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. 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.
    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. Martin C. Parlasca & Matin Qaim, 2022. "Meat Consumption and Sustainability," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 17-41, October.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    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. Nie, Zihan & Ho, Thong Q. & Alpízar, Francisco & Carlsson, Fredrik & Nam, Pham Khanh, 2024. "Spillover effects of an environmental campaign on policy support: within and between domains," EfD Discussion Paper 24-11, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    4. 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.
    5. Peter Howley & Neel Ocean, 2022. "Can nudging only get you so far? Testing for nudge combination effects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(5), pages 1086-1112.
    6. Saulais, Laure & Massey, Camille & Perez-Cueto, Federico J.A. & Appleton, Katherine M. & Dinnella, Caterina & Monteleone, Erminio & Depezay, Laurence & Hartwell, Heather & Giboreau, Agnès, 2019. "When are “Dish of the Day” nudges most effective to increase vegetable selection?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 15-27.
    7. Siegerink, Veerle E. & Delnoij, Joyce & Alpizar, Francisco, 2024. "Public preferences for meat tax attributes in The Netherlands: A discrete choice experiment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    8. Doris Läpple, 2023. "Information about Climate Change Mitigation: What Do Farmers Think?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 22(1), pages 74-80, April.
    9. Marthe Hårvik Austgulen & Silje Elisabeth Skuland & Alexander Schjøll & Frode Alfnes, 2018. "Consumer Readiness to Reduce Meat Consumption for the Purpose of Environmental Sustainability: Insights from Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-24, August.
    10. Heeb, Florian & Kölbel, Julian & Ramelli, Stefano & Vasileva, Anna, 2024. "Green investing and political behavior," SAFE Working Paper Series 438, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    11. Ruben Sanchez-Sabate & Yasna Badilla-Briones & Joan Sabaté, 2019. "Understanding Attitudes towards Reducing Meat Consumption for Environmental Reasons. A Qualitative Synthesis Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-38, November.
    12. Fan, Lurong & Wang, Binyu & Song, Xiaoling, 2023. "An authority-enterprise equilibrium differentiated subsidy mechanism for promoting coalbed methane extraction in multiple coal seams," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PA).
    13. Eßer Jana & Flörchinger Daniela & Frondel Manuel & Wittmann Julia, 2025. "Helfen Ernährungstipps und Informationen über die Klimawirkungen des Fleischkonsums, diesen zu verringern? Experimentelle Evidenz für Deutschland," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 26(1), pages 80-98.
    14. 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.
    15. 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).
    16. Bruns, Hendrik & Perino, Grischa, 2023. "The role of autonomy and reactance for nudging — Experimentally comparing defaults to recommendations and mandates," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    17. Luca Congiu & Ivan Moscati, 2022. "A review of nudges: Definitions, justifications, effectiveness," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 188-213, February.
    18. Romain Cadario & Pierre Chandon, 2019. "Viewpoint: Effectiveness or consumer acceptance? Tradeoffs in selecting healthy eating nudges," Post-Print hal-02508983, HAL.
    19. Diane Pelly & Orla Doyle, 2022. "Nudging in the workplace: increasing participation in employee EDI wellness events," Working Papers 202208, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    20. Chao Li & Xing Su & Chao Fan & Jun Wang & Xiangyu Wang, 2025. "A Sustainable Circular Framework for Financing Infrastructure Climate Adaptation: Integrated Carbon Markets," Papers 2501.08004, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2025.

    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.