IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/gausfs/344114.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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)

    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. Leonhard Lades & Federica Nova, 2022. "Ethical Considerations when using Behavioural Insights to Reduce Peoples Meat Consumption," Working Papers 202209, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    2. 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.
    3. Romain Espinosa & Anis Nassar, 2021. "The Acceptability of Food Policies," Post-Print halshs-03210654, HAL.
    4. 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.
    5. Rehse, Dominik & Tremöhlen, Felix, 2022. "Fostering participation in digital contact tracing," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    6. L. Mundaca & H. Moncreiff, 2021. "New Perspectives on Green Energy Defaults," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 357-383, September.
    7. 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.
    8. 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).
    9. 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.
    10. Roosen, Jutta & Staudigel, Matthias & Rahbauer, Sebastian, 2022. "Demand elasticities for fresh meat and welfare effects of meat taxes in Germany," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    11. Knook, Jorie & Dorner, Zack & Stahlmann-Brown, Philip, 2022. "Priming for individual energy efficiency action crowds out support for national climate change policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    12. Yu Jiang & H. Holly Wang & Shaosheng Jin, 2023. "Mobilising the public to fight poverty using anti‐poverty labels in online food markets: Evidence from a real experimental auction," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(1), pages 168-190, February.
    13. Diane Pelly & Orla Doyle, 2022. "Nudging in the workplace: increasing participation in employee EDI wellness events," Working Papers 202208, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    14. Cinzia Di Novi & Anna Marenzi & Francesca Zantomio, 2021. "Patterns of Red and Processed Meat Consumption across Generations: A Shift from the Traditional Mediterranean Diet," Working Papers 2021:01, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    15. Braut, Beatrice & Zaccagni, Sarah, 2023. "Emotional reactions to food interventions: Evidence from an online survey," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 419-426.
    16. Huang, Hsien-Long, 2023. "Challenges for contactless online food delivery services during the COVID-19 pandemic in Taiwan: Moderating effects of perceived government response," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    17. Gary E. Bolton & Eugen Dimant & Ulrich Schmidt, 2020. "When a Nudge Backfires: Combining (Im)Plausible Deniability with Social and Economic Incentives to Promote Behavioral Change," CESifo Working Paper Series 8070, CESifo.
    18. Parkhi, Charuta M. & Liverpool-Tasie, Saweda & Reardon, Thomas A., 2022. "Food systems transformation and changing demand for animal proteins: Evidence from Nigeria," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322594, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Cadario, Romain & Chandon, Pierre, 2019. "Viewpoint: Effectiveness or consumer acceptance? Tradeoffs in selecting healthy eating nudges," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-6.
    20. Yimin Mao & Peihua Ma & Tangyuan Li & He Liu & Xinpeng Zhao & Shufeng Liu & Xiaoxue Jia & Shaik O. Rahaman & Xizheng Wang & Minhua Zhao & Gang Chen & Hua Xie & Alexandra H. Brozena & Bin Zhou & Yaguan, 2024. "Flash heating process for efficient meat preservation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-9, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; Institutional and Behavioral Economics; Public Economics; Sustainability;
    All these 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.