IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0231338.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A value chain analysis of interventions to control production diseases in the intensive pig production sector

Author

Listed:
  • Jarkko Niemi
  • Richard Bennett
  • Beth Clark
  • Lynn Frewer
  • Philip Jones
  • Thomas Rimmler
  • Richard Tranter

Abstract

Value chain analysis (VCA) calculated the financial effects on food chain actors of interventions to improve animal health and welfare in the intensive pig sector. Two interventions to reduce production diseases were studied. A generic chain diagram of linkages between stakeholders and value-added dimensions was designed. Data on structure and financial performance were collected for the sector. The production parameters and financial effects of the interventions were then described to illustrate impact on the supply chain. The effects of the interventions were also assessed at market level using economic welfare analysis. The sectors in Finland and the UK are small in farm numbers and few companies produced much of the output in a largely vertically-integrated structure. The most beneficial intervention in financial terms to farmers was improved hygiene in pig fattening (around +50% in gross margin). It was calculated to reduce the consumer price for pig meat by up to 5% when applied at large, whereas for improved management measures, it would reduce consumer price by less than 0.5%. However, the latter added value also through food quality attributes. We show that good hygiene and animal care can add value. However, evaluation of the financial and social viability of the interventions is needed to decide what interventions are adopted. The structure of supply chains influences which policy measures could be applied. Of the two interventions, improved pig hygiene had the largest potential to improve efficiency and reduce costs. The studied interventions can also provide new business opportunities to farms, slaughterhouses and food sector companies. More evidence is needed to support public policies and business decision-making in the sector. For this, evidence on consumer attitudes to production diseases is needed. Nevertheless, the study makes an important contribution by showing how improvements in health and welfare benefit the whole chain.

Suggested Citation

  • Jarkko Niemi & Richard Bennett & Beth Clark & Lynn Frewer & Philip Jones & Thomas Rimmler & Richard Tranter, 2020. "A value chain analysis of interventions to control production diseases in the intensive pig production sector," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-25, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0231338
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231338
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231338
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231338&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0231338?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Onono, Joshua Orungo & Alarcon, Pablo & Karani, Maurice & Muinde, Patrick & Akoko, James Miser & Maud, Carron & Fevre, Eric M. & Häsler, Barbara & Rushton, Jonathan, 2018. "Identification of production challenges and benefits using value chain mapping of egg food systems in Nairobi, Kenya," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 1-8.
    2. 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.
    3. McVittie, Alistair & Moran, Dominic & Nevison, Ian, 2006. "Public Preferences for Broiler Chicken Welfare: Evidence from Stated Preference Studies," Working Papers 45990, Scotland's Rural College (formerly Scottish Agricultural College), Land Economy & Environment Research Group.
    4. Andrew Bowman & Julie Froud & Sukhdev Johal & Adam Leaver & Karel Williams, 2013. "Opportunist dealing in the UK pig meat supply chain: Trader mentalities and alternatives," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(4), pages 300-314, December.
    5. Bowman, Andrew & Froud, Julie & Johal, Sukhdev & Leaver, Adam & Williams, Karel, 2013. "Opportunist dealing in the UK pig meat supply chain: Trader mentalities and alternatives," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 300-314.
    6. Sneeringer, Stacy & MacDonald, James & Key, Nigel & McBride, William & Mathews, Ken, 2015. "Economics of Antibiotic Use in U.S. Livestock Production," Economic Research Report 229202, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    7. Irvine, Richard M., 2015. "A conceptual study of value chain analysis as a tool for assessing a veterinary surveillance system for poultry in Great Britain," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 143-158.
    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. Malik, Sheraz Alam & Hingley, Martin K., 2021. "Consumer demand information as a re-balancing tool for power asymmetry between food retailers and suppliers," Economia agro-alimentare / Food Economy, Italian Society of Agri-food Economics/Società Italiana di Economia Agro-Alimentare (SIEA), vol. 23(2), July.
    2. Henrik Barth & Per-Ola Ulvenblad & Pia Ulvenblad, 2017. "Towards a Conceptual Framework of Sustainable Business Model Innovation in the Agri-Food Sector: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-15, September.
    3. Molly Scott Cato, 2014. "From resilient regions to bioregions: An exploration of green post-Keynesianism," Working Papers PKWP1407, Post Keynesian Economics Society (PKES).
    4. Sheraz Alam Malik & Martin K. Hingley, 2021. "Consumer demand information as a re-balancing tool for power asymmetry between food retailers and suppliers," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 23(2), pages 1-20.
    5. Else, Tim & Choudhary, Sonal & Genovese, Andrea, 2022. "Uncovering sustainability storylines from dairy supply chain discourse," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 858-874.
    6. Jack, Lisa & Florez-Lopez, Raquel & Ramon-Jeronimo, Juan Manuel, 2018. "Accounting, performance measurement and fairness in UK fresh produce supply networks," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 17-30.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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).
    12. 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).
    13. Ulrich J Frey & Frauke Pirscher, 2018. "Willingness to pay and moral stance: The case of farm animal welfare in Germany," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-20, August.
    14. Stacy Sneeringer & Matt Clancy, 2020. "Incentivizing New Veterinary Pharmaceutical Products to Combat Antibiotic Resistance," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(4), pages 653-673, December.
    15. Fernando Mata & Maria Dos-Santos & Jack Cocksedge, 2023. "Attitudinal and Behavioural Differences towards Farm Animal Welfare among Consumers in the BRIC Countries and the USA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-18, February.
    16. Maples, Joshua G. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Peel, Derrell S., 2019. "Technology and evolving supply chains in the beef and pork industries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 346-354.
    17. Jan Tind Sørensen & Lars Schrader, 2019. "Labelling as a Tool for Improving Animal Welfare—The Pig Case," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-13, June.
    18. Thomas Bøker Lund & Sara Vincentzen Kondrup & Peter Sandøe, 2019. "A multidimensional measure of animal ethics orientation – Developed and applied to a representative sample of the Danish public," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-24, February.
    19. Lingling Xu & Xixi Yang & Linhai Wu & Xiujuan Chen & Lu Chen & Fu-Sheng Tsai, 2019. "Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Food with Information on Animal Welfare, Lean Meat Essence Detection, and Traceability," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-22, September.
    20. Lai, Yufeng & Minegishi, Kota & Boaitey, Albert K., 2020. "Social Desirability Bias in Farm Animal Welfare Preference Research," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304375, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0231338. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.