. (2002). Consumer perception of organic food production and farm animal welfare. British Food Journal, 104(3/4/5), 287–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Heerwagen, L. R., Mørkbak, M. R., Denver, S., Sandøe, P., & Christensen, T. (2015). The role of quality labels in market-driven animal welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 28(1), 67–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Homer, P., & Kahle, L. R. (1988). A structural equation test of the value-attitude behavior hierarchy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 638–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hughner, R. S., McDonagh, P., Prothero, A., Shultz, C. J., & Stanton, J. (2007). Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review of why people purchase organic food. Journal of consumer behaviour, 6(2–3), 94–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ilea, R. (2009). Intensive livestock farming: Global trends, increased environmental concerns, and ethical solutions. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 22(2), 153–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Inglehart, R. (1971). The silent revolution in Europe: Intergenerational change in post-industrial societies. American Political Science Review, 65, 991–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jonge, J., & Trijp, H. C. M. (2012). Meeting heterogeneity in consumer demand for animal welfare: A reflection on existing knowledge and implications for the meat sector. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 26, 629–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kendall, H. A., Lobao, L. M., & Sharp, J. S. (2006). Public concern with animal well-being: Place, social structural location, and individual experience. Rural Sociology, 71(3), 399–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kerlinger, F. N. (1973). Foundations of behavioural research (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  36. Kiley-Worthington, M. (1989). Ecological, ethological and ethically sound environments for animals: Towards symbiosis. Journal of Agricultural Ethics, 2, 323–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Knight, S., Vrij, A., Bard, K., & Brandon, D. (2009). Science versus human welfare? Understanding attitudes toward animal use. Journal of Social Issues, 65(3), 463–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lagerkvist, C. J., & Hess, S. (2010). A meta-analysis of consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 38(1), 55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lesschen, J. P., Van den Berg, M., Westhoek, H. J., Witzke, H. P., & Oenema, O. (2011). Greenhouse gas emission profiles of European livestock sectors. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 166, 16–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lindeman, M., & Väänänen, M. (2000). Measurement of ethical food choice motives. Appetite, 34(1), 55–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lombardi, A., Migliore, G., Verneau, F., Schifani, G., & Cembalo, L. (2015). Are “good guys” more likely to participate in local agriculture? Food Quality and Preference, 45(10), 158–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lund, V., Coleman, G., Gunnarsson, S., Appleby, M. C., & Karkinen, K. (2006). Animal welfare science: Working at the interface between the natural and social sciences. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 97(1), 37–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lundmark, F., Berg, C., Schmid, O., Behdadi, D., & Röcklinsberg, H. (2014). Intentions and values in animal welfare legislation and standards. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 27(6), 991–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lusk, J. L., & Norwood, F. B. (2011a). Speciesism, altruism and the economics of animal welfare. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 39(2), 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lusk, J. L., & Norwood, F. B. (2011b). Animal welfare economics. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 33(4), 463–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. MacFie, H. J. H., & Meiselman, H. L. (Eds.). (1996). Food choice acceptance and consumption. London: Blackie Academic and Professional.Google Scholar
  47. Magnusson, M. K., Arvola, A., Hursti, U. K. K., Åberg, L., & Sjödén, P. O. (2003). Choice of organic foods is related to perceived consequences for human health and to environmentally friendly behaviour. Appetite, 40(2), 109–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McInerney, J. (2004). Animal welfare, economics and policy. Report on a study undertaken for the Farm and Animal Health Economics Division of Defra. http://archive.defra.gov.uk/evidence/economics/foodfarm/reports/documents/animalwelfare.pdf. Accessed 28 Oct 2014.
  49. Michaud, C., Llerena, D., & Joly, I. (2013). Willingness to pay for environmental attributes of non-food agricultural products: A real choice experiment. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 40(2), 313–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ngapo, T. M., Dransfield, E., Martin, J. F., Magnusson, M., Bredahl, L., & Nute, G. R. (2004). Consumer perceptions: Pork and pig production. Insights from France, England, Sweden and Denmark. Meat Science, 66, 125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Nocella, G., Hubbard, L., & Scarpa, R. (2010). Farm animal welfare, consumer willingness to pay, and trust: Results of a cross-national survey. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 32(2), 275–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Nordenfelt, L. (2006). Animal and human health and welfare: A comparative philosophical analysis. Oxford: CABI Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Paul, E., & Podberscek, A. (2000). Veterinary education and students’ attitudes towards animal welfare. The Veterinary Record, 146(10), 269–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pouta, E., Heikkilä, J., Forsman-Hugg, S., Isoniemi, M., & Mäkelä, J. (2010). Consumer choice of broiler meat: The effects of country of origin and production methods. Food Quality and Preference, 21(5), 539–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  56. Rollin, B. E. (1981). Animal rights and human morality. Buffalo: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  57. Rollin, B. E. (1995). Farm animal welfare: Social, bioethical, and research issues. Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Rollin, B. E. (2015). The inseparability of science and ethics in animal welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 28(4), 759–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schröder, M. J., & McEachern, M. G. (2004). Consumer value conflicts surrounding ethical food purchase decisions: A focus on animal welfare. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 28(2), 168–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  61. Schwartz, S.H. (2006), Basic human values: An overview, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem. http://segr-did2.fmag.unict.it/Allegati/convegno%207-8-10-05/Schwartzpaper.pdf. Accessed 27 Aug 2015.
  62. Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., & Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 519–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sørensen, B. T., de Barcellos, M. D., Olsen, N. V., Verbeke, W., & Scholderer, J. (2012). Systems of attitudes towards production in the pork industry. A cross-national study. Appetite, 59(3), 885–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(2), 173–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tannenbaum, J. (1991). Ethics and animal welfare: The inextricable connection. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 198(8), 1360–1376.Google Scholar
  66. Toma, L., Stott, A. W., Revoredo-Giha, C., & Kupiec-Teahan, B. (2012). Consumers and animal welfare. A comparison between European Union countries. Appetite, 58(2), 597–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Vanhonacker, F., Van Poucke, E., Tuyttens, F., & Verbeke, W. (2010). Citizens’ views on farm animal welfare and related information provision: Exploratory insights from Flanders, Belgium. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 23(6), 551–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Vanhonacker, F., Verbeke, W., Van Poucke, E., Pieniak, Z., Nijs, G., & Tuyttens, F. (2012). The concept of farm animal welfare: Citizen perceptions and stakeholder opinion in Flanders, Belgium. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25(1), 79–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Ventura, B. A., Von Keyserlingk, M. A. G., & Weary, D. M. (2015). Animal welfare concerns and values of stakeholders within the dairy industry. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 28(1), 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Verbeke, W. J., & Viaene, J. (2000). Ethical challenges for livestock production: Meeting consumer concerns about meat safety and animal welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 12(2), 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Vinson, D. E., & Munson, J. M. (1976). Personal values: an approach to market segmentation. In K. L. Bernhardt (Ed.), Marketing, 1877–1976 and beyond. Chicago: Chicago American Marketing Association.Google Scholar
  73. Von Keyserlingk, M. A., & Hötzel, M. J. (2015). The ticking clock: Addressing farm animal welfare in emerging countries. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 28(1), 179–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AgEcon and Policy Group, Department of Agricultural SciencesUniversity of Naples Federico IIPorticiItaly
  2. 2.MAPP Centre for Research on Customer Relations in the Food SectorAarhus UniversitetAarhusDenmark

Personalised recommendations