IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/gausfs/344114.html

Driving public support for a meat tax: Fiscal policies and behavioral interventions

Author

Listed:
  • Erhard, Ainslee
  • Banerjee, Sanchayan
  • Morren, Meike

Abstract

Taxing meat optimally is a first-best policy outcome to internalize environmental harms. However, meat taxes often lack public and governmental support. Recent research indicates that support for meat taxes can be improved by combining behavioral nudges with fiscal measures. In this study, we test this claim in a preregistered between-within-subjects experiment using a representative sample of the Dutch (N=2,032) population. The Netherlands is currently considering a meat tax legislation, thereby making our study timely and policy relevant. Participants were randomly assigned to a treatment condition in a 2x2 experimental setup, varying across a framing nudge (“tax” versus “levy”) and a reflection (“yes” versus “no”) dimension. Subsequently, all participants engaged in a discrete choice experiment where they selected their preferred meat pricing policy from six sets of choice cards. Each card included random variations in levels of four attributes: meat pricing (costs), revenue recycling, policy coverage, and pricing rationale. We find that policy support increases with greater revenue recycling and broader policy coverage but decreases as costs rise. The rationale behind pricing does not alter public support substantially. Importantly, we find no significant difference in public support across the different behavioral nudge or reflection treatments. Our experimental findings underscore the importance of policy design in enhancing support for meat taxes. The effective design of a meat tax is crucial, as superficial changes, such as behavioral nudges, may not be sufficient to sway public opinion.

Suggested Citation

  • Erhard, Ainslee & Banerjee, Sanchayan & Morren, Meike, 2024. "Driving public support for a meat tax: Fiscal policies and behavioral interventions," Sustainable Food Systems Discussion Papers 344114, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:gausfs:344114
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.344114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/344114/files/SFS_DP_006.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.344114?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. David Hagmann & Emily H Ho & George Loewenstein, 2019. "Nudging out support for a carbon tax," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(6), pages 484-489, June.
    2. Hagmann, Désirée & Siegrist, Michael & Hartmann, Christina, 2018. "Taxes, labels, or nudges? Public acceptance of various interventions designed to reduce sugar intake," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 156-165.
    3. Bhagyashree Katare & H. Holly Wang & Jonathan Lawing & Na Hao & Timothy Park & Michael Wetzstein, 2020. "Toward Optimal Meat Consumption," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(2), pages 662-680, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Martin C. Parlasca & Matin Qaim, 2022. "Meat Consumption and Sustainability," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 17-41, October.
    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. Banerjee, Sanchayan, 2025. "Meat taxes are inevitable, yet we seem to shy away from them. But why?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).

    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. Petr Prochazka & Jana Soukupova & Josef Abrham & Kevin J. Mullen & Karel Tomsik & Lukas Cechura & Inna Cabelkova & Lubos Smutka, 2025. "Protein consumption in Europe: Sustainability, tradition, and policy implications," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(1), pages 1124-1135, February.
    2. Leonhard Lades & Federica Nova, 2022. "Ethical Considerations when using Behavioural Insights to Reduce Peoples Meat Consumption," Working Papers 202209, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    3. Wesam Salah Alaloul & Muhammad Altaf & Muhammad Ali Musarat & Muhammad Faisal Javed & Amir Mosavi, 2021. "Systematic Review of Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Cost Analysis for Pavement and a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-38, April.
    4. Romain Espinosa & Anis Nassar, 2021. "The Acceptability of Food Policies," Post-Print halshs-03210654, HAL.
    5. Lan Nguyen & Hans De Steur, 2021. "Public Acceptability of Policy Interventions to Reduce Sugary Drink Consumption in Urban Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Rehse, Dominik & Tremöhlen, Felix, 2022. "Fostering participation in digital contact tracing," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    7. Ammann, Jeanine & Arbenz, Andreia & Mack, Gabriele & Siegrist, Michael, 2025. "Consumer support of policy measures to increase sustainability in food consumption," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    8. Alice Wistar & Marissa G. Hall & Maxime Bercholz & Lindsey Smith Taillie, 2022. "Designing Environmental Messages to Discourage Red Meat Consumption: An Online Experiment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-14, March.
    9. L. Mundaca & H. Moncreiff, 2021. "New Perspectives on Green Energy Defaults," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 357-383, September.
    10. Lim, Sungmin & Choi, Syngjoo & Hong, Jong Ho & Kim, Booyuel & Lee, Heerae & Shin, Jinwook, 2025. "Promoting willingness to pay for environmental charges in electricity tariff: Evidence from a randomized survey experiment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    11. Bose, Neha & Hills, Thomas & Sgroi, Daniel, 2020. "Climate Change and Diet," IZA Discussion Papers 13426, IZA Network @ LISER.
    12. Schüler, Stefan & Noack, Eva Maria, 2019. "Does the CAP reflect the population's concerns about agricultural landscapes? A qualitative study in Lower Saxony, Germany," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 240-255.
    13. Kevin W. Maina & Martin C. Parlasca & Elizaphan J. O. Rao & Matin Qaim, 2024. "Farmer‐friendly delivery of veterinary services: Experimental insights from the Kenyan dairy sector," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(3), pages 829-846, September.
    14. Reynolds, J.P. & Archer, S. & Pilling, M. & Kenny, M. & Hollands, G.J. & Marteau, T.M., 2019. "Public acceptability of nudging and taxing to reduce consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and food: A population-based survey experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Ling, Maoliang & Liu, Chutian & Xu, Lin & Yang, Haimi, 2024. "Carrot and stick incentive policies for climate change mitigation: A survey experiment on crowding out of public support," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    16. Shoshanna Griver & Itay Fischhendler, 2021. "The Social Construction of Food Security: The Israeli Case," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(5), pages 1303-1321, October.
    17. Mo Li & Thomas Wiedmann & Tianfang Shen, 2025. "Towards Consumption-Based Carbon Inequality Metrics: Socioeconomic and Demographic Insights from Chinese Households," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-20, May.
    18. Bonnet, Céline & Bouamra-Mechemache, Zohra & Réquillart, Vincent & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Viewpoint: Regulating meat consumption to improve health, the environment and animal welfare," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    19. Schwarz, Antonia & Stünzi, Anna & Kaestner, Kathrin & Pahle, Michael & Sommer, Stephan, 2026. "Tailored information and the public support for carbon pricing in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    20. Osberg, Gustav & Schulz, Felix & Bretter, Christian, 2024. "Navigating sustainable futures: The role of terminal and instrumental values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:gausfs:344114. 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/iagoede.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.