IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Gibt es eine Zukunft für die moderne konventionelle Tierhaltung in Nordwesteuropa?

Listed author(s):
  • Spiller, Achim
  • von Meyer-Höfer, Marie
  • Sonntag, Winnie
Registered author(s):

    Die aktuelle intensive Form der Nutztierhaltung gewinnt weltweit an Bedeutung. Sie wird jedoch mit wachsender gesellschaftlicher Kritik und Ablehnung konfrontiert. Insbesondere in nordwesteuropäischen Ländern gibt es ausgeprägte gesellschaftliche Diskussionen um Tier- und Umweltschutz in der Nutztierhaltung. Daher stellt sich die Frage, was die Treiber dieser Akzeptanzprobleme sind und wie Vertrauen zurückgewonnen werden kann, um die license to produce nachhaltig zu sichern. Dazu fasst der vorliegende Beitrag in Form eines Literaturüberblickes aktuelle wissenschaftliche Forschungsergebnisse zusammen und stellt die Ursachen der Akzeptanzproblematik sowie Maßnahmen und Kommunikationsstrategien zur Rückgewinnung von Akzeptanz vor. Das Interesse der Gesellschaft an der Nutztierhaltung, Fragen der Ernährung und Gesundheit sowie dem Tierwohl sind langfristige Trends. Eine grundlegende Neuorientierung der Branche muss auf diesen Trend folgen. Vieles deutet darauf hin, dass die zunächst verfolgten eher passiven Konzepte (low profiling) und die heute stärker genutzten Gegenangriffs-, Rechtfertigungs- und Aufklärungsstrategien nicht ausreichen werden, um aus der medialen Defensive zu kommen. Angesichts des starken Strukturwandels, der konzentrationsfördernden Wirkung von zusätzlichen Tierschutzauflagen und der beachtlichen economies of scale gibt es keinen einfachen Weg zurück zu einer kleinbetrieblichen Landwirtschaft. Da die Einstellung der Bevölkerung gegenüber Großbetrieben z. T. aber sehr negativ ist, stehen gerade die größeren landwirtschaftlichen Betriebe und große Unternehmen der Fleischwirtschaft vor der Herausforderung, über CSR- und Shared-Value-Aktivitäten Vertrauen in der Gesellschaft zurückzugewinnen. Neben den Verbänden sind es auch diese Unternehmen, die über Ressourcen für einen Ausbau der Kommunikation verfügen. Wichtig ist zu betonen, dass Kommunikation alleine nicht ausreichen wird um Vertrauen und Akzeptanz zurückzugewinnen, es müssen auch glaubwürdige Veränderungen der Nutztierhaltung stattfinden.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/147501/1/87129009X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE) in its series DARE Discussion Papers with number 1608.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 2016
    Handle: RePEc:zbw:daredp:1608
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Platz der Göttinger Sieben 5, D-37073 Göttingen

    Web page: http://www.uni-goettingen.de/en/18500.html

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Harvey, David & Hubbard, Carmen, 2013. "Reconsidering the political economy of farm animal welfare: An anatomy of market failure," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 105-114.
    2. Weinrich, Ramona & Kühl, Sarah & Franz, Anabell & Spiller, Achim, 2015. "Consumer Preferences for High Welfare Meat in Germany: Self-service Counter or Service Counter?," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 6(1).
    3. Isermeyer, Folkhard, 2014. "Künftige Anforderungen an die Landwirtschaft: Schlussfolgerungen für die Agrarpolitik," Thünen Working Papers 30, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    4. Busch, Gesa & Spiller, Achim, 2016. "Farmer share and fair distribution in food chains from a consumer’s perspective," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 149-158.
    5. Heng, Yan & Hanawa Peterson, Hikaru & Li, Xianghong, 2013. "Consumer Attitudes toward Farm-Animal Welfare: The Case of Laying Hens," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), December.
    6. Cordts, Anette & Nitzko, Sina & Spiller, Achim, 2014. "Consumer Response to Negative Information on Meat Consumption in Germany," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA), vol. 17(A).
    7. Kayser, Maike & Boehm, Justus & Spiller, Achim, 2010. "Two Sides of the Same Coin? Analysis of the Web‐based Social Media with Regard to the Image of the Agri‐food Sector in Germany," 2010 Internatonal European Forum, February 8-12, 2010, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 100587, International European Forum on Innovation and System Dynamics in Food Networks.
    8. Grethe, Harald, 2007. "High animal welfare standards in the EU and international trade - How to prevent potential `low animal welfare havens'?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 315-333, June.
    9. Candel, Jeroen J.L. & Breeman, Gerard E. & Stiller, Sabina J. & Termeer, Catrien J.A.M., 2014. "Disentangling the consensus frame of food security: The case of the EU Common Agricultural Policy reform debate," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 47-58.
    10. Neeru Paharia & Anat Keinan & Jill Avery & Juliet B. Schor, 2011. "The Underdog Effect: The Marketing of Disadvantage and Determination through Brand Biography," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(5), pages 775-790.
    11. Weinrich, Ramona & Kühl, Sarah & Franz, Anabell & Spiller, Achim, 2015. "Consumer preferences for meat: self-service counter or service counter?," 144th Seminar, February 9-13, 2015, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 206232, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Maike Kayser & Justus Böhm & Achim Spiller, 2011. "Die Agrar- und Ernährungswirtschaft in der Öffentlichkeit – Eine Analyse der deutschen Qualitätspresse auf Basis der Framing-Theorie," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 4(1), pages 59-83.
    13. Weinrich, Ramona & Kühl, Sarah & Zühlsdorf, Anke & Spiller, Achim, 2014. "Consumer Attitudes in Germany towards Different Dairy Housing Systems and Their Implications for the Marketing of Pasture Raised Milk," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA), vol. 17(4).
    14. Boehm, Justus & Kayser, Maike & Spiller, Achim, 2010. "Two Sides of the Same Coin? Analysis of the Web-Based Social Media with Regard to the Image of the Agri-Food Sector in Germany," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 1(3).
    15. Franz, Annabell & von Meyer, Marie & Spiller, Achim, 2010. "Prospects for a European Animal Welfare Label from the German Perspective: Supply Chain Barriers," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 1(4).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:daredp:1608. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.