IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v49y2025i3p564-593.html

Evaluating the Economic Impacts of a Cage-Free Animal Welfare Policy in Southeast Asian and Indian Egg Production: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Ren Ryba

Abstract

Animal welfare is increasingly understood to be a key component of sustainable agricultural production. Southeast Asia and India are witnessing an emerging market for cage-free egg production. To evaluate the economic sustainability of cage-free policies in the region, it is critical to understand how this transition will affect farmers’ costs and revenues. In this article, we provide an overview of the available information that can inform evaluations of cage-free egg production in Southeast Asia and India. Cage-free egg producers around the world tend to experience higher costs, but these costs are offset by higher revenues. As demand for cage-free eggs is stimulated in Southeast Asia and India by retailer or government policies, we expect that producers will be capable of meeting this demand. In Asia specifically, the dominant cost component is poultry feed. We conclude that the economic viability of egg production in the region is likely to be driven by feed prices and associated government policies, rather than production system per se .

Suggested Citation

  • Ren Ryba, 2025. "Evaluating the Economic Impacts of a Cage-Free Animal Welfare Policy in Southeast Asian and Indian Egg Production: A Systematic Review," Evaluation Review, , vol. 49(3), pages 564-593, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:49:y:2025:i:3:p:564-593
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X241280681
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X241280681
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X241280681?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. Domingo, Sonny N. & Rosellon, Maureen Ane D. & Manejar, Arvie Joy A. & Lorenzo, Pauline Joy M., 2022. "Domestic Benchmarking of the Philippine Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry Industries," Discussion Papers DP 2022-19, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    2. Erin O’Donnell & Rebecca Nelson, 2020. "Shield science for robust decisions," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 3(9), pages 675-676, September.
    3. Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood, 2011. "Animal Welfare Economics," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 33(4), pages 463-483.
    4. Fang, Peixun & Benny, Dickson & Ovah, Raywin & Roberts, Arthur & Schmidt, Emily & Solomon, Elly, 2023. "Constraints facing rural poultry production in PNG: The role of input suppliers," IFPRI discussion papers 2193, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Lusk, Jayson L. & Thompson, Nathanael M. & Weimer, Shawna L., 2019. "The Cost and Market Impacts of Slow-Growth Broilers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 44(3), September.
    6. repec:plo:pone00:0146394 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Charnley, Susan & Carothers, Courtney & Satterfield, Terre & Levine, Arielle & Poe, Melissa R. & Norman, Karma & Donatuto, Jamie & Breslow, Sara Jo & Mascia, Michael B. & Levin, Phillip S. & Basurto, , 2017. "Evaluating the best available social science for natural resource management decision-making," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 80-88.
    8. Marius Gilbert & Giulia Conchedda & Thomas P Van Boeckel & Giuseppina Cinardi & Catherine Linard & Gaëlle Nicolas & Weerapong Thanapongtharm & Laura D'Aietti & William Wint & Scott H Newman & Timothy , 2015. "Income Disparities and the Global Distribution of Intensively Farmed Chicken and Pigs," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-14, July.
    9. Colin A. Carter & K. Aleks Schaefer & Daniel Scheitrum, 2021. "Piecemeal Farm Regulation and the U.S. Commerce Clause," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(3), pages 1141-1163, May.
    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. Ufer, Danielle J., 2025. "Animal Welfare and Treatment Label Claims in U.S. Table Eggs: Trends in Retail Premiums and Policy Impacts, 2008–18," Economic Research Report 349285, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Martin C. Parlasca & Matin Qaim, 2022. "Meat Consumption and Sustainability," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 17-41, October.
    3. Ferguson, Shon & Wallenbeck, Anna & Agenäs, Sigrid & Hansson, Helena, 2025. "The impact of animal welfare regulations on pork trade: evidence from European countries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Jayson Lusk, 2011. "The market for animal welfare," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(4), pages 561-575, December.
    6. Levan Elbakidze & Rodolfo M. Nayga Jr. & Hao Li & Chris McIntosh, 2014. "Value elicitation for multiple quantities of a quasi-public good using open ended choice experiments and uniform price auctions," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 253-265, March.
    7. Leight, Jessica & Awonon, Josué & Pedehombga, Abdoulaye & Ganaba, Rasmané & Gelli, Aulo, 2022. "How light is too light touch: The effect of a short training-based intervention on household poultry production in Burkina Faso," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Conner Mullally & Jayson L Lusk, 2018. "The Impact of Farm Animal Housing Restrictions on Egg Prices, Consumer Welfare, and Production in California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(3), pages 649-669.
    9. Läpple, Doris & Osawe, Osayanmon Wellington, 2022. "Animal Welfare, Altruism and Policy Support," 96th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2022, K U Leuven, Belgium 321212, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    10. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2013. "Dynamic hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments: Evidence from measuring the impact of corporate social responsibility on consumers demand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 53-61.
    11. Sérgio Luís Castro Júnior & Eduardo Eugênio Spers & Hermes Moretti Ribeiro Silva & Iran José Oliveira Silva, 2025. "Antecedents of the intention to buy animal welfare certified products: A study with brazilian consumers," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 22(2), pages 295-325, June.
    12. Disdier, Anne-Célia & Marette, Stéphan & Millet, Guy, 2013. "Are consumers concerned about palm oil? Evidence from a lab experiment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 180-189.
    13. Hestermann, Nina & Le Yaouanq, Yves & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "An economic model of the meat paradox," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    14. repec:ags:aaea22:335949 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Cordts, Anette & Nitzko, Sina & Spiller, Achim, . "Consumer Response to Negative Information on Meat Consumption in Germany," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 17(A), pages 1-24.
    16. McKendree, Melissa G.S. & Olynk Widmar, Nicole & Ortega, David L. & Foster, Kenneth A., 2013. "Consumer Preferences for Verified Pork-Rearing Practices in the Production of Ham Products," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-21.
    17. Tomislav Vukina & Danijel Nestic, 2020. "Paying for animal welfare? A hedonic analysis of egg prices," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(4), pages 613-630, October.
    18. Lee, Hanbin & Sexton, Richard J. & Sumner, Daniel A., 2021. "Economics of Mandates on Farm Practices: Lessons from California’s Proposition 12 Regulations on Pork Sold in California," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313920, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Birhanu Addisu Adamie & Helena Hansson, 2022. "Rationalising inefficiency in dairy production: evidence from an over-time approach," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(2), pages 433-471.
    20. Bruers, Stijn, 2025. "Determining an optimal animal welfare levy," EconStor Preprints 330515, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    21. repec:plo:pone00:0150424 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Jason Alexandra, 2021. "Navigating the Anthropocene’s rivers of risk—climatic change and science-policy dilemmas in Australia’s Murray-Darling Basin," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-21, March.

    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:sae:evarev:v:49:y:2025:i:3:p:564-593. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.