Buying higher welfare poultry products? Profiling Flemish consumers who do and do not.
A substantial number of studies has already investigated differences within the consumer market with regard to attitudes and perceptions in relation to farm animal welfare. Likewise, several studies focused on the gap that exists between positive attitudes and reported consumption or purchase intentions for sustainable food products in general and higher welfare products more specific, and on the factors influencing this attitude-behavior gap. Little or no studies, however, have started from reported pro-welfare behavior to distinguish between consumer groups and to explore the motivations of the respective behavior. With this study, we aim to group consumers according to their reported buying frequency of higher welfare eggs and higher welfare chicken meat. Similarities and dissimilarities between these groups are mapped in terms of individual characteristics, product attribute importance, perceived consumer effectiveness, perception of higher welfare products, and attitude toward a welfare label. The research methodology applied was a quantitative study with cross-sectional consumer survey data collected in Flanders in spring 2007 (n = 469). Pro-welfare behavior was unevenly distributed across different consumer segments, despite a general interest and concern for bird welfare. A consistent choice for standard (no welfare premium) poultry products was related to strong perceived price and availability barriers, to a low importance attached to ethical issues as product attributes, and to a low perceived consumer effectiveness. A consistent choice for products with higher welfare standards to the contrast associated with a high importance attached to ethical issues; a low effect of price and availability perception; a strong association of higher welfare products with product attributes like health, taste, and quality; and a high perceived consumer effectiveness. The identification of market segments with common characteristics is essential for positioning higher welfare products and developing effective communication strategies. Finally, a welfare label emerged as an appropriate communication vehicle for consumers who engage in pro-welfare behavior and who experienced the label as a solution to lower the search costs for higher welfare products.
Vanhonacker
F
F
Department of Agricultural Economics, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium. Filiep.Vanhonacker@ugent.be
Verbeke
W
W
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000827:Animal Welfare; D000818:Animals; D001530:Belgium; D002645:Chickens; D003258:Consumer Behavior / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D004531:Eggs / Q000592:standards; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008460:Meat / Q000592:standards*; D008875:Middle Aged; D011202:Poultry Products / Q000592:standards*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D055815:Young Adult