IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i24p16901-d1005713.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preliminary Analysis of Voluntary Information on Organic Milk Labels in Four European Union Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Karolina Woś

    (Department of Functional and Organic Food, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, 02-787 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Lisa Marie Borghoff

    (Department of Food Nutrition Facilities, FH Münster University of Applied Sciences, 48149 Münster, Germany)

  • Andrijana Horvat

    (Department of Agrotechnology and Food Sciences, Wageningen University and Research, P.O. Box 17, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands)

  • Flavio Paoletti

    (CREA—Research Centre for Food and Nutrition, Via Ardeatina, 546-00178 Rome, Italy)

  • Eleonora Saggia Civitelli

    (CREA—Research Centre for Food and Nutrition, Via Ardeatina, 546-00178 Rome, Italy)

  • Ewa Rembiałkowska

    (Department of Functional and Organic Food, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, 02-787 Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract

The concern for the environment among European consumers is growing and in the future the need for sustainable shopping is expected to increase. Through transparent on-packaging communication with consumers, organic producers have the opportunity to show attributes of organic production system and build a strong market position. The aim of the study was to analyse voluntary packaging information on organic milk from four European markets in the context of organic food quality, i.e., Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and Poland. More specifically, the textual content of 106 organic milk packages was analysed and voluntary information on each package was categorized according to process- and product-related organic milk attributes. The assortment and content of voluntary packaging information varied across the four countries. The largest number of products was found on the German market (37) and the smallest on the Polish market (14). Dutch milk had the greatest amount of voluntary information on animal welfare, product locality, environmental protection, quality confirmation, naturalness and nutritional value. German milk had the most information on enjoyment and conditions of processing, while the Italian milk on the social perspective. The products available on the Polish market had the least voluntary information. Pasteurized organic milk had noticeably more information about organic quality attributes than micro filtrated and UHT milk.

Suggested Citation

  • Karolina Woś & Lisa Marie Borghoff & Andrijana Horvat & Flavio Paoletti & Eleonora Saggia Civitelli & Ewa Rembiałkowska, 2022. "Preliminary Analysis of Voluntary Information on Organic Milk Labels in Four European Union Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-18, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:24:p:16901-:d:1005713
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16901/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16901/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jessica Aschemann-Witzel & Stephan Zielke, 2017. "Can't Buy Me Green? A Review of Consumer Perceptions of and Behavior Toward the Price of Organic Food," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 211-251, March.
    2. Ingenbleek, Paul T.M. & Immink, Victor M. & Spoolder, Hans A.M. & Bokma, Martien H. & Keeling, Linda J., 2012. "EU animal welfare policy: Developing a comprehensive policy framework," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 690-699.
    3. Isaac Ankamah-Yeboah & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen & Søren Bøye Olsen & Max Nielsen & Rasmus Nielsen, 2019. "The Impact of Animal Welfare and Environmental Information on the Choice of Organic Fish: An Empirical Investigation of German Trout Consumers," Marine Resource Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(3), pages 247-266.
    4. 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.
    5. F. Kuchler & M. Bowman & M. Sweitzer & C. Greene, 2020. "Evidence from Retail Food Markets That Consumers Are Confused by Natural and Organic Food Labels," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 379-395, June.
    6. Hanna Górska-Warsewicz & Sylwia Żakowska-Biemans & Maksymilian Czeczotko & Monika Świątkowska & Dagmara Stangierska & Ewa Świstak & Agnieszka Bobola & Julita Szlachciuk & Karol Krajewski, 2018. "Organic Private Labels as Sources of Competitive Advantage—The Case of International Retailers Operating on the Polish Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-28, July.
    7. Herm, Steffen & Möller, Jana, 2016. "Das EU-Bio-Logo: Seine Wirkung nach fünf Jahren Marktpräsenz," PraxisWISSEN Marketing: German Journal of Marketing, AfM – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Marketing, vol. 1(01/2016), pages 66-78.
    8. Aleksandra Kowalska & Monika Ratajczyk & Louise Manning & Milena Bieniek & Radosław Mącik, 2021. "“Young and Green” a Study of Consumers’ Perceptions and Reported Purchasing Behaviour towards Organic Food in Poland and the United Kingdom," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-23, November.
    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. Mergenthaler, Marcus & Schröter, Iris, 2020. "Institutionelle Grenzen und Perspektiven bei der ökonomischen Bewertung und der Bereitstellung von Tierwohl," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305598, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    2. Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano & Albenzio, Marzia & Ciliberti, Maria Giovanna & Di Gioia, Leonardo & Lamonaca, Emilia & Tappi, Marco & Caroprese, Mariangela, 2020. "Individuazione e implementazione di indicatori di benessere animale: aspetti tecnici e impatto economico [Identification and implementation of animal welfare indicators: technical aspects and econo," MPRA Paper 100673, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Duan, Dinglin & Gao, Zhifeng & Uddin, Md Azhar & Nian, Yefan & Nguyen, Ly, 2022. "Tracing the Trends in Consumer Preferences for Eco-labeled Food: A Text Mining and Topic Modeling Approach," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322419, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Mergenthaler, Marcus & Schröter, Iris, 2020. "Institutionelle Grenzen und Perspektiven bei der ökonomischen Bewertung und der Bereitstellung von Tierwohl," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305598, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    5. Yue Wu & Katalin Takács-György, 2022. "Comparison of Consuming Habits on Organic Food—Is It the Same? Hungary Versus China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-19, June.
    6. Tamaki Kitagawa & Kenichi Kashiwagi & Hiroko Isoda, 2020. "Effect of Religious and Cultural Information of Olive Oil on Consumer Behavior: Evidence from Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-17, January.
    7. Matthias Staudigel & Aleksej Trubnikov, 2022. "High price premiums as barriers to organic meat demand? A hedonic analysis considering species, cut and retail outlet," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(2), pages 309-334, April.
    8. Henry Schwartz & Tomi Solakivi & Magnus Gustafsson, 2022. "Is There Business Potential for Sustainable Shipping? Price Premiums Needed to Cover Decarbonized Transportation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-20, May.
    9. Chen, Junhong & Nian, Yefan & Gao, Zhifeng, 2022. "Value, Attitude/Belief, and Sustainable Food Consumption," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322485, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Abele Kuipers & Agata Malak-Rawlikowska & Aldona Stalgienė & Anita Ule & Marija Klopčič, 2021. "European Dairy Farmers’ Perceptions and Responses towards Development Strategies in Years of Turbulent Market and Policy Changes," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-24, March.
    11. Tiziano Tempesta & Daniel Vecchiato, 2019. "Analysis of the Factors that Influence Olive Oil Demand in the Veneto Region (Italy)," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-17, July.
    12. Nesar Ahmed & Shirley Thompson & Giovanni M. Turchini, 2020. "Organic aquaculture productivity, environmental sustainability, and food security: insights from organic agriculture," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(6), pages 1253-1267, December.
    13. Aleksandra Kowalska & Julia Wojciechowska-Solis & Milena Bieniek & Monika Ratajczyk & Louise Manning, 2023. "Declared non-buyers of organic food: A study of young British and Polish consumer profiles," Ekonomista, Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne, issue 1, pages 28-50.
    14. Verburg, René W. & Verberne, Emma & Negro, Simona O., 2022. "Accelerating the transition towards sustainable agriculture: The case of organic dairy farming in the Netherlands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    15. Conner Mullally & Jayson L Lusk, 2018. "The Impact of Farm Animal Housing Restrictions on Egg Prices, Consumer Welfare, and Production in California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(3), pages 649-669.
    16. Hernando Barreto Riaño & John Willmer Escobar & Rodrigo Linfati & Virna Ortiz-Araya, 2022. "Disciplinary Categorization of the Cattle Supply Chain—A Review and Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-44, November.
    17. Kelly R. Wilson & Robert L. Myers & Mary K. Hendrickson & Emily A. Heaton, 2022. "Different Stakeholders’ Conceptualizations and Perspectives of Regenerative Agriculture Reveals More Consensus Than Discord," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-14, November.
    18. Bonnet, Céline & Bouamra-Mechemache, Zohra & Réquillart, Vincent & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Viewpoint: Regulating meat consumption to improve health, the environment and animal welfare," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    19. Busch, Gesa & Spiller, Achim, 2020. "Warum wir eine Tierschutzsteuer brauchen: Die Bürger-Konsumenten-Lücke," DARE Discussion Papers 2001, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    20. Ufer, Danielle J. & Ortega, David L. & Wolf, Christopher A. & McKendree, Melissa & Swanson, Janice, 2022. "Getting past the gatekeeper: Key motivations of dairy farmer intent to adopt animal health and welfare-improving biotechnology," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).

    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:14:y:2022:i:24:p:16901-:d:1005713. 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.