The impact of fat content, production methods and carbon footprint information on consumer preferences for minced meat

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 126-136

  Koistinen, L ^a   Pouta, E ^a   Heikkila J ^a   Forsman Hugg, S ^a   Kotro, J ^a   Makela J ^b   Niva, M ^c  

^a FINNISH FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^c National Consumer Research Centre   (Finland)

Author keywords

Choice experiment; Consumer preferences; Heterogeneity; Latent class analysis; Meat; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA;

EID: 84876823191     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.03.007     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Adamowicz W., Louviere J., Swait J. Introduction to attribute-based stated choice methods. Final Report submitted to Resource Valuation Branch 1998, Damage Assessment Center, NOAA, Edmonton.
2. Aikman S.N., Crites S.L., Fabrigar L.R. Beyond affect and cognition: identification of the informational bases of food attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 2006, 36:340-382.
3. Bateman I., Carson R., Day B., Hanemann M., Hanley N., Hett T., et al. Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: A manual 2002, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
4. Bech M., Gyrd-Hansen D. Effects coding in discrete choice experiments. Health Economics 2005, 14:1079-1083.
5. Becker T., Benner E., Glitsch K. Consumer perception of fresh meat quality in Germany. British Food Journal 2000, 102:246-266.
6. Boxall P., Adamowicz W. Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: A latent class approach. Environmental and Resource Economics 2002, 23:421-446.
7. Burns A., Burns R. Basic Marketing Research 2008, Pearson Education, New Jersey. 2nd ed.
8. Carlsson F., Frykblom P., Lagerkvits C.J. Consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare: Mobile abattoirs versus transportation to slaughter. European Review of Agricultural Economics 2007, 34:321-344.
9. Chalak A., Balcombe K., Bailey A., Fraser I. Pesticides, preference heterogeneity and environmental taxes. Journal of Agricultural Economics 2008, 59:537-554.
10. Cicia G., Colantuoni F. Willingness to pay for traceable meat attributes: A meta-analysis. International Journal on Food System Dynamics 2010, 1:252-263.
11. Colombo S., Hanley N., Louviere J. Modelling preference heterogeneity in stated choice data: An analysis for public goods generated by agriculture. Agricultural Economics 2009, 40:307-322.
12. Eagly A., Chaiken S. The psychology of attitudes 1993, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
13. Enneking U. Willingness-to-pay for safety improvements in the German meat sector: The case of the Q&S label. European Review of Agricultural Economics 2004, 31:205-223.
14. ETL (2009). Elintarvikkeiden tuonti 1995, 2000 ja 2005 - 2009 [Foodstuff imports 1995, 2000 and 2005 - 2009]. Vienti- ja tuontitilastot, Elintarviketeollisuusliitto [Finnish food and drinks industries' federation]. Retrieved on 15th Oct 2010 from the Website http://www.etl.fi/www/fi/tilastot/vienti-_ja_tuontitilastot.php.
15. Fishbein M., Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research 1975, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA, USA.
16. Forsman-Hugg, S., Katajajuuri, J.-M., Pesonen, I., Paananen, J., Mäkelä, J., & Timonen, P. (2008). Building the content for CSR in the food chain with a stakeholder dialogue. In European Association of the Agricultural Economists. XIIth Congress of the European Association of the Agricultural Economists. People, Food and Environments: Global Trends and European Strategies.
17. Gracia A., de Magistris T. The demand for organic foods in the South of Italy: A discrete choice model. Food Policy 2008, 33:386-398.
18. Goldberg, I. & Roosen, J. (2005). Measuring consumer willingness to pay for a health risk reduction of Salmonellosis and Campylobacteriosis. Paper prepared for presentation at the 11th congress of the European Association of Agricultural Economists. Copenhage, Denmark, August 24-27, 2005.
19. Hammitt J.K., Haninger K. Willingness to pay for food safety: Sensitivity to duration and severity of illness. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2007, 89:1170-1175.
20. Hearne R., Volcan M. The use of choice experiments to analyze consumer preferences for ecolabeled and organic produce in Costa Rica. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 2005, 44:381-397.
21. Hearty Á.P., McCarthy S.N., Kearney J.M., Gibney M.J. Relationship between attitudes towards healthy eating and dietary behaviour, lifestyle and demographic factors in a representative sample of Irish adults. Appetite 2007, 48:1-11.
22. Henson S., Northen J. Consumer assessment of the safety of beef at the point of purchase: A pan-European study. Journal of Agricultural Economics 2000, 51:90-105.
23. Holmes T., Adamowicz W. Attribute-based methods. A primer on nonmarket valuation - the economics of non-market goods and resources 2003, Chapter 4:99-110. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
24. Hu W., Hunnemeyer A., Veeman M., Adamowicz W., Srivastava L. Trading off health, environmental and genetic modification attributes in food. European Review of Agricultural Economics 2004, 31:389-408.
25. Katajajuuri, J.-M., Grönroos, J., Usva, K., Virtanen, Y., Sipilä, I., Venäläinen, E., Kurppa, S., Tanskanen, R., Mattila, T. & Virtanen H. (2006). Broilerin fileesuikaleiden tuotannon ympäristövaikutukset ja kehittämismahdollisuudet [Environmental impacts and improvement options of sliced broiler fillet production]. Maa- ja elintarviketalous, 90, 118.
26. Kemp K., Insch A., Holdsworth D.K., Knight J.G. Food miles: Do UK consumers actually care?. Food Policy 2010, 35:504-513.
27. Kornelis M., van Herpen E., van der Lans I., Aramyan L. Using non-food information to identify food-choice segment membership. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21:512-520.
28. Lagerkvist C.J., Carlsson F., Viske D. Swedish consumer preferences for animal welfare and biotech: A choice experiment. AgBioForum 2006, 9(1):51-58.
29. Lancaster K. A new approach to consumer theory. The Journal of Political Economy 1966, 74:132-157.
30. Liljenstolpe C. Evaluating animal welfare with choice experiments: An application to Swedish pig production. Agribusiness 2008, 24:67-84.
31. Loureiro M., Umberger W. 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 2007, 32:496-514.
32. Lusk J.L., Roosen J., Fox J.A. Demand for beef from cattle administered growth hormones or fed genetically modified corn: A comparison of consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2003, 8:16-29.
33. MacKerron G., Egerton C., Gaskell C., Parpia A., Mourato S. Willingness to pay for carbon offset certification and co-benefits among (high-)flying young adults in the UK. Energy Policy 2009, 37:1372-1381.
34. Maria G.A. Public perception of farm animal welfare in Spain. Livestock Science 2006, 103:250-256.
35. McCarthy M., O'Reilly S.O., Cotter L., de Boer M. Factors influencing consumption of pork and poultry in the Irish market. Appetite 2004, 43:19-28.
36. McFadden D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Frontiers in econometrics 1974, 105-142. Academic Press, New York. P. Zarembka (Ed.).
37. Napolitano F., Caporale G., Carlucci A., Monteleone E. Effect of information about animal welfare and product nutritional properties on acceptability of meat from Podolian cattle. Food Quality and Preference 2007, 18:305-312.
38. Napolitano F., Pacelli C., Girolami A., Braghieri A. Effect of information about animal welfare on consumer willingness to pay for yoghurt. Journal of Dairy Science 2008, 91:910-917.
39. Nilsson T., Foster K., Lusk J.L. Marketing opportunities for certified pork chops. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 2006, 54:567-583.
40. Official Statistics of Finland (2006). Kotitalouksien kulutus [Household consumption] [web publication]. ISSN=1798-3533. 2006, Katsaus kulutuksen muutoksiin [Review on changes in consumption]. Helsinki: Statistics Finland [referred 5th Apr 2013]. Access method: http://www.stat.fi/til/ktutk/2006/ktutk_2006_2009-06-08_kat_001_fi.html.
41. Olesen I., Alfnes F., Røra M.B., Kolstad K. Eliciting consumers' willingness to pay for organic and welfare-labelled salmon in a non-hypothetical choice experiment. Livestock Science 2010, 127:218-226.
42. Pouta E., Heikkilä J., Forsman-Hugg S., Isoniemi M., Mäkelä J. Consumer choice of broiler meat: The effects of country of origin and production methods. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21:539-546.
43. Prättälä R. Dietary changes in Finland - Success stories and future challenges. Appetite 2003, 41:245-249.
44. Roininen K., Tuorila H., Zandstra E.H., de Graaf C., Vehkalahti K., Stubenitsky K., et al. Differences in health and taste attitudes and reported behaviour among Finnish, Dutch and British consumers: A cross-national validation of the Health and Taste Attitude Scales (HTAS). Appetite 2001, 37:33-45.
45. Schnettler B., Vidal R., Silva R., Vallejos L., Sepulveda N. Utility to consumers and consumer acceptance of information on beef kabels in Southern Chile. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research 2009, 69:373-382.
46. Swait J. A structural equation model of latent segmentation and product choice for cross-sectional revealed preference choice data. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 1994, 1:77-89.
47. Tarkiainen A., Sundqvist S. Subjective norms, attitudes and intentions of Finnish consumers in buying organic food. British Food Journal 2005, 107:808-822.
48. Teisl M.F., Roe B.E. Consumer willingness-to-pay to reduce the probability of retail foodborne pathogen contamination. Food Policy 2010, 35:521-530.
49. Teratanavat R., Hooker N.H. Consumers valuations and preference: heterogeneity for a novel functional food. Journal of Food Science 2006, 71:533-541.
50. Thurnström L., Rausser G. The marginal willingness to pay for health-related food characteristics. Food Economics - Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section C 2008, 5:194-206.
51. TIKE (2010). Consumption of food commodities per capita in 2008 and 2009. Tike, Balance sheet for food commodities, preliminary 2009. Information Centre of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Retrieved April 5th 2013 from the Website: http://www.maataloustilastot.fi/en/node/1355.
52. Tonsor G.T., Schroeder T.C., Fox J.A., Biere A.W. European preferences for beef steak attributes. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 2005, 30:367-380.
53. Ureña F., Bernabéu R., Olmeda M. Women, men and organic food: Differences in their attitudes and willingness to pay. A Spanish case study. International Journal of Consumer Studies 2008, 32:18-26.
54. Verbeke W., Pérez-Cueto F.J.A., de Barcellos M.D., Krystallis A., Grunert K.G. European citizen and consumer attitudes and preferences regarding beef and pork. Meat Science 2010, 84:284-292.
55. Vermunt J. K., & Magidson, J. (2005). Latent GOLD® Choice 4.0 User's Manual, Copyright © 2005 by Statistical Innovations, Inc.
56. Viinisalo, M., Nikkilä, M., & Varjonen, J. (2008). Elintarvikkeiden kulutusmuutokset kotitalouksissa vuosina 1966-2006 [Changes in the consumption of foods in households during the years 1966-2006]. National Consumer Research Centre Publications 7, 2008.