Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Food Retailers as Mediating Gatekeepers between Farmers and Consumers in the Supply Chain of Animal Welfare Meat - Studying Retailers’ Motives in Marketing Pasture-Based Beef

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Food Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although there is increasing public criticism of intensive livestock production, the market share of meat with an animal welfare standard exceeding legal requirements remains small. Food retailers, in their role as gatekeepers, can influence changes in production and consumption patterns. Their strategic role between farmers and consumers allows them to control commodity, information and value flow and therefore places them into a key position when it comes to the distribution of meat with a higher animal welfare standard. The aim of this explorative study is to identify factors which motivate food retailers to take on the marketing of products of increased animal welfare standards, in this case, pasture-based beef. Nine in depth-interviews were conducted with representatives of the food retail industry. The interviews took place in June 2018, followed a structured guideline and were transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were categorized and evaluated using qualitative content analysis. Results showed that food retailers are driven by both extrinsic and intrinsic motives. The main extrinsic motive is the perceived customer demand. Consciousness for animal welfare and the regional production cycles, including close connection between farmers and retailers are inherently intrinsic motives. Interestingly, the interviewed retailers show a high personal interest and moral obligation with regard to sourcing and marketing pasture-based beef. As such, this research finds innovative retailers, who take on a new role in sustainable food systems which exceed classical distribution functions and may have a considerable effect in transforming the food system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguilera, Ruth V., Deborah E. Rupp, Cynthia A. Williams, and Jyoti Ganapathi. 2007. Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: a multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review 32 (3): 836–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, Joe Machiel J. Reinders, and Mariet van Haaster-de Winter. 2015. Perceived sustainability initiatives: retail managers’ intrinsic and extrinsic motives. British Food Journal 117 (6): 1720–1736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boogaard, Birgit K. Simon J. Oosting, and Bettina B. Bock. 2006. Elements of societal perception of farm animal welfare: a quantitative study in the Netherlands. Livestock Science 104 (1–2): 13–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brønn, Peggy S., and Deborah Vidaver-Cohen. 2008. Corporate motives for social initiative: legitimacy, sustainability, or the bottom line. Journal of Business Ethics 87: 91–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caroll, Archie B., and Kareem M. Shabana. 2010. The business case for corporate social responsibility: a review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews 12 (1): 58–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cordano, Mark, and Irene H. Frieze. 2000. Pollution reduction preferences of U.S. environmental managers: applying Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior. Academy of Management Journal 43 (4): 637–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esbjerg, Lars, Steve Burt, Hannah Pearse, and Viviane Glanz-Chanos. 2016. Retailers and technology-driven innovation in the food sector: caretakers of consumer interests or barriers to innovation? British Food Journal 118 (6): 1370–1383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernkvist, Fredrik, and Lena Eskelund. 2014. Credence and the effect on consumer liking of food – a review. Food Quality and Preference 23 (Part C): 340–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franz, Anabell Marie von Meyer, and Achim Spiller. 2010. Prospects for a european animal welfare label from the German perspective: supply chain barriers. International Journal on Food System Dynamics 4: 318–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, Milton. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Time Magazine 13 September 1970.

  • Fulponi, Linda. 2006. Private voluntary standards in the food system: the perspective of major food retailers in OECD countries. Food Policy. 31 (2006): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Genier, Claudia Mike Stamp and Mark Pfitzer. 2009. Corporate social responsibility for agro-industries development. In: Agro-industries for development, ed. Carlos A. da Silva, Doyle Baker, Andrew W. Shepherd, Chakib Jenane, and Sergio Miranda-da-Cruz, 223–252. Bodmin: MPG Books Group.

  • Gjerris, Mickey, Christian Gamborg, and Henrik Saxe. 2016. What to buy? On the complexity of being a critical consumer. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29: 81–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graafland, Johan, and Corrie Mazereeuw-Van der Duijn Schouten. 2012. Motives for corporate social responsibility. De Economist 160: 377–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graafland, Johan, and Bert van de Ven. 2006. Strategic and moral motivation for corporate social responsibility. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship 22: 111–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Bronwyn H. 2002. The financing of research and development. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 18 (1): 35–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, Ursula. 1993. Ökologisches Marketing im Handel. In Eberhard Seidel, Heinz Strebel, ed. Betriebliche Umweltökonomie, 448–479. Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, Helena, and Carl J. Lagerkvist. 2015. Identifying use and non-use values of animal welfare: evidence from Swedish dairy agriculture. Food Policy 50: 36–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann, Wiebke 2019. Einheitliche Haltungskennzeichnung für Fleisch jetzt im Handel. Agrarheute. https://www.agrarheute.com/tier/einheitliche-haltungskennzeichnung-fuer-fleisch-handel-552820. Accessed 02 April 2019.

  • Honkanen, Pirjo Bas Verplanken, and Svein O. Olsen. 2006. Ethical values and motives driving organic food choice. Journal of Consumer Behavior 5 (5): 420–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Peter, Daphne Comfort, and David Hillier. 2007. What’s in store? Retail marketing and corporate social responsibility. Marketing Intelligence and Planning 25 (1): 17–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohlmüller, Matthias, and Tim Koch. 2018. Markt Bilanz – Vieh und Fleisch, ed. In AMI (Argrarmarkt Informationsgesellschaft). Bonn: Medienhaus Plump GmbH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Ming - Dong P. 2008. A review of theories of corporate social responsibility: its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Reviews 10 (1): 53–73.

  • Maloni, Michael J., and Michael E. Brown. 2006. Corporate social responsibility in the supply chain: an application in the food industry. Journal of Business Ethics 68 (1): 35–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, Joshua D., and James P. Walsh. 2003. Misery loves companies: rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly 48 (2): 268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayring, Philipp. 2010 Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse – Grundlagen und Techniken. Weinheim and Basel: Beltz.

  • McWilliams, Abagail, and Donald Siegel. 2001. Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. The Academy of Management Review 26 (1): 117–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, Morgan .P., and Jeffrey G. Covin. 2000. Environmental marketing: A source of reputational, competitive, and financial advantage. Journal of Business Ethics 23: 299–311.

  • Moewius, Joyce Peter Röhring, Diana Schaack, Christine Ramphold, Hans-Josef Brzukalle, Frank Gottwald, Karin Stein-Bachinger, Markus Wolter, and Jürn Sanders. 2018. Zahlen, Daten, Fakten – Bio-Branche 2018, ed. In BÖLW (Bund Ökologischer Lebensmittelwirtschaft e.V.). Berlin: Spree Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padel, Susanne, and Carolyn Foster. 2005. Exploring the gap between attitudes and behavior: understanding why consumers buy or do not buy organic food. British Food Journal 107 (8): 606–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papagiannakis, Giorgos, and Spyros Lioukas. 2012. Values, attitudes and perceptions of managers as predictors of corporate environmental responsiveness. Journal of Environmental Management 100: 41–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piacentini, Maria, Lynn MacFadyen, and Douglas Eadie. 2000. Corporate social responsibility in food retailing. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management 28 (11): 459–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pirsich, Wiebke Louisa V. Hardenberg, and Ludwig Theuvsen. 2017. Eine empirische Analyse zum Angebot von Tierwohl-Fleisch in Fleischerfachgeschäften. Berichte über Landwirtschaft 95 (2).

  • Pullman, Madeleine.E., and Jesse Dillard. 2010. Value based supply chain management and emergent organizational structures. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 30 (7): 744–771.

  • Risius, Antje, and Ulrich Hamm. 2016. The effect of information on beef husbandry on consumers’ preference and willingness to pay. Meat Science 124 (2017): 9–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rombach, Meike, and Vera Bitsch. 2015. Food movements in Germany: slow food, food sharing, and dumpster diving. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 18 (3): 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, Paul C. 2000. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues 56 (3): 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockebrand, Nina, Nina S. Berner, and Achim Spiller. 2008. Regionalmarketing im Naturkostfachhandel. Göttingen: Cuvillier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tjärnemo, Heléne, and Liv Södahl. 2015. Swedish food retailers promoting climate smarter food choices – trapped between visions and reality? Journal of Retailing and Consume Services 24 (May): 130–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valor, Carmen, Isabel Carrero, and Raquel Redondi. 2014. The influence of knowledge and motivation on sustainable label use. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27 (4): 591–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Loo Ellen J. Vincenzina Caputo Rodolfo M. Nayga and Wim Verbeke. 2014. Consumer’s evaluation of sustainability labels on meat. Food Policy 49(Part 1):137–150.

  • Weber, Klaus, Kathryn L. Heinze, and Michaela DeSoucey. 2008. Forage for thought: Mobilizing codes in the movement for grass-fed meat and dairy products. Administrative Science Quarterly 53 (3): 529–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Sarah, and Anja Schaefer. 2013. Small and medium sized enterprises and sustainability: managers’ values and engagement with environmental and climate change issues. Business Strategy and the Environment 22 (3): 173–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors greatfully ackowledge funding from the “Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL)” and the “Ministry of Science and Arts” in Lower Saxony, Germany.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Marketing of Food and Agricultural Products, University of Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany

    Maureen Schulze, Achim Spiller & Antje Risius

Authors
  1. Maureen Schulze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Achim Spiller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Antje Risius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maureen Schulze.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schulze, M., Spiller, A. & Risius, A. Food Retailers as Mediating Gatekeepers between Farmers and Consumers in the Supply Chain of Animal Welfare Meat - Studying Retailers’ Motives in Marketing Pasture-Based Beef. Food ethics 3, 41–52 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-019-00040-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-019-00040-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation