IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i14p3907-d249379.html

Animal Ethics and Eating Animals: Consumer Segmentation Based on Domain-Specific Values

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah Hölker

    (University of Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Marketing of Food and Agricultural Products, Platz der Göttinger Sieben 5, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Marie von Meyer-Höfer

    (University of Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Marketing of Food and Agricultural Products, Platz der Göttinger Sieben 5, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Achim Spiller

    (University of Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Marketing of Food and Agricultural Products, Platz der Göttinger Sieben 5, 37073 Göttingen, Germany)

Abstract

For a sustainable diet, especially with regard to animal welfare, human health, and environmental issues, a significant reduction in the consumption of animal source foods is essential. The most frequently reported motivations for a meat-reduced or meat-free diet are ethical concerns about animal welfare. This study realizes one of the first consumer segmentations in the context of the human–animal relationship based on domain-specific values; animal ethics. Such a consumer segmentation is relatively stable over time and encompasses the issue of the human–animal relationship in its entirety without limiting itself to a specific question. Based on a comprehensive consumer survey in Germany and by means of a three-step cluster analysis, five consumer segments characterized by different animal-ethical value profiles were defined. A subsequent analysis revealed a link between animal ethics and diet. As a key result, relationism as an animal-ethical position seems to play a key role in the choice of a sustainable diet. About a quarter of the population is characterized by a combination of animal welfare-oriented ethical positions with a clear rejection of relationism, i.e., they do not distinguish between farm animals and companion animals. This specific combination of animal-ethical values is associated with a significantly above-average proportion of flexitarians and vegetarians. Thus, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of existing animal-ethical values and their link to the choice of diet.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah Hölker & Marie von Meyer-Höfer & Achim Spiller, 2019. "Animal Ethics and Eating Animals: Consumer Segmentation Based on Domain-Specific Values," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-17, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:14:p:3907-:d:249379
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3907/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3907/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Ivar Krumpal, 2013. "Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 2025-2047, 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. Rachel Mazac & Kajsa Resare Sahlin & Iisa Hyypiä & Fanny Keränen & Mari Niva & Nora Berglund & Iryna Herzon, 2025. "Does “better” mean “less”? Sustainable meat consumption in the context of natural pasture-raised beef," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 42(3), pages 1637-1651, September.
    2. Eichner, Thomas & Runkel, Marco, 2025. "Animal welfare, moral consumers and the optimal regulation of animal food production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    3. Kristin Jürkenbeck & Achim Spiller, 2020. "Consumers’ Evaluation of Stockfree-Organic Agriculture—A Segmentation Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, May.
    4. David Kilian & Ulrich Hamm, 2021. "Perceptions of Vegan Food among Organic Food Consumers Following Different Diets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-17, August.
    5. Berkes, Jessica & Mergenthaler, Marcus, 2020. "Speed-Datings zwischen Menschen aus der Landwirtschaft und der Gesellschaft als neues Dialogformat: Eine kommunikationswissenschaftliche Untersuchung," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305601, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    6. Berkes, Jessica & Mergenthaler, Marcus, "undated". "Speed-Datings zwischen Menschen aus der Landwirtschaft und der Gesellschaft als neues Dialogformat: Eine kommunikationswissenschaftliche Untersuchung," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305601, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    7. Ivica Faletar & Marija Cerjak, 2022. "Perception of Cultured Meat as a Basis for Market Segmentation: Empirical Findings from Croatian Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-16, June.
    8. Derstappen, Rebecca & Thies, Annika Johanna, . "The South Korean Perspective on German Animal Welfare Certified Pork," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 73(1).
    9. Li Lin-Schilstra & Arnout R. H. Fischer, 2020. "Consumer Moral Dilemma in the Choice of Animal-Friendly Meat Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-19, June.
    10. Michał Gazdecki & Elżbieta Goryńska-Goldmann & Marietta Kiss & Zoltán Szakály, 2021. "Segmentation of Food Consumers Based on Their Sustainable Attitude," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-28, May.
    11. Maria Hatjiathanassiadou & Sthephany Rayanne Gomes de Souza & Josimara Pereira Nogueira & Luciana de Medeiros Oliveira & Virgílio José Strasburg & Priscilla Moura Rolim & Larissa Mont’Alverne Jucá Sea, 2019. "Environmental Impacts of University Restaurant Menus: A Case Study in Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-15, September.

    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. Gauly, Sarah & Busch, Gesa & Spiller, Achim & Enneking, Ulrich & Kunde, Susanne & von Meyer-Höfer, Marie, . "How do People look at Pictures of Pigs? Analyzing Fixation Duration Depending on Pig Expression and Barn Type using Eye-Tracking," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(4).
    2. Aycinena, Diego & Bogliacino, Francesco & Kimbrough, Erik O., 2024. "Measuring norms: Assessing the threat of social desirability bias to the Bicchieri and Xiao elicitation method," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 225-239.
    3. Michael T Gastner & Károly Takács & Máté Gulyás & Zsuzsanna Szvetelszky & Beáta Oborny, 2019. "The impact of hypocrisy on opinion formation: A dynamic model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-21, June.
    4. Babette Bühler & Katja Möhring & Andreas P. Weiland, 2022. "Assessing dissimilarity of employment history information from survey and administrative data using sequence analysis techniques," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(6), pages 4747-4774, December.
    5. Sjöstedt, Martin & Sundström, Aksel & Jagers, Sverker C. & Ntuli, Herbert, 2022. "Governance through community policing: What makes citizens report poaching of wildlife to state officials?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    6. Tricia Koroknay†Palicz & Joao Montalvao, 2020. "Sex, Lies, and Surveys: The Role of Interviewer Characteristics," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(4), pages 3313-3324.
    7. Shinichi Kitano, 2021. "Estimation of Determinants of Farmland Abandonment and Its Data Problems," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    8. Burgstaller, Lilith & Feld, Lars P. & Pfeil, Katharina, 2022. "Working in the shadow: Survey techniques for measuring and explaining undeclared work," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 661-671.
    9. Seres, Gyula & Balleyer, Anna Helen & Cerutti, Nicola & Danilov, Anastasia & Friedrichsen, Jana & Liu, Yiming & Süer, Müge, 2021. "Face masks increase compliance with physical distancing recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 7(2), pages 139-158.
    10. Yuning Wu & Ivan Y. Sun & Rong Hu, 2021. "Cooperation with Police in China: Surveillance Cameras, Neighborhood Efficacy and Policing," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(1), pages 433-453, January.
    11. Egon Dejonckheere & Brock Bastian, 2021. "Perceiving Social Pressure not to Feel Negative is Linked to a More Negative Self-concept," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 667-679, February.
    12. Chau-kiu Cheung & Cindy Xinshan Jia & Jieyi Hu, 2024. "Life Meaningfulness, Law Abidance, and Social Risk Among Hong Kong Youth," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 19(2), pages 709-726, April.
    13. Martin Korndörfer & Boris Egloff & Stefan C. Schmukle, 2015. "A Large Scale Test of the Effect of Social Class on Prosocial Behavior," Working Papers 1601, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    14. Navarro Ana Inés & Camusso Jorge & Varvello Juan Cruz, 2025. "Commitment to sustainability or marketing strategy to increase profits? A preliminary analysis of startup practices in Argentina's AgTech sector," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4824, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    15. Filippo Corsini & Natalia Marzia Gusmerotti & Edoardo Bartoletti & Francesco Testa & Andrea Appolloni & Fabio Iraldo, 2024. "Addressing Plastic Concern: Behavioral Insights into Recycled Plastic Products and Packaging in a Circular Economy," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 1961-1981, September.
    16. Michela Accerenzi & Pablo Brañas-Garza & Diego Jorrat, 2022. "Parents’ knowledge and predictions about the age of menarche: Experimental evidence from Honduras," Working Papers 132, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    17. Guo, Shiau-Ling, 2023. "The governance implication of the geographic concentration of franchise activities for franchise relationships," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    18. Rebecca Walcott & Isabelle Cohen & Denise Ferris, 2024. "When Who Matters: Interviewer Effects and Survey Modality," Evaluation Review, , vol. 48(6), pages 1024-1049, December.
    19. McCoy, Selina & Carroll, Eamonn & Ye, Keyu, 2024. "Embracing Diversity in all its Forms : The Voluntary Secondary Sector in Irish Education," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number RS182.
    20. Giorgio Piccitto & Hans M. A. Schadee & Gabriele Ballarino, 2023. "Job Satisfaction and Gender in Italy: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 775-793, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:14:p:3907-:d:249379. 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.