IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i10p4093-d359275.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer Assessment of Sustainability Traits in Meat Production. A Choice Experiment Study in Spain

Author

Listed:
  • Ali Eldesouky

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Agriculture, Zagazig University, Sharkia 44511, Egypt
    Research Institute of Agricultural Resources (INURA), University of Extremadura, 06006 Extremadura, Spain)

  • Francisco J. Mesias

    (Research Institute of Agricultural Resources (INURA), University of Extremadura, 06006 Extremadura, Spain)

  • Miguel Escribano

    (Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Extremadura, 10003 Extremadura, Spain)

Abstract

Consumers are increasingly concerned about the way their food is produced. This is particularly relevant in the case of meat, due to the impacts that its production methods can have on greenhouse gas emissions and its role in climate change. In relation to this issue, the purpose of our research is to obtain more information on the consumer decision-making process for beef, in order to determine the relative importance of sustainability claims and traditional attributes, and identify consumer profiles with similar perceptions and intentions. A choice experiment was used to assess the influence of these attributes on consumers’ purchasing decisions. The results reveal that the best purchase choice for the consumer would be organic beef, produced in Spain, with an animal welfare label and eco-labelled. Later on, a cluster analysis was carried out using consumer beliefs and attitudes towards meat consumption as inputs, together with purchasing behaviour variables. A solution was obtained with three well-defined consumer segments showing different preference patterns: Cluster 1 (Male millennials indifferent towards environment or sustainability), Cluster 2 (Sustainability-concerned mature women) and Cluster 3 (Middle-aged meat eaters with established families). The results of this study are relevant to develop more appropriate strategies that may be adapted to the behaviour and expectations of eco-friendly food consumers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ali Eldesouky & Francisco J. Mesias & Miguel Escribano, 2020. "Consumer Assessment of Sustainability Traits in Meat Production. A Choice Experiment Study in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-16, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:10:p:4093-:d:359275
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/10/4093/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/10/4093/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ingo Balderjahn & Anja Buerke & Manfred Kirchgeorg & Mathias Peyer & Barbara Seegebarth & Klaus-Peter Wiedmann, 2013. "Consciousness for sustainable consumption: scale development and new insights in the economic dimension of consumers’ sustainability," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(4), pages 181-192, December.
    2. Dobrenova, Fanny V. & Grabner-Kräuter, Sonja & Terlutter, Ralf, 2015. "Country-of-origin (COO) effects in the promotion of functional ingredients and functional foods," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 314-321.
    3. Balcombe, Kelvin & Bradley, Dylan & Fraser, Iain & Hussein, Mohamud, 2016. "Consumer preferences regarding country of origin for multiple meat products," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 49-62.
    4. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    5. Tom Joerß & Payam Akbar & Robert Mai & Stefan Hoffmann, 2017. "Conceptualizing sustainability from a consumer perspective [Konzeptionalisierung der Nachhaltigkeit aus der Konsumentensicht]," NachhaltigkeitsManagementForum | Sustainability Management Forum, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 15-23, June.
    6. Riccardo Scarpa & Raffaele Zanoli & Viola Bruschi & Simona Naspetti, 2013. "Inferred and Stated Attribute Non-attendance in Food Choice Experiments," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(1), pages 165-180.
    7. Giuseppe Nocella & Lionel Hubbard & Riccardo Scarpa, 2010. "Farm Animal Welfare, Consumer Willingness to Pay, and Trust: Results of a Cross-National Survey," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 275-297.
    8. Tonsor, Glynn T. & Olynk, Nicole J. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2009. "Consumer Preferences for Animal Welfare Attributes: The Case of Gestation Crates," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-17, December.
    9. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    10. Nocella, Giuseppe & Kennedy, Orla, 2012. "Food health claims – What consumers understand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 571-580.
    11. Julia Bronnmann & Frank Asche, 2016. "The Value of Product Attributes, Brands and Private Labels: An Analysis of Frozen Seafood in Germany," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(1), pages 231-244, February.
    12. Carl Johan Lagerkvist & Sebastian Hess, 2011. "A meta-analysis of consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(1), pages 55-78, March.
    13. Sungchul Choi & Alex Ng, 2011. "Environmental and Economic Dimensions of Sustainability and Price Effects on Consumer Responses," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 269-282, December.
    14. Wuepper, David & Clemm, Alexandra & Wree, Philipp, 2019. "The preference for sustainable coffee and a new approach for dealing with hypothetical bias," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 475-486.
    15. Hamzaoui-Essoussi, Leila & Sirieix, Lucie & Zahaf, Mehdi, 2013. "Trust orientations in the organic food distribution channels: A comparative study of the Canadian and French markets," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 292-301.
    16. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. "Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    17. Van Loo, Ellen J. & Caputo, Vincenzina & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Verbeke, Wim, 2014. "Consumers’ valuation of sustainability labels on meat," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 137-150.
    18. Grunert, Klaus G. & Hieke, Sophie & Wills, Josephine, 2014. "Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 177-189.
    19. 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.
    20. Schumacher, Ingmar, 2010. "Ecolabeling, consumers' preferences and taxation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2202-2212, September.
    21. Tully, Stephanie M. & Winer, Russell S., 2014. "The Role of the Beneficiary in Willingness to Pay for Socially Responsible Products: A Meta-analysis," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 255-274.
    22. Zander, Katrin, 2018. "Verbraucherakzeptanz des Regionalfensters," Thünen Working Papers 90, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    23. Sama, Celia & Crespo-Cebada, Eva & Díaz-Caro, Carlos & Escribano, Miguel & Mesías, Francisco J., 2018. "Consumer Preferences for Foodstuffs Produced in a Socio-environmentally Responsible Manner: A Threat to Fair Trade Producers?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 290-296.
    24. David Hensher & John Rose & William Greene, 2005. "The implications on willingness to pay of respondents ignoring specific attributes," Transportation, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 203-222, May.
    25. Jaffry, Shabbar & Pickering, Helen & Ghulam, Yaseen & Whitmarsh, David & Wattage, Prem, 2004. "Consumer choices for quality and sustainability labelled seafood products in the UK," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 215-228, June.
    26. Zander, Katrin, 2018. "Verbraucherakzeptanz des Regionalfensters," Thünen Working Paper 270623, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    27. Azucena Gracia & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & Belinda López- Galán, 2014. "Are Local and Organic Claims Complements or Substitutes? A Consumer Preferences Study for Eggs," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(1), pages 49-67, January.
    28. 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.
    29. Kar H. Lim & Wuyang Hu & Leigh J. Maynard & Ellen Goddard, 2014. "A Taste for Safer Beef? How Much Does Consumers’ Perceived Risk Influence Willingness to Pay for Country‐of‐Origin Labeled Beef," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 17-30, January.
    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. Faical Akaichi & Klaus Glenk & Cesar Revoredo‐Giha, 2022. "Bundling food labels: What role could the labels “Organic,” “Local” and “Low Fat” play in fostering the demand for animal‐friendly meat," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 349-370, April.
    2. Claudia Valli & Małgorzata Maraj & Anna Prokop-Dorner & Chrysoula Kaloteraki & Corinna Steiner & Montserrat Rabassa & Ivan Solà & Joanna Zajac & Bradley C. Johnston & Gordon H. Guyatt & Malgorzata M. , 2022. "People’s Values and Preferences about Meat Consumption in View of the Potential Environmental Impacts of Meat: A Mixed-methods Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-25, December.
    3. Meiling Yin & Hanna Choi & Eun-Ju Lee, 2022. "Can Climate Change Awaken Ecological Consciousness? A Neuroethical Approach to Green Consumption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-17, November.
    4. Lin Bai & Zhanguo Zhu & Tong Zhang, 2021. "How to Improve Food Quality in the Domestic Market: The Role of “Same Line Same Standard Same Quality”—Evidence from a Consumer Choice Experiment in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-16, May.
    5. Ching-Hua Yeh & Monika Hartmann, 2021. "To Purchase or Not to Purchase? Drivers of Consumers’ Preferences for Animal Welfare in Their Meat Choice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-25, August.
    6. Tommaso Fantechi & Caterina Contini & Gabriele Scozzafava & Leonardo Casini, 2022. "Consumer preferences for wild game meat: evidence from a hybrid choice model on wild boar meat in Italy," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, December.

    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. Faical Akaichi & Klaus Glenk & Cesar Revoredo‐Giha, 2022. "Bundling food labels: What role could the labels “Organic,” “Local” and “Low Fat” play in fostering the demand for animal‐friendly meat," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 349-370, April.
    2. Shijiu Yin & Shanshan Lv & Yusheng Chen & Linhai Wu & Mo Chen & Jiang Yan, 2018. "Consumer preference for infant milk‐based formula with select food safety information attributes: Evidence from a choice experiment in China," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 66(4), pages 557-569, December.
    3. Bronnmann, Julia & Asche, Frank, 2017. "Sustainable Seafood From Aquaculture and Wild Fisheries: Insights From a Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 113-119.
    4. Yang, Yang & Hobbs, Jill E. & Natcher, David C., 2020. "Assessing consumer willingness to pay for Arctic food products," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    5. Lin Bai & Zhanguo Zhu & Tong Zhang, 2021. "How to Improve Food Quality in the Domestic Market: The Role of “Same Line Same Standard Same Quality”—Evidence from a Consumer Choice Experiment in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-16, May.
    6. Peschel, Anne & Grebitus, Carola & Steiner, Bodo & Veeman, Michele, 2016. "How does consumer knowledge affect environmentally sustainable choices? Evidence from a cross-country latent class analysis of food labels," MPRA Paper 69864, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    8. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities, China," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212609, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Olynk Widmar, Nicole J. & Ortega, David L., 2014. "Comparing Consumer Preferences for Livestock Production Process Attributes Across Products, Species, and Modeling Methods," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 46(3), pages 1-17, August.
    10. Ward, Patrick S. & Ortega, David L. & Spielman, David J. & Singh, Vartika, 2013. "Farmer preferences for drought tolerance in hybrid versus inbred rice: Evidence from Bihar, India:," IFPRI discussion papers 1307, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    11. Sigurdsson, Valdimar & Larsen, Nils Magne & Pálsdóttir, Rakel Gyða & Folwarczny, Michal & Menon, R.G. Vishnu & Fagerstrøm, Asle, 2022. "Increasing the effectiveness of ecological food signaling: Comparing sustainability tags with eco-labels," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1099-1110.
    12. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities, China," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211884, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Tiziano Tempesta & Daniel Vecchiato & Federico Nassivera & Maria Bugatti & Biancamaria Torquati, 2019. "Consumers Demand for Social Farming Products: An Analysis with Discrete Choice Experiments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-17, November.
    14. Domenico Carlucci & Biagia De Devitiis & Gianluca Nardone & Fabio Gaetano Santeramo, 2017. "Certification Labels Versus Convenience Formats: What Drives the Market in Aquaculture Products?," Marine Resource Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(3), pages 295-310.
    15. 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.
    16. Erpeng Wang & Zhifeng Gao, 2017. "Chinese Consumer Quality Perception and Preference of Traditional Sustainable Rice Produced by the Integrated Rice–Fish System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-13, December.
    17. Alexander J. Stein & Marcelo Lima, 2022. "Sustainable food labelling: considerations for policy-makers," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 103(2), pages 143-160, June.
    18. Yuan, Rao & Asioli, Daniele & Jin, Shaosheng & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2021. "Consumers’ Valuation for Cultured Chicken Meat: A Multi-city Choice Experiment in China," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313957, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Caputo, Vincenzina & Scarpa, Riccardo & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Ortega, David L., 2018. "Are preferences for food quality attributes really normally distributed? An analysis using flexible mixing distributions," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 10-27.
    20. Apostolidis, Chrysostomos & McLeay, Fraser, 2016. "Should we stop meating like this? Reducing meat consumption through substitution," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 74-89.

    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:12:y:2020:i:10:p:4093-:d:359275. 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.