IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i19p7884-d418157.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability and Quality Aspects of Different Table Egg Production Systems: A Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Szilvia Molnár

    (Institute of Applied Economics Sciences, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary)

  • László Szőllősi

    (Institute of Applied Economics Sciences, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary)

Abstract

Eggs are of considerable importance in feeding the population, as they are a relatively inexpensive and complex food source of very high biological value. The daily animal protein requirement for the human body can be covered with eggs in the cheapest way and with the lowest environmental impact. As animal welfare, as well as environmental and health awareness issues, become increasingly prominent in developed countries, consumer demand for eggs has also changed significantly in recent years, with an increasing number of consumers buying eggs produced in non-cage housing systems. In recent years, cage housing has been more frequently debated in EU member states. An initiative was launched in 2018 to end cage housing technologies and the sale of eggs produced in this way. However, in addition to animal welfare, a number of other factors need to be considered in relation to sustainable production. For this reason, the aim of this research is to provide a comprehensive overview of the sustainability issues of various housing technologies, as well as quality factors affecting consumer health and egg consumption based on the relevant international references and databases. Although there is a growing demand for products produced in non-cage housing systems due to the increasing relevance of environmental protection, health awareness and animal welfare issues in Western societies, research has shown that non-caged production is not the best solution for environmentally, socially and economically sustainable egg production.

Suggested Citation

  • Szilvia Molnár & László Szőllősi, 2020. "Sustainability and Quality Aspects of Different Table Egg Production Systems: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-22, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:19:p:7884-:d:418157
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/19/7884/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/19/7884/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Li, Tongzhe & Bernard, John C. & Johnston, Zachary A. & Messer, Kent D. & Kaiser, Harry M., 2017. "Consumer preferences before and after a food safety scare: An experimental analysis of the 2010 egg recall," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 25-34.
    2. Horn, Péter, 2013. "Korunk fő fejlődési tendenciái az élelmiszer-termelésben, különös tekintettel az állati termékekre," GAZDÁLKODÁS: Scientific Journal on Agricultural Economics, Karoly Robert University College, vol. 57(06), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Sylwia Żakowska-Biemans & Agnieszka Tekień, 2017. "Free Range, Organic? Polish Consumers Preferences Regarding Information on Farming System and Nutritional Enhancement of Eggs: A Discrete Choice Based Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-16, November.
    4. Djamel Rahmani & Zein Kallas & Maria Pappa & José Maria Gil, 2019. "Are Consumers’ Egg Preferences Influenced by Animal-Welfare Conditions and Environmental Impacts?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-23, November.
    5. Sumner, Daniel A. & Matthews, William A. & Mench, Joy A. & Rosen-Molina, J. Thomas, 2010. "The Economics of Regulations on Hen Housing in California," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 429-438, August.
    6. Andrei Boar & Ramon Bastida & Frederic Marimon, 2020. "A Systematic Literature Review. Relationships between the Sharing Economy, Sustainability and Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Francesca Gerini & Frode Alfnes & Alexander Schjøll, 2016. "Organic- and Animal Welfare-labelled Eggs: Competing for the Same Consumers?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 471-490, June.
    8. H.H. Jensen & T. Kesavan & S.R. Johnson, 1992. "Measuring the Impact of Health Awareness on Food Demand," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 14(2), pages 299-312.
    9. Ochs, Dan & Wolf, Christopher A. & Widmar, Nicole Olynk & Bir, Courtney & Lai, John, 2019. "Hen housing system information effects on U.S. egg demand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Chang, Jae Bong & Lusk, Jayson L. & Norwood, F. Bailey, 2010. "The Price of Happy Hens: A Hedonic Analysis of Retail Egg Prices," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 35(3), pages 1-18, December.
    11. Chen, Wenbo, 2018. "Retailer-driven carbon emission abatement with consumer environmental awareness and carbon tax: Revenue-sharing versus Cost-sharingAuthor-Name: Yang, Huixiao," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 179-191.
    12. Heng, Yan & Hanawa Peterson, Hikaru & Li, Xianghong, 2013. "Consumer Attitudes toward Farm-Animal Welfare: The Case of Laying Hens," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-17.
    13. Ochs, Daniel & Wolf, Christopher A. & Widmar, Nicole J. & Bir, Courtney, 2019. "Is There a “Cage-Free” Lunch in U.S. Egg Production? Public Views of Laying-Hen Housing Attributes," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 44(2), May.
    14. Yu, Yugang & Han, Xiaoya & Hu, Guiping, 2016. "Optimal production for manufacturers considering consumer environmental awareness and green subsidies," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 397-408.
    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. Djamel Rahmani & Zein Kallas & Maria Pappa & José Maria Gil, 2019. "Are Consumers’ Egg Preferences Influenced by Animal-Welfare Conditions and Environmental Impacts?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-23, November.
    2. Tomislav Vukina & Danijel Nestic, 2020. "Paying for animal welfare? A hedonic analysis of egg prices," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(4), pages 613-630, October.
    3. Kaminski, Danielle M. & Caputo, Vincenzina & McKendree, Melissa G.S., . "The US Public’s Attitudes on Animal and Worker Welfare in the Dairy and Poultry Industries," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 49(1).
    4. Malone, Trey & Lusk, Jayson L., 2016. "Putting the Chicken Before the Egg Price: An Ex Post Analysis of California's Battery Cage Ban," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-15, September.
    5. Oh, Sohae & Vukina, Tomislav, 2020. "Quantifying the Welfare Effects of Laying-hen Cage Ban," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304408, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Ochs, Dan & Wolf, Christopher A. & Widmar, Nicole Olynk & Bir, Courtney & Lai, John, 2019. "Hen housing system information effects on U.S. egg demand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Heng, Yan & Peterson, Hikaru, 2014. "Estimating Demand for Differentiated Eggs Using Scanner Data," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170457, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Weiling Wang & Yongjian Wang & Xiaoqing Zhang & Dalin Zhang, 2021. "Effects of Government Subsidies on Production and Emissions Reduction Decisions under Carbon Tax Regulation and Consumer Low-Carbon Awareness," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-17, October.
    9. Paniagua, Javier & Solórzano, Johanna & Barboza, David & Pérez, Catalina, 2023. "Hedonic Price Of Free-Range Eggs In Costa Rica," APSTRACT: Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, AGRIMBA, vol. 17(2), December.
    10. Heng, Yan & Peterson, Hikaru Hanawa & Li, Xianghong, 2012. "Consumers’ Preferences for Shell Eggs Regarding Laying Hen Welfare," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124592, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Faical Akaichi & Klaus Glenk & Cesar Revoredo‐Giha, 2022. "Bundling food labels: What role could the labels “Organic,” “Local” and “Low Fat” play in fostering the demand for animal‐friendly meat," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 349-370, April.
    12. Luigi Bollani & Alessandro Bonadonna & Giovanni Peira, 2019. "The Millennials’ Concept of Sustainability in the Food Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-19, May.
    13. Wen Cheng & Qunqi Wu & Fei Ye & Qian Li, 2022. "The Impact of Government Interventions and Consumer Green Preferences on the Competition between Green and Nongreen Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-34, May.
    14. Heydari, Jafar & Bineshpour, Pegah & Walther, Grit & Ülkü, M. Ali, 2022. "Reconciling conflict of interests in a green retailing channel with green sales effort," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    15. Heng, Yan & Hanawa Peterson, Hikaru & Li, Xianghong, 2013. "Consumer Attitudes toward Farm-Animal Welfare: The Case of Laying Hens," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-17.
    16. Lai, Yufeng & Yue, Chengyan, 2020. "Consumer Willingness to pay for Organic and Animal Welfare Product Attributes: Do Experimental Results Align with Market Data?," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304328, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Ortega, David L. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2018. "Demand for farm animal welfare and producer implications: Results from a field experiment in Michigan," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 74-81.
    18. Heng, Yan & Peterson, Hikaru Hanawa & Li, Xianghong, 2016. "Consumer Responses to Multiple and Superfluous Labels in the Case of Eggs," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 47(2), pages 1-21, July.
    19. Kitano, Shinichi & Mitsunari, Yuka & Yoshino, Akira, 2022. "The impact of information asymmetry on animal welfare-friendly consumption: Evidence from milk market in Japan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    20. Cao, Ying & Chen, Chen & Cranfield, John & Widowski, Tina, 2017. "Market Responses to Information Conveying Mixed Messages – Prediction of Informational Impacts on Consumer Willingness to Pay for Eggs from Welfare Enhanced Cage Systems using Discrete Choice Experime," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258545, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:19:p:7884-:d:418157. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.