IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consumer trust and willingness to pay for certified animal-friendly products




Increasing animal welfare standards requires changes along the supply chain which involve several stakeholders: scientists, farmers and people involved in transportation and slaughtering. The majority of researchers agree that compliance with these standards increases costs along the livestock value chain, especially for monitoring and certifying animal-friendly products. Knowledge of consumer willingness to pay (WTP) in such a decision context is paramount to understanding the magnitude of market incentives necessary to compensate all involved stakeholders. The market outcome of certification programs is dependent on consumer trust. Particularly, there is a need to understand to what extent consumers believe that stakeholders operating in the animal-friendly supply chain will respect certification standards. We examine these issues using a contingent valuation survey administered in five economically dominant EU countries. The implied WTP estimates are found to be sensitive to robust measures of consumer trust for certified animal-friendly products. Significant differences across countries are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Giuseppe Nocella & Lionel Hubbard & Riccardo Scarpa, 2007. "Consumer trust and willingness to pay for certified animal-friendly products," Working Papers in Economics 07/09, University of Waikato.
  • Handle: RePEc:wai:econwp:07/09

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Harrigan, Jane, 2008. "Food insecurity, poverty and the Malawian Starter Pack: Fresh start or false start?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 237-249, June.
    2. Westert, Gert P. & Groenewegen, Peter P., 1999. "Regional disparities in health care supply in eleven European countries: does politics matter?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 169-182, May.
    3. Andrew Dorward, 2006. "Markets and pro-poor agricultural growth: insights from livelihood and informal rural economy models in Malawi," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 35(2), pages 157-169, September.
    4. Niebuhr, Annekatrin, 2000. "Convergence and the effects of spatial interaction," HWWA Discussion Papers 110, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    5. Löfgren, Hans, 2001. "A CGE model for Malawi," TMD discussion papers 70, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Banful, Afua Branoah, 2010. "Old problems in the new solutions?," IFPRI discussion papers 1002, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Jacob Ricker-Gilbert & Thomas S. Jayne & Ephraim Chirwa, 2010. "Subsidies and Crowding Out: A Double-Hurdle Model of Fertilizer Demand in Malawi," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(1), pages 26-42.
    8. Wallace E. Oates, 1999. "An Essay on Fiscal Federalism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(3), pages 1120-1149, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. 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).
    2. Erdem, Seda & Rigby, Dan, 2011. "Using a Discrete Choice Experiment to Elicit Consumers’ WTP for Health Risk Reductions Achieved By Nanotechnology in the UK," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108950, Agricultural Economics Society.

    More about this item


    Animal welfare ; Certification ; Consumer trust ; Contingent Valuation ; Willingness to Pay ; Budget approach ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:wai:econwp:07/09. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Brian Silverstone). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.