Utility to consumers and consumer acceptance of information on beef labels in Southern Chile;Utilidad y aceptación de información en el etiquetado de la carne bovina en consumidores del sur de Chile

Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research

Volumn 69, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 373-382

  Berta Schnettler, M ^a   Roberto Silva, F ^a   Nestor Sepulveda B ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE LA FRONTERA   (Chile)

Author keywords

Animal welfare; Beef; Label; Production systems; Traceability

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; BOS;

EID: 70749156417     PISSN: 07185820     EISSN: 07185839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Adimark. 2004. Mapa socioeconómico de Chile. Adimark, Santiago, Chile. Available at http://www.adimark.cl/ medios/estudios/Mapa_Socioeconomico_de_Chile. pdf (accessed 20 October 2005).
2. Alfnes, F. 2004 Stated preferences for imported and hormone-treated beef: application of a mixed logit model. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 31:19-37.
3. Altmann, M. 1997. Product policy. p. 279-294. In D. Padberg, C. Titson, and L. Albisu (eds.) Agro-food marketing. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.
4. Beardsworth, A., A. Bryman, T. Keil, J. Goode, C. Haslam, and E. Lancashire. 2002. Women, men and food: the significance of gender for nutritional attitudes and choices. Br. Food J. 107:470-491.
5. Bernués, A., A. Olaizola, and K. Corcoran. 2003a. Labelling information demanded by European consumers and relationships with purchasing motives, quality and safety of meat. Meat Sci. 65:1095-1106.
6. Bernués, A., A. Olaizola, and K. Corcoran. 2003b. Extrinsic attributes of red meat as indicators of quality in Europe: an application for market segmentation. Food Qual. Prefer. 14:265-276.
7. Blokhuis, H.J., R.B. Jones, R. Geers, M. Miele, and I. Veissier. 2003. Measuring and monitoring animal welfare: transparency in the food product quality chain. Anim. Welfare 12:445-455.
8. Bredahl, L. 2004. Cue utilization and quality perception with regard to branded beef. Food Qual. Pref. 15:65-75.
9. Caswell, J.A., and E.M. Mojduszka. 1996. Using informational labelling to influence the market for quality in food products. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 78:1248-1253.
10. Corcoran, K., A. Bernués, E. Manrique, M.T. Pacchioli, R. Baines, and J.P. Boutonnet. 2001. Current consumer attitudes towards lamb and beef in Europe. Options Méditerranéennes A46:75-79.
11. Choat, W.T., J.A. Paterson, B.M. Rainey, M.C. King, G.C. Smith, K.E. Belk, and R.J. Lipsey. 2006. The effects of cattle sex on carcass characteristics and longissimus muscle palatability. J. Anim. Sci. 84:1820-1826.
12. FAENACAR. 2004. Nuevo Reglamento de Mataderos, 9 septiembre 2004. Reglamento sobre Estructura y Funcionamiento de Mataderos, Cámaras Frigoríficas y Plantas de Desposte y Fija Equipamiento Mínimo de tales Establecimientos. Asociación Gremial de Plantas Faenadoras Frigoríficas de Carnes de Chile, Santiago, Chile. Available at http://www.faenacar.cl/UserFiles/File/legales/NuevoReglamentoMataderos.p df (accessed 26 November 2008).
13. Fernández, A. 2002. Investigación y técnicas de mercado. 273 p. Editorial Esic, Madrid, España.
14. Gellynck, X., and W. Verbeke. 2001. Consumer perception of traceability in the meat chain. Agrarwirtschaft 50:368-374.
15. Glitsch, K. 2000. Consumer perceptions of fresh meat quality: cross-national comparison. Br. Food J. 102:177-194.
16. Grunert, K.G., and C. Valli. 2001. Designer-made meat and dairy products: consumer-led product development. Livest. Prod. Sci. 72:83-98.
17. Hair, J., R. Anderson, R. Tatham, y W. Black. 1999. Análisis multivariante. Otero. 832 p. 5a ed. Prentice Hall Internacional, Madrid, España.
18. INE. 2003. Censo 2002. Resultados Volumen I: Población; País-Región. 356 p. Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas (INE), Gobierno de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
19. Kinnear, T.C., y J.R. Taylor. 1989. Investigación de mercados. 335 p. 3a ed. McGraw-Hill, Bogotá, Colombia.
20. Köbrich, K., M. Maino, y C. Díaz. 2001. El bienestar animal como un atributo de diferenciación en la compra de alimentos de origen animal. Econ. Agrar. 6:251-260.
21. Kotler, P. 1997. Marketing management: analysis, planning, implementation and control. 756 p. 7a ed. Prentice Hall International, New Jersey, USA.
22. Lea, P., M. Rodbotten, and T. Naes. 1997. Analysis of variance for sensory data. 102 p. Wiley, Chichester, UK.
23. María, G.A. 2006. Public perception of farm animal welfare in Spain. Livest. Sci. 103:250-256.
24. McEachern, M.G., and C. Seaman. 2005. Consumer perception of meat production. Br. Food J. 107:572- 593.
25. Napolitano, F., G. Caporale, A. Carlucci, and E. Monteleone. 2007. Effect of information about animal welfare and product nutritional properties on acceptability of meat from Podolian cattle. Food Qual. Prefer. 18:305-312.
26. Olaizola, A., Z. Whebi, and E. Manrique. 2005. Quality perception and consumer attitudes to "specific quality beef" in Aragón, Spain. Span. J. Agric. Res. 3:418-428.
27. Oliver, M., G. Nute, I. Font, M. Furnols, R. San Julián, M. Campo, et al. 2006. Eating quality for beef, from different production system, assessed by German, Spanish and British consumers. Meat Sci. 74:435-442.
28. Realini, C., S. Duckett, G. Brito, M. Dalla Rizza, and D. de Mattos. 2004. Effect of pasture vs. concentrate feeding with or without antioxidants on carcass characteristics, fatty acid composition, and quality of Uruguayan beef. Meat Sci. 66:567-577.
29. Roosen, J., J.L. Lusk, and J.A. Fox. 2003. Consumer demand for and attitudes toward alternative beef labeling strategies in France, Germany and the UK. Agribusiness 19:77-90.
30. SAG. 2008. Reglamento General del Sistema de Clasificación de Ganado, Tipificación, Marca y Comercialización de Carne Bovina. Texto consolidado. Servicio Agrícola y Ganadero (SAG), Santiago, Chile. Available at http://www.sag.gob.cl/common/asp/pagAtachadorVisualizador.asp?argCrypted Data=GP1TkTXdhRJAS2Wp3v88hLh8Ob3rW0mc&argModo=inline&argOrigen=B D&argFlagYaGrabados=&argArchivoId=1945 (accessed 26 November 2008).
31. Scheaffer, R., W. Mendwenhall, y L. Ott. 1996. Elementos de muestreo. 321 p. Grupo Editorial Iberoamericana, Ciudad de México, México.
32. Schnettler, B., O. Manquilef, y H. Miranda. 2004. Atributos valorados en la selección de carne bovina en supermercados de Temuco, IX Región de Chile. Cien. Inv. Agr. 31:91-100.
33. Schnettler, B., O. Manquilef, y H. Miranda. 2006. Hábitos de consumo de carne bovina en Temuco, IX Región de Chile. Idesia 24:15-23.
34. Schnettler, B., D. Ruiz, O. Sepulveda, and N. Sepulveda. 2008a. Importance of the country of origin in food consumption in a developing country. Food Qual. Pref. 19:372-382.
35. Schnettler, B., R. Vidal, R. Silva, L. Vallejos, and N. Sepulveda. 2008b. Consumer perception of animal welfare and livestock production in the Araucanía Region, Chile. Chilean J. Agric. Res. 68:80-93.
36. Schröeder, M.J.A., and M.G. McEachern. 2004. Consumer value conflicts surrounding ethical food purchase decisions: a focus on animal welfare. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 28:168-177.
37. SPSS. 2005. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows. Version 14.0. SPSS, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
38. Van Rijswijk, W., L. Frewer, D. Menozzi, and G. Faioli. 2008. Consumer perceptions of traceability: A cross- national comparison of the associated benefits. Food Qual. Prefer. 19:452-464.
39. Verbeke, W., and J. Viaene. 1999. Beliefs, attitude and behavior towards fresh meat consumption in Belgium: empirical evidence from a consumer survey. Food Qual. Prefer. 10:437-445.
40. Verbeke, W., R. Ward, and J. Viaene. 2000. Probit analysis of fresh meat consumption in Belgium: exploring BSE and television communication impact. Agribusiness 16:215-234.
41. Verbeke, W., and R. Ward. 2006. Consumer interest in information cues denoting quality, traceability and origin: An application of ordered probit models to beef labels. Food Qual. Prefer. 17:453-467.