IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae05/24598.html

Livestock Husbandry between Ethics and Economics: Finding a Feasible Way Out by Target Costing?

Author

Listed:
  • Theuvsen, Ludwig
  • Essmann, Sandra
  • Brand-Sassen, Henning

Abstract

Livestock husbandry is a major line of conflict in many industrialized countries. Farmers are caught in a dilemma between ethical considerations imposed by, for instance, nongovernmental organizations and the wider public on the one hand and competitive and economic pressures on the other. In this paper we use a target-costing approach to determine whether it is possible to implement more animal-friendly husbandry conditions for turkey fattening in Germany without sacrificing competitiveness. Empirical results show that, at first glance, the willingness on the part of consumers to pay for more animal welfare exceeds the costs to farmers of more animal-friendly husbandry systems. A critical discussion reveals that this result may be flawed by methodological problems for which no solutions have yet been found.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae05:24598
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.24598
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/24598/files/cp05th02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.24598?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. Jayson L. Lusk & Darren Hudson, 2004. "Willingness-to-Pay Estimates and Their Relevance to Agribusiness Decision Making," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 152-169.
    2. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Dekker, Henri & Smidt, Peter, 2003. "A survey of the adoption and use of target costing in Dutch firms," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 293-305, June.
    5. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Lagerkvist, Carl Johan, 2004. "Consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare - transportation of farm animals to slaughter versus the use of mobile abattoirs," Working Papers in Economics 149, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    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. Grethe, Harald, 2007. "High animal welfare standards in the EU and international trade - How to prevent potential `low animal welfare havens'?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 315-333, June.
    2. Makdisi, Fadi & Marggraf, Rainer, 2011. "Consumer Willingness-To-Pay For Farm Animal Welfare In Germany - The Case Of Broiler," 51st Annual Conference, Halle, Germany, September 28-30, 2011 115359, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    3. Boecker, Andreas & Nocella, Giuseppe & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2006. "Do Consumers Want Public or Private Bodies to Monitor Animal Friendly Production and Marketing Schemes? And Does Trust Matter?," 99th Seminar, February 8-10, 2006, Bonn, Germany 7772, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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. Liljenstolpe, Carolina, 2005. "Valuing Animal Welfare with Choice Experiments: An Application to Swedish Pig Production," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24503, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. 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.
    3. Ubilava, David & Foster, Kenneth, 2009. "Quality certification vs. product traceability: Consumer preferences for informational attributes of pork in Georgia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 305-310, June.
    4. Ubilava, David & Foster, Kenneth A., 2007. "Targeting Consumers by Store - The Basis of Increased Sales with Less Advertising," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34909, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Oerlemans, Leon A.G. & Chan, Kai-Ying & Volschenk, Jako, 2016. "Willingness to pay for green electricity: A review of the contingent valuation literature and its sources of error," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 875-885.
    6. Minah H. Jung & Leif D. Nelson & Uri Gneezy & Ayelet Gneezy, 2017. "Signaling Virtue: Charitable Behavior Under Consumer Elective Pricing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(2), pages 187-194, March.
    7. Das, Gopal & van Esch, Patrick & Jain, Shailendra Pratap & Cui, Yuanyuan (Gina), 2023. "Donor happiness comes from afar: The role of donation beneficiary social distance and benevolence," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 865-880.
    8. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2006:i:33:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Heineck, Guido & Süssmuth, Bernd, 2013. "A different look at Lenin’s legacy: Social capital and risk taking in the Two Germanies," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 789-803.
    10. Ferrara, Ida & Missios, Paul, 2024. "Does waste management policy crowd out social and moral motives for recycling?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    11. Mengyuan Zhou, 2022. "Does the Source of Inheritance Matter in Bequest Attitudes? Evidence from Japan," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 867-887, December.
    12. Dipankar Purkayastha, 2004. "A theory of reciprocal gifts," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 32(4), pages 312-319, December.
    13. Britta Butz & Pablo Guillen Alvarez & Christine Harbring, 2024. "Incentives for cooperation in groups: sociality meets decision rights," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 18(10), pages 2925-2951, October.
    14. Qianping Ren & Maoliang Ye, 2017. "Donations Make People Happier: Evidence from the Wenchuan Earthquake," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 517-536, May.
    15. Daniel Sutter & Daniel J. Smith, 2017. "Coordination in disaster: Nonprice learning and the allocation of resources after natural disasters," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 30(4), pages 469-492, December.
    16. Damiano Fiorillo & Nunzia Nappo, 2017. "Formal volunteering and self-perceived health. Causal evidence from the UK-SILC," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 75(2), pages 112-138, April.
    17. Sant'Anna, Ana Claudia & Bergtold, Jason & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Caldas, Marcellus & Granco, Gabriel, 2021. "Deal or No Deal? Analysis of Bioenergy Feedstock Contract Choice with Multiple Opt-out Options and Contract Attribute Substitutability," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315289, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Gary Bolton & Eugen Dimant & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "When a Nudge Backfires. Using Observation with Social and Economic Incentives to Promote Pro-Social Behavior," PPE Working Papers 0017, Philosophy, Politics and Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    19. Dwenger, Nadja & Kleven, Henrik & Rasul, Imran & Rincke, Johannes, 2014. "Extrinsic vs Intrinsic Motivations for Tax Compliance. Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment in Germany," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100389, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    20. 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.
    21. Anne Corcos & Yorgos Rizopoulos, 2011. "Is prosocial behavior egocentric? The “invisible hand” of emotions," Post-Print halshs-01968213, HAL.

    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:ags:eaae05:24598. 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/eaaeeea.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.