IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i14p10849-d1191195.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

In Search of the Niche—Targeting Lamb Meat Consumers in North-East Germany to Communicate the Ecosystem Services of Extensive Sheep Farming Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Anne Wiedemann

    (Faculty of Landscape Management and Nature Conservation, Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development, Schicklerstr. 5, 16225 Eberswalde, Germany)

  • Josephine Lauterbach

    (Faculty of Landscape Management and Nature Conservation, Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development, Schicklerstr. 5, 16225 Eberswalde, Germany)

  • Anna Maria Häring

    (Faculty of Landscape Management and Nature Conservation, Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development, Schicklerstr. 5, 16225 Eberswalde, Germany)

Abstract

Extensive sheep farming systems provide numerous ecosystem services, most of which consumers are not aware of. Consumers’ subjective quality perception relates to intrinsic and extrinsic quality attributes. Extrinsic quality attributes, like animal welfare, conservation of biodiversity, and regional and sustainable lamb meat production, meet the expectations of meat consumers. Communication of quality attributes can support consumers’ willingness to buy and pay a premium price, as well as producers’ economic viability. Previous studies focused on consumers’ perception of intrinsic quality attributes, while it is our objective to analyse the target group-specific communication of extrinsic quality attributes of extensive sheep farming. An online survey with 387 valid respondents included lamb meat consumers in Berlin-Brandenburg and revealed their consumption patterns. The sample is representative of Berlin-Brandenburg in net household income, population division and gender, while academics and respondents over 50 years were overrepresented. The survey addressed demographics, meat consumption and purchasing behaviour, preferences for different lamb meat products, purchasing motives and barriers, perception of communication messages and personal initiative for the purchase of regional lamb. Via Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Cluster Analysis, we identified two key target groups for regionally produced lamb meat: “Foodies” and “Cooking enthusiasts”. Guided by Alphabet theory with its specific focus on Knowledge, Information seeking behaviour and purchasing Habit, we derive recommendations for target-group-specific communication of regionally produced lamb meat. “Foodies” showed a high potential for direct marketing and personal storytelling of sheep farmers. “Cooking enthusiasts” are best addressed through print and online marketing with a focus on cooking and personal health.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne Wiedemann & Josephine Lauterbach & Anna Maria Häring, 2023. "In Search of the Niche—Targeting Lamb Meat Consumers in North-East Germany to Communicate the Ecosystem Services of Extensive Sheep Farming Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-16, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:14:p:10849-:d:1191195
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/14/10849/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/14/10849/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Decuypere, Robbe & Robaeyst, Ben & Hudders, Liselot & Baccarne, Bastiaan & Van de Sompel, Dieneke, 2022. "Transitioning to energy efficient housing: Drivers and barriers of intermediaries in heat pump technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    2. Conner, David S. & Campbell-Arvai, Victoria & Hamm, Michael W., 2008. "Consumer Preferences for Pasture-Raised Animal Products: Results from Michigan," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 39(2), pages 1-14, July.
    3. John D. Mullen & Michael K. Wohlgenant, 1991. "The Willingness Of Consumers To Pay For Attributes Of Lamb," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 35(3), pages 247-262, December.
    4. Andreas Chatzidakis & Sally Hibbert & Andrew Smith, 2007. "Why People Don’t Take their Concerns about Fair Trade to the Supermarket: The Role of Neutralisation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 89-100, August.
    5. Rahmann, Gerold & Ashworth, Stuart W. & Boutonnet, Jean-Pierre & Brunori, Gianluca & Papadopoulos, Ioannis, 2001. "Opportunities and barriers for niche marketing of lamb in European LFAs based on consumer attitudes to product quality," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 50(05), pages 1-9.
    6. Michal Carrington & Benjamin Neville & Gregory Whitwell, 2010. "Why Ethical Consumers Don’t Walk Their Talk: Towards a Framework for Understanding the Gap Between the Ethical Purchase Intentions and Actual Buying Behaviour of Ethically Minded Consumers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 97(1), pages 139-158, November.
    7. Wohlgenant, Michael K. & Lemieux, Catharine M., 1991. "U. K. Consumers' Willingness To Pay For Leaner Pork Products," 1991 Annual Meeting, August 4-7, Manhattan, Kansas 271244, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    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. Elena Kossmann & Mónica Gómez-Suárez, 2018. "Decision-making processes for purchases of ethical products: gaps between academic research and needs of marketing practitioners," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 15(3), pages 353-370, September.
    2. Natalia Stanulewicz & Emily Knox & Melanie Narayanasamy & Noureen Shivji & Kamlesh Khunti & Holly Blake, 2019. "Effectiveness of Lifestyle Health Promotion Interventions for Nurses: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-36, December.
    3. Etilé, Fabrice & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2013. "Corporate social responsibility and the economics of consumer social responsibility," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 94(2).
    4. Paolo Antonetti & Stan Maklan, 2014. "Feelings that Make a Difference: How Guilt and Pride Convince Consumers of the Effectiveness of Sustainable Consumption Choices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 117-134, September.
    5. Brunen, Ann-Christine & Laubach, Oliver, 2022. "Do sustainable consumers prefer socially responsible investments? A study among the users of robo advisors," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    6. Evon Scott & Giorgos Kallis & Christos Zografos, 2019. "Why environmentalists eat meat," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-9, July.
    7. Veronika Andorfer & Ulf Liebe, 2012. "Research on Fair Trade Consumption—A Review," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 106(4), pages 415-435, April.
    8. Pamela Yeow & Alison Dean & Danielle Tucker, 2014. "Bags for Life: The Embedding of Ethical Consumerism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(1), pages 87-99, November.
    9. Dilek PENPECE, 2014. "Demografik Deðiþkenler ve Dizi Türünün Dizi Tanýtým Mecralarýna Etkisi Üzerine Bir Araþtýrma," Isletme ve Iktisat Calismalari Dergisi, Econjournals, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10.
    10. Michal Carrington & Andreas Chatzidakis & Helen Goworek & Deirdre Shaw, 2021. "Consumption Ethics: A Review and Analysis of Future Directions for Interdisciplinary Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(2), pages 215-238, January.
    11. Cristina Longo & Avi Shankar & Peter Nuttall, 2019. "“It’s Not Easy Living a Sustainable Lifestyle”: How Greater Knowledge Leads to Dilemmas, Tensions and Paralysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(3), pages 759-779, February.
    12. Yu, Lingling & Hailu, Getu, 2010. "Household Demand for Convenience Chicken Meat Products in Canada," Consumer and Market Demand Network Papers 310299, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    13. Andrés Nova-Reyes & Francisco Muñoz-Leiva & Teodoro Luque-Martínez, 2020. "The Tipping Point in the Status of Socially Responsible Consumer Behavior Research? A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-23, April.
    14. Carrington, Michal J. & Neville, Benjamin A. & Whitwell, Gregory J., 2014. "Lost in translation: Exploring the ethical consumer intention–behavior gap," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 2759-2767.
    15. Deirdre Shaw & Robert McMaster & Terry Newholm, 2016. "Care and Commitment in Ethical Consumption: An Exploration of the ‘Attitude–Behaviour Gap’," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 251-265, June.
    16. Volker Lingnau & Florian Fuchs & Florian Beham, 2019. "The impact of sustainability in coffee production on consumers’ willingness to pay–new evidence from the field of ethical consumption," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 65-93, April.
    17. Kadic-Maglajlic, Selma & Arslanagic-Kalajdzic, Maja & Micevski, Milena & Dlacic, Jasmina & Zabkar, Vesna, 2019. "Being engaged is a good thing: Understanding sustainable consumption behavior among young adults," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 644-654.
    18. Fred Amofa Yamoah & Rachel Duffy & Dan Petrovici & Andrew Fearne, 2016. "Towards a Framework for Understanding Fairtrade Purchase Intention in the Mainstream Environment of Supermarkets," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(1), pages 181-197, June.
    19. Dimitris Georgantzis Garcia & Eva Kipnis & Efi Vasileiou & Adrian Solomon, 2021. "Consumption in the Circular Economy: Learning from Our Mistakes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-23, January.
    20. Michal Carrington & Andreas Chatzidakis & Deirdre Shaw, 2021. "Consuming Worker Exploitation? Accounts and Justifications for Consumer (In)action to Modern Slavery," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 35(3), pages 432-450, June.

    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:15:y:2023:i:14:p:10849-:d:1191195. 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.