IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iefi11/122016.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

European Consumers’ Acceptance of Beef Safety-Improving Interventions at Different Stages of the Beef Chain: Primary Production, Slaughtering, Processing and Packaging

Author

Listed:
  • Van Wezemael, Lynn
  • Verbeke, Wim
  • Kugler, Jens O.
  • Scholderer, Joachim
  • Ueland, Oydis

Abstract

Following the occurrence of meat safety incidents during the nineties (Verbeke et al., 1999), considerable effort has been done to improve safety in the beef chain, both by policy and beef chain actors. Nowadays, a wide array of interventions to improve beef safety is applied at different stages through the beef chain. As a result the microbiological safety risk has been significantly reduced (Koohmaraie et al., 2005). Although the benefits for the sector and the end users seem to be rather obvious, the application of interventions and technologies that are used to enhance beef safety is not always communicated to consumers. Currently, communication related to technologies and processes used in beef production and processing from the sector to consumers is often driven by legal obligations (for instance traceability) or profit seeking (for instance organic labelling). Consequently, information

Suggested Citation

  • Van Wezemael, Lynn & Verbeke, Wim & Kugler, Jens O. & Scholderer, Joachim & Ueland, Oydis, 2011. "European Consumers’ Acceptance of Beef Safety-Improving Interventions at Different Stages of the Beef Chain: Primary Production, Slaughtering, Processing and Packaging," 2011 International European Forum, February 14-18, 2011, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 122016, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iefi11:122016
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.122016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/122016/files/21a-van%20Wezemeal%20et%20al..pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.122016?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. Jill J. McCluskey & Johan F.M. Swinnen, 2004. "Political Economy of the Media and Consumer Perceptions of Biotechnology," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1230-1237.
    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. Morgan, Kimberly L. & Larkin, Sherry L. & Adams, Charles M., 2011. "Empirical analysis of media versus environmental impacts on park attendance," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 852-859.
    2. Elena Briones Alonso & Lara Cockx & Jo Swinnen, 2017. "Culture and food security," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven 591898, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    3. Giraud, Georges & Lebecque, Annick & Amblard, Corinne & Bord, Cecile & Sulmont-Rosse, Claire & Lefur, Yves, 2008. "Does Knowledge-Based Economy Speaks to Consumers? A French Case Study with Respect to Food Products," 110th Seminar, February 18-22, 2008, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 49848, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Martin Browning & Lars Gårn Hansen & Sinne Smed, 2013. "Rational inattention or rational overreaction? Consumer reactions to health news," IFRO Working Paper 2013/14, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    5. Fabio Gaetano Santeramo & Emilia Lamonaca, 2022. "On the trade effects of bilateral SPS measures in developed and developing countries," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(10), pages 3109-3145, October.
    6. Pecchioli, Bruno & Moroz, David, 2023. "Do geographical appellations provide useful quality signals? The case of Scotch single malt whiskies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    7. Johan F.M. Swinnen & Thijs Vandemoortele, 2008. "The Political Economy of Nutrition and Health Standards in Food Markets," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 30(3), pages 460-468.
    8. Gauly, Sarah & Müller, Andreas & Spiller, Achim, 2017. "New methods of increasing transparency: Does viewing webcam pictures change peoples' opinions towards modern pig farming?," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 260769, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    9. Vigani, Mauro & Olper, Alessandro, 2014. "GM-free private standards, public regulation of GM products and mass media," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(6), pages 743-768, December.
    10. Ridley, William & Devadoss, Stephen, 2024. "Determinants of Policy Responses in the US–China Tit-for-Tat Trade War," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 0(Preprint), January.
    11. Stranieri, S. & Baldi, L., 2015. "Fresh-cut salad and shelf life date extension: a segmentation of Italian consumers," 2015 International European Forum (144th EAAE Seminar), February 9-13, 2015, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 206215, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    12. Stranieri, Stefanella & Banterle, Alessandro, 2015. "Consumer Interest in Meat Labelled Attributes: Who Cares?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 18(4), pages 1-18, November.
    13. Ying (Jessica) Cao & David R. Just & Calum Turvey & Brian Wansink, 2015. "Existing Food Habits and Recent Choices Lead to Disregard of Food Safety Announcements," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 63(4), pages 491-511, December.
    14. Balzarova, Michaela & Dyer, Celia & Falta, Michael, 2022. "Perceptions of blockchain readiness for fairtrade programmes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    15. Vigani, Mauro & Olper, Alessandro, 2013. "GMO standards, endogenous policy and the market for information," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 32-43.
    16. Ventura, Vera & Frisio, Dario G. & Ferrazzi, Giovanni, 2015. "How Scary! An analysis of visual communication concerning genetically modified organisms in Italy," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211921, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Johan F.M. Swinnen, 2010. "The Right Price of Food: Reflections on the Political Economy of Policy Analysis and Communication," LICOS Discussion Papers 25910, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    18. Martin Browning & Lars Gårn Hansen & Sinne Smed, 2019. "Heterogeneous Consumer Reactions to Health News," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 101(2), pages 579-599.
    19. Livat, Florine & Alston, Julian M. & Cardebat, Jean-Marie, 2019. "Do denominations of origin provide useful quality signals? The case of Bordeaux wines," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 518-532.
    20. Kent D. Messer & Marco Costanigro & Harry M. Kaiser, 2017. "Labeling Food Processes: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 407-427.

    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:ags:iefi11:122016. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ilbonde.html .

    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.