IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/gjagec/96737.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Faktoren für die Zufriedenheit mit Qualitätssystemen aus Sicht der Primärerzeuger

Author

Listed:
  • Enneking, Ulrich
  • Obersojer, Thomas
  • Kratzmair, Marion

Abstract

In order to ensure and to improve quality in the agro-food sector quality systems have to undergo a permanent change: simple end-of-the-pipe monitoring is therefore being replaced with management oriented concepts. Farmers are also increasingly requested to implement quality systems. This paper gives an overview of quality regimes in the agro-food sector and compares three systems in the domains of pork production, potato growing and the cultivation of hop. 315 Bavarian farmers were interviewed in order to identify factors which may influence the satisfaction with quality systems. Differences between the three quality regimes were moderate with respect to the overall satisfaction. Hop growers judged their system to improve production efficiency while the others did not to this extent. Socio-demographic factors do not have any significant impact on farmers' satisfaction with the quality systems. Key factors are gains in image, in sales and in production efficiency. The results of this study helps for a successful development of the plenty quality systems actually offered.

Suggested Citation

  • Enneking, Ulrich & Obersojer, Thomas & Kratzmair, Marion, 2007. "Faktoren für die Zufriedenheit mit Qualitätssystemen aus Sicht der Primärerzeuger," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 56(02), pages 1-13.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:gjagec:96737
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.96737
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/96737/files/3_Enneking.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.96737?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. Ulrich Enneking, 2004. "Willingness-to-pay for safety improvements in the German meat sector: the case of the Q&S label," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 31(2), pages 205-223, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Padilla Bravo, Carlos Antonio & Spiller, Achim & Villalobos, Pablo, 2012. "Are Organic Growers Satisfied with the Certification System? A Causal Analysis of Farmers’ Perceptions in Chile," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 15(4), pages 1-22, November.

    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. Bond, Craig A. & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Bond, Jennifer Keeling, 2008. "What to Choose? The Value of Label Claims to Fresh Produce Consumers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-26.
    2. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny, 2011. "Demand for improved food safety and quality: a cross-regional comparison," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108791, Agricultural Economics Society.
    3. Illichmann, R. & Abdulai, A., 2014. "Analysis of Consumer Preferences and Wilingness-To-Pay for Organic Food Products in Germany," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 49, March.
    4. Goddard, Ellen W. & Drescher, Larissa S. & Fernando, Jeewani, 2012. "The potential impact of the Health Check™ on diet quality of food away from home purchases," 2012 AAEA/EAAE Food Environment Symposium 123523, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Oluwakemi Adeola Obayelu & Janet Abiola Agbohin & Omobolaji Olubukunmi Obisesan, 2022. "Consumers’ Preference For Local Rice Brands In Ibadan Metropolis, Nigeria," Food and Agri Economics Review (FAER), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 2(1), pages 12-17, January.
    6. Pouta, Eija & Forsman-Hugg, Sari & Heikkila, Jaakko & Isoniemi, Merja & Makela, Johanna & Paananen, Jaana, 2008. "Consumers' choice of broiler meat in Finland: the effects of country of origin and production methods," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43543, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    8. Theuvsen, Ludwig & Essmann, Sandra & Brand-Sassen, Henning, 2005. "Livestock Husbandry between Ethics and Economics: Finding a Feasible Way Out by Target Costing?," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24598, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Alfnes, Frode & Steine, Gro, 2005. "None-of-These Bias in Stated Choice Experiments," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24761, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Kaleb S. Jada & Mequanint B. Melesse & Marrit Berg, 2023. "The effects of safety certification and nutrition messaging on the demand for nutritionally enhanced food in urban Ethiopia," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 15(2), pages 395-409, April.
    11. Agnes Emberger‐Klein & Marina Zapilko & Klaus Menrad, 2016. "Consumers’ Preference Heterogeneity for GM and Organic Food Products in Germany," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 203-221, April.
    12. Lilavanichakul, Apichaya & Boecker, Andreas, 2013. "Consumer Acceptance of a New Traceability Technology: A Discrete Choice Application to Ontario Ginseng," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 16(4), pages 1-26, November.
    13. Birol, Ekin & Koundouri, Phoebe & Kountoyris, Yiannis, 2008. "Applications of the Choice Experiment Method in Europe: A Review," MPRA Paper 41903, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Federica Di Marcantonio & Luisa Menapace & Jesus Barreiro-Hurle & Pavel Ciaian & François J. Dessart & Liesbeth Colen, 2020. "Empirical testing of the impact on consumer choice resulting from differences in the composition of seemingly identical branded products," JRC Research Reports JRC119484, Joint Research Centre.
    15. Linhai Wu & Xiaolin Liu & Dian Zhu & Hongsha Wang & Shuxian Wang & Lingling Xu, 2015. "Simulation of Market Demand for Traceable Pork with Different Levels of Safety Information: A Case Study in Chinese Consumers," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 63(4), pages 513-537, December.
    16. Carolina Liljenstolpe, 2008. "Evaluating animal welfare with choice experiments: an application to Swedish pig production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(1), pages 67-84.
    17. Birol, Ekin & Roy, Devesh & Torero, Maximo, 2010. "How safe is my food?: Assessing the effect of information and credible certification on consumer demand for food safety in developing countries," IFPRI discussion papers 1029, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    18. Birol, Ekin & Kontoleon, Andreas & Smale, Melinda, 2005. "Using A Choice Experiment To Estimate The Demand Of Hungarian Farmers For Food Security And Agrobiodiversity During Economic Transition," Environmental Economy and Policy Research Discussion Papers 31937, University of Cambridge, Department of Land Economy.
    19. Heise, Heinke & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2016. "What do consumers think about farm animal welfare in modern agriculture? Attitudes and shopping behaviour," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 20(3), November.
    20. Wang, Shuxian & Wu, Linhai & Zhu, Dian & Wang, Hongsha & Xu, Lingling, 2014. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food attributes: The case of pork," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 165639, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness;

    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:ags:gjagec:96737. 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/iahubde.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.