IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iefi09/58710.html

Fresh Meat and Traceability Labelling: Who Cares?

Author

Listed:
  • Stranieri, Stefanella
  • Banterle, Alessandro

Abstract

Within the framework of European food safety measures, Reg. 1760/2000 and 1825/2000 have introduced mandatory traceability and relevant labelling into the beef sector. The paper analyses whether information on meat labels can be considered a useful instrument for consumers, facilitating the verification of quality. The purpose of the paper is, first, to evaluate whether meat information is used during food purchase, and secondly, by focussing on specific meat information, to assess consumer interest in some mandatory and voluntary information cues and to identify the determinants affecting the use of such cues. Data were collected by a telephone questionnaire in a survey conducted in the Lombardy region of northern Italy. The sample consisted of 1,025 consumers. We estimated 4 models based on the literature, and for all the equations we used a binary logit model. The analysis revealed that most consumers tend to use the meat label and also most of the mandatory and voluntary information reported. With regard to mandatory meat labelling, the most important information was considered to be the country of animal origin, in accordance with other empirical studies. With regard to voluntary information, some, like the system of cattle breeding and cattle feeding, seems to be of interest to the Italian consumer. The empirical analysis suggests two different consumer types. The consumers who declare they use meat labels tend to be young people, of female gender, with a low income, and who use the media as their principal source of information. These consumers could have a lot of time available for food purchasing and probably the possibility of reading most of the information reported on the food label, even if they do not have the capacity to process all the information. On the other hand, those consumers who read specific labelled information tend to have a good level of food knowledge or education and weight problems. This second type of consumer probably does not have much time for food purchasing and they select only that information in which they are mostly interested. Moreover, the analysis reveals that consumers tend to read only information that is quickly understood, and that can help them to evaluate the quality of meat products.

Suggested Citation

  • Stranieri, Stefanella & Banterle, Alessandro, 2009. "Fresh Meat and Traceability Labelling: Who Cares?," 2009 International European Forum, February 15-20, 2009, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 58710, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iefi09:58710
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.58710
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/58710/files/Banterle-Stranieri1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.58710?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. Souza Monteiro, Diogo M. & Caswell, Julie A., 2004. "The Economics Of Implementing Traceability In Beef Supply Chains: Trends In Major Producing And Trading Countries," Working Paper Series 14521, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
    2. Dickinson, David L. & Bailey, DeeVon, 2005. "Experimental Evidence on Willingness to Pay for Red Meat Traceability in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Japan," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(3), pages 1-12, December.
    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. Shota Shaburishvili & Maia Chania, 2017. "Global Innovation Trends and Georgia," European Journal of Economics and Business Studies Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 3, ejes_v3_i.
    2. Wägeli, S. & Hamm, U., . "Wahrnehmung und Präferenzen für tierische Öko-Lebensmittel produziert mit regionalen Futtermitteln," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 48.
    3. Waegeli, Salome & Hamm, Ulrich, 2012. "Wahrnehmung Und Präferenz Für Tierische Ökolebensmittel Produziert Mit Regionalen Futtermitteln," 52nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 26-28, 2012 138194, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    4. Wageli, Salome & Hamm, Ulrich, 2012. "Consumers‘ Perception of Feed Origin in Organic Food Products Declared as Local," 2012 International European Forum, February 13-17, 2012, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 144965, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.

    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. Seyoum, Bruk Tefera & Adam, Brian D. & Ge, Candi, 2013. "The Value of Genetic Information in a Whole-Chain Traceability System for Beef," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150458, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Heyder, Matthias & Theuvsen, Ludwig & Hollmann-Hespos, Thorsten, 2012. "Investments in tracking and tracing systems in the food industry: A PLS analysis," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 102-113.
    3. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny, 2011. "Demand for improved food safety and quality: a cross-regional comparison," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108791, Agricultural Economics Society.
    4. Asioli, Daniele & Boecker, Andreas & Canavari, Maurizio, 2012. "Perceived Traceability Costs and Benefits in the Italian Fisheries Supply Chain," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 2(4), pages 1-19, March.
    5. Banterle, Alessandro & Stranieri, Stefanella, 2008. "The consequences of voluntary traceability system for supply chain relationships. An application of transaction cost economics," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 560-569, December.
    6. Ximing Chen & Jie Shang & Muhammad Zada & Shagufta Zada & Xueqiang Ji & Heesup Han & Antonio Ariza-Montes & Jesús Ramírez-Sobrino, 2021. "Health Is Wealth: Study on Consumer Preferences and the Willingness to Pay for Ecological Agricultural Product Traceability Technology: Evidence from Jiangxi Province China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-13, November.
    7. Chloe S McCallum & Simone Cerroni & Daniel Derbyshire & W George Hutchinson & Rodolfo M Nayga, 2022. "Consumers’ responses to food fraud risks: an economic experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(4), pages 942-969.
    8. Kennedy Ndue & Goda Pál, 2022. "European Green Transition Implications on Africa’s Livestock Sector Development and Resilience to Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-29, November.
    9. Pouliot, Sebastien, 2008. "Estimating the Costs and Benefits of Cattle Traceability: the Case of the Quebec Cattle Traceability System," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6522, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    11. Bulut, Harun & Lawrence, John D., 2007. "Meat Slaughter and Processing Plants' Traceability Levels Evidence From Iowa," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12791, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Wu, Linhai & Wang, Shuxian & Zhu, Dian & Hu, Wuyang & Wang, Hongsha, 2015. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food quality and safety attributes: The case of pork," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 121-136.
    13. Rebeca Cordero-Gutiérrez & Eva Lahuerta-Otero & Ana Zapatero-González, 2025. "Leveraging blockchain for ecosystem service transparency: enhancing consumer value and sustainability in the beef industry," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.
    14. White, Robin R. & Brady, Michael & Capper, Judith L. & Johnson, Kristen A., 2014. "Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 1-12.
    15. Lai, John & Wang, H. Holly, "undated". "Producers’ Willingness to Adopt an Alternative Technology: Market Opportunities to Export Pork to China," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236054, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Lin, Yu-Hsuan & Kim, KyungJa, 2017. "Willingness to Pay for Government-Certified Agri-Products in South Korea," MPRA Paper 84100, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Pendell, Dustin L. & Tonsor, Glynn T. & Dhuyvetter, Kevin C. & Brester, Gary W. & Schroeder, Ted C., 2013. "Evolving beef export market access requirements for age and source verification," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 332-340.
    18. Shengnan Sun & Xinping Wang & Yan Zhang, 2017. "Sustainable Traceability in the Food Supply Chain: The Impact of Consumer Willingness to Pay," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-19, June.
    19. Rosa, Franco, 2010. "Short Chain in FVG Region: An Evaluation of the Customer Satisfaction at the “Farmer’s Shopping Points”," 2010 International European Forum, February 8-12, 2010, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 100459, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    20. Lim, Kar Ho & Hu, Wuyang & Maynard, Leigh J. & Goddard, Ellen W., 2012. "Stated Preference and Perception Analysis for Traceable and BSE-tested Beef: An Application of Mixed Error-Component Logit Model," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124784, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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:iefi09:58710. 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/ilbonde.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.