IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/jhtiwp/184.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An empirical analysis of the export potential of pork produced under higher animal welfare standards

Author

Listed:
  • Derstappen, Rebecca
  • Christoph-Schulz, Inken Birte
  • Banse, Martin

Abstract

Derzeit werden in Deutschland die Nutztierhaltung und insbesondere die Schweinehaltung kontrovers diskutiert. In diesem Zusammenhang, werden die Forderungen nach höheren Tierwohlstandards lauter. Allerdings führen höhere Tierwohlstandards zu höheren Produktionskosten. Vor diesem Hintergrund sind deutsche Landwirte insbesondere über die Zukunft der deutschen Nutztierhaltung besorgt, da sie in ihren Augen keine Planungssicherheit haben. Da Deutschland ein Nettoexporteur von Schweinefleisch ist, stellt sich im Rahmen der Tierwohldebatte die Frage, ob es ein Exportpotential für deutsches Schweinefleisch gibt, welches unter höheren Tierwohlstandards produziert wird. Um diese Frage beantworten zu können, wurden innerhalb dieser Studie vier potenzielle Exportmärkte (Polen, Italien, Japan und Südkorea) genauer betrachtet. Dabei wurden zwei Erhebungsmethoden verwendet: Zunächst wurde eine Marktanalyse durchgeführt, um wichtige Marktdaten zu erheben und genauere Kenntnisse über die Schweinefleischmärkte vor Ort zu erhalten. Danach konnten in den Untersuchungsländern Experteninterviews durchgeführt werden, um detaillierte Informationen zu sammeln. Die Experteninterviews wurden im Anschluss mit Hilfe einer Inhaltsanalyse ausgewertet. Laut der Experten spielt das Thema Tierwohl in den verschiedenen Ländern eine unterschiedliche Rolle. Dabei können insbesondere große Unterschiede zwischen den europäischen und asiatischen Untersuchungsländern festgestellt werden. Neben dem Thema Tierwohl müssen weitere Kriterien berücksichtigt werden, die beim Kauf von Schweinefleisch eine beeinflussende Wirkung haben. Dazu zählen unter anderem: die Qualität (und dabei insbesondere die Fleischqualität einschließlich Fleischfarbe, Wasserkapazität des Fleisches oder Frische), der Geschmack, der Preis und das Herkunftsland. Daraus lässt sich schlussfolgern, dass das mögliche Potential für deutsches Tierwohlfleisch je Zielmarkt variiert. Dabei müssen verschiedene Aspekte und Marktdaten berücksichtigt werden, um den Mechanismus und die Spezifität der jeweiligen Zielmärkte zu verstehen. Somit sind weitere Erhebungsschritte notwendig, um eine genauere Aussage darüber machen zu können ob es ein Exportpotential für deutsches Schweinefleisch, welches unter höheren Tierwohlstandards produziert wird, gibt.

Suggested Citation

  • Derstappen, Rebecca & Christoph-Schulz, Inken Birte & Banse, Martin, 2021. "An empirical analysis of the export potential of pork produced under higher animal welfare standards," Thünen Working Papers 184, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:jhtiwp:184
    DOI: 10.3220/WP1638366213000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/247796/1/1782081860.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3220/WP1638366213000?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. Brümmer, Nanke & Petersen, Wiebke & Christoph-Schulz, Inken, 2018. "Consumer Acceptance of Dual-Purpose Chickens A Mixed Methods Approach," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 67(4), December.
    2. Cherevko, Georgij & Dunn, James W. & Gebska, Monika & Jarocka, Barbara & Beldycka-Borawska, Aneta & Borawski, Piotr & Kovaliv, Volodymyr & Kovaliv, Iryna & Alokhina, Natalia & Malak-Rawlikowska, Agata, 2017. "Changes in the Live Pig Market in Different Countries," Monographs: Applied Economics, AgEcon Search, number 263232, July.
    3. Kazuki Onji, 2009. "A tale of pork prices : evasion and attenuation of a Japanese tariff," Trade Working Papers 22883, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    4. Shunsuke Managi & Yasutaka Yamamoto & Hiroyuki Iwamoto & Kiyotaka Masuda, 2008. "Valuing the influence of underlying attitudes and the demand for organic milk in Japan," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 39(3), pages 339-348, November.
    5. Sebastian Stępień & Jan Polcyn, 2016. "Pig Meat Market In Selected Eu Countries Under The Conditions Of Economic Integration: A Comparative Analysis Of Old And New Member States," Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, Faculty of Sciences, "1 Decembrie 1918" University, Alba Iulia, vol. 2(18), pages 1-14.
    6. Deblitz, Claus & Efken, Josef & Banse, Martin & Isermeyer, Folkhard & Rohlmann, Christa & Tergast, Hauke & Thobe, Petra & Verhaagh, Mandes, 2021. "Politikfolgenabschätzung zu den Empfehlungen des Kompetenznetzwerks Nutztierhaltung," Thünen Working Papers 173, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    7. Spiller, A. & Kayser, M. & Böhm, J., 2012. "Unternehmerische Landwirtschaft zwischen Marktanforderungen und gesellschaftlichen Erwartungen in Deutschland...aus Sicht der Forschung," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 47, March.
    8. Kazuki Onji, 2009. "A Tale of Pork Prices: Evasion and Attenuation of a Japanese Tariff," Asia Pacific Economic Papers 382, Australia-Japan Research Centre, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    9. Deblitz, Claus & Efken, Josef & Banse, Martin & Isermeyer, Folkhard & Rohlmann, Christa & Tergast, Hauke & Thobe, Petra & Verhaagh, Mandes, 2021. "Politikfolgenabschätzung zu den Empfehlungen des Kompetenznetzwerks Nutztierhaltung," Thünen Working Paper 310985, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    10. Marie‐Hélène Felt & Jean‐Philippe Gervais & Bruno Larue, 2011. "Market power and import bans: the case of Japanese pork imports," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 47-61, Winter.
    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. Derstappen, Rebecca & Christoph-Schulz, Inken & Banse, Martin, 2022. "An empirical analysis of the export potential of pork produced under higher animal welfare standards," Thünen Working Paper 319352, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    2. Kentaka Aruga, 2017. "Consumer responses to food produced near the Fukushima nuclear plant," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 19(4), pages 677-690, October.
    3. Akinwehinmi, Oluwagbenga & Ogundari, Kolawole & Amos, Taiwo, 2021. "Consumers' Food Control Risk Perception and Preference for Government-Controlled Safety Certification in Emerging Food Markets," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315312, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Nakajima, Toru, 2012. "Estimating Time Variation of Market Power: Case of U.S. Soybean Exports," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124775, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Johanna Lena Dahlhausen & Cam Rungie & Jutta Roosen, 2018. "Value of labeling credence attributes—common structures and individual preferences," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 741-751, November.
    6. Perekhozhuk, Oleksandr & Glauben, Thomas, 2017. "Russian food and agricultural import ban: The impact on the domestic market for cattle, pork and poultry," IAMO Discussion Papers 269555, Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    7. Tong Wang & David A. Hennessy & Seong C. Park, 2016. "Demand Side Change, Rurality, and Gender in the United States Veterinarian Market, 1990–2010," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 236-253, April.
    8. Taglioni, Chiara & Cavicchi, Alessio & Torquati, Biancamaria & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2011. "Influence of Brand Equity on Milk Choice: A Choice Experiment Survey," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 2(3), pages 1-21, December.
    9. Evans, Edwardv A. & Ballen, Fredy H., 2015. "Competitive Behavior in the U.S. Green Skin Avocado Market," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 46(3), pages 1-12, November.
    10. Tong Wang & David A. Hennessy, 2015. "Strategic Interactions Among Private and Public Efforts When Preventing and Stamping Out a Highly Infectious Animal Disease," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(2), pages 435-451.
    11. Gafarova, Gulmira & Perekhozhuk, Oleksandr & Glauben, Thomas, 2015. "An econometric analysis of market power in Azerbaijani wheat market: Evidence from Kazakhstan and Russia," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211642, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Dimitrios Panagiotou & Athanassios Stavrakoudis, 2020. "A Stochastic Frontier Analysis Approach for Estimating Market Power in the Major US Meat Export Markets," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 569-586, September.
    13. Schüler, Stefan & Noack, Eva Maria, 2019. "Does the CAP reflect the population's concerns about agricultural landscapes? A qualitative study in Lower Saxony, Germany," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 240-255.
    14. Spiller, Achim & von Meyer-Höfer, Marie & Sonntag, Winnie, 2016. "Gibt es eine Zukunft für die moderne konventionelle Tierhaltung in Nordwesteuropa?," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 260780, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    15. Rovers, Anja & Mergenthaler, Marcus & Wildraut, Christiane & Sonntag, Winnie Isabel & von Meyer-Höfer, Marie & Christoph-Schulz, Inken, 2017. "Roundtable on hotspots in livestock production – A mixed-methods-approach for a better understanding of farmers’ and consumers’ views," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 261286, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Inken Christoph-Schulz & Anja-Karolina Rovers, 2020. "German Citizens’ Perception of Fattening Pig Husbandry—Evidence from a Mixed Methods Approach," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
    17. David A. Hennessy, 2013. "Biosecurity Externalities and Indemnities for Infectious Animal Diseases," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 13-wp539, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    18. Yuji Hara & Yuki Sampei & Hirotaka Tanaka, 2018. "The Minabe-Tanabe Ume System: Linkage of Landscape Units by Locals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, April.
    19. Gulmira Gafarova & Oleksandr Perekhozhuk & Thomas Glauben, 2023. "The Oligopolistic Behavior of Kazakh and Russian Wheat Exporters in the South Caucasus: Evidence from a Residual Demand Elasticity Analysis," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1-32, June.
    20. Lajos Baráth & Imre Fertő & Jakub Staniszewski, 2021. "Technological Heterogeneity in Pig Farming: A Metafrontier Approach—Perspectives from Hungary and Poland," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-13, October.

    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:zbw:jhtiwp:184. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vtigvde.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.