The consumer does not exist: overcoming the citizen/consumer paradox by shifting focus

  • S. Aerts

Abstract

A common framework to describe the difficult situation of today’s agricultural markets is the different (perceived) attitudes of the citizen (as found via surveys) and that of the consumer (assessed via buying patterns). It is said that the citizen is demanding for ever increasing animal welfare and environmental efforts (usually at an increased production price), but at the same time the consumer in the shops is heading for the cheapest product, regardless of the production system. This dilemma (or paradox) has been confirmed many times by scientific and market research. This way of framing does however not align with the complexity of contemporary food production. It starts from the – flawed – assumption that food producers (farmers) and consumers interact. But only on rare occasions they still do. Except in short-chain commercialisation systems, consumers do not buy food as it is produced by farmers, but instead they buy – even fresh produce – from retailers that have acquired it from auction markets. For other food products many more intermediate steps exist. In this paper we will show that in most instances in which conventional food production systems made progress towards more welfare friendly or more sustainable production this has been done by circumventing the citizen-consumer paradox instead of addressing it. Examples are the shift to non-battery eggs in the Low Countries in 2005-2006 and the current steps towards non-castration pig production. We conclude that focusing on the consumer in order to restore balance is – if not futile – overly optimistic. It assumes a consumer position that is not in line with reality. Furthermore, it obscures the important leverage of other actors in the food chain, some of whom may not be unsympathetic to this ‘invisible’ position.

Keywords

consumption market power 

References

  1. Aerts, S. (2005). Dierenwelzijn en consumptie. In: De Tavernier, J., Aerts, S. and Lips, D. (eds.) Dier en welzijn. LannooCampus, Leuven, Belgium.Google Scholar
  2. Aerts, S. and Lips, D. (2010). Dierenwelzijn en consumptie. In: De Tavernier, J., Aerts, S. and Lips, D. (eds.) Dier en welzijn, 2nd edition. LannooCampus, Leuven, Belgium.Google Scholar
  3. Brom, F.W. A., Visak, T. and Meijboom, F. (2005). Food, citizens and market. The quest for responsible consuming. In: Pothast, T., Baumgartner, C. and Engels, E-M (eds.) Die richtigen Masse für die Nahrung. Biotechnologie, Landwirtschaft und Lebensmittel in ethischer Perspective. Francke Verlag, Tübingen/Basel, Germany/Switzerland, p. 115-132.Google Scholar
  4. Dagevos, H. and Sterrenberg, L. (2003). Burgers en consumenten – tussen tweedeling en twee-eenheid. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, the Netherlands, p. 160 pp.Google Scholar
  5. Davies, J.R. (2010). The European consumer citizen: a coherent, tangible and relevant notion of citizenship? PhD, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.Google Scholar
  6. De Bakker, E. and Dagevos, H. (2012). Reducing meat consumption in today’s consumer society: questioning the citizen-consumer gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25(6): 877-894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Flanders Today (2012). Food industry says no to battery eggs (May 23, 2012). Available at: http://www.flanderstoday.eu/content/food-industry-says-no-battery-eggs.Google Scholar
  8. Food and Agriculture Organisation. (2004). The ethics of sustainable agricultural intensification. FAO Ethics Series 3. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  9. Grievink, J.W. (2006). The changing face of the global food industry. Brands, products and concepts under retail dominance? Available at: www.cooperatie.nl/download/17-grievink.pdf.Google Scholar
  10. Grievink, J.W. (2003). The changing face of the global food industry. Presentation at the OECD Conference 6 February 2003, The Hague, the netherlands. Available via: www.oecd.org/tad/agricultural-trade/oecdconferencetoexplorechangesinthefoodeconomythehague6-7february2003.htm.Google Scholar
  11. Hendrickson, M. and Heffernan, W. (2005). Concentration of agricultural markets. University of Missouri, Columbia, USA.Google Scholar
  12. Johnston, J. (2008). The citizen-consumer hybrid: ideological tensions and the case of Whole Foods Market. Theory and Society 37(3): 229-270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Johnston, J. and Szabo, M. (2011). Reflexivity and the Whole Foods Market consumer: the lived experience of shopping for change. Agriculture and Human Values 28(3): 303-319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lips, D. (2004). Op zoek naar een meer diervriendelijke veehouderij in de 21ste eeuw. Aanzet tot het ontwikkelen van win-winsituaties voor dier en veehouder. Dissertationes de Agricultura, 609. PhD, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.Google Scholar
  15. Lockie, S. (2009). Responsibility and agency within alternative food networks: assembling the ‘citizen consumer’. Agriculture and Human Values 26(3): 193-201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. MacRae, R., Szabo, M., Anderson, K., Louden, F. and Trillo, S. (2012). Empowering the citizen-consumer: re-regulating consumer information to support the transition to sustainable and health promoting food systems in Canada. Sustainability 4: 2146-2175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority, Tavistock, London, UK.Google Scholar
  18. Onderzoeks- en informatiecentrum van de verbruikersorganisaties (2012). Consumer behavior monitor. OIVO, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
  19. Thirkell, P.C. (2012). The Consumer as critical player in moving towards a sustainable marketing system: refining the agenda. In: Haase, M. and Kleinaltenkamp, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 37th Macromarketing Conference. June 13 – 16, 2012. Berlin, Germany. pp. 392-398.Google Scholar
  20. Verbeke, W. (2009). Stakeholder, citizen and consumer interests in farm animal welfare. Animal Welfare 18(4): 325-333.Google Scholar
  21. Verbeke, W. and Vackier, I. (2004). Profile and effects of consumer involve-ment in fresh meat. Meat Science 67(2): 159-168.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Verbeke, W. and Ward, R. (2006). Consumer interest in information cues denoting quality, traceability and origin: an application of ordered probit models to beef labels. Quality and Preference 17(6): 453-467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Visak, T., Meijboom, F.L.B, Kalis, A. and Brom, F.W.A. (2004). Verantwoord consumeren: De dubbele moraal als vertrekpunt voor een discussie over normatieve vooronderstellingen en verantwoordelijkheid Verkennend Essay, NWO Programma Ethiek, onderzoek & Bestuur. Ethiek Instituut, Universiteit Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Wageningen Academic Publishers 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Aerts
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.KAHO Sint-LievenSint-NiklaasBelgium
  2. 2.Centre for ScienceTechnology and EthicsLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations