Moral Convictions and Meat Consumption-A Comparative Study of the Animal Ethics Orientations of Consumers of Pork in Denmark, Germany, and Sweden

Why is welfare pork so expensive?

Specialty (niche) pork products may provide societal benefits in terms of e.g. higher animal welfare, reduced use of antibiotics, and lower environmental impact. At the same time, they offer a business opportunity for farmers, slaughterhouses, meat processers, and retailers, who can capitalise on consumer segments willing to pay a price premium. However, the added cost of delivering niche products and a limited willingness among consumers to pay the higher prices may negate the benefits of this approach, particularly as niche products typically have high substitutability with standard pork. One way to ensure the success of the niche pork products is to drive down costs across all parts of the value chain. Inspired by data from the Danish pork market, the present study seeks to identify cost drivers in the value chain. We found two promising approaches to reduce the costs associated with niche products. First, the pricing strategy can be altered so that mainstream pork is replaced entirely by specialty pork products in the chiller section, thereby making niche the new standard. Second, with improved carcass balance, the price premium paid to farmers can be assigned to a larger proportion of the pig, thus enabling the retail price to be lowered. For example, we found that improved carcass balance had the potential to halve the necessary retail price increase, regardless of the pricing strategy employed. The conclusion is that it is possible to drive down costs across all parts of the value chain to enable further production and profitable sale of welfare pork.

Dairy producer perceptions toward male dairy calves in the Midwestern United States

Male dairy calves are often sold from the farm of birth within the first few days of life. Research describing the care of male calves is limited, with an emphasis on parsing differences between the care of male and female calves. The aims of this study were to describe dairy producers’ self-reported care practices for male relative to female calves, as well as their perceptions toward male calf care and welfare. Overall, 24 dairy producers in Ohio and Indiana participated in 1 in-person focus group (n = 10) or were individually interviewed (n = 14) using a semi-structured questionnaire with closed and open-ended questions about neonatal calf care and welfare. Discussions were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data from closed-ended questions are described quantitatively, and thematic analysis was used to identify common themes discussed by producers for open-ended questions. A majority of producers described using different care protocols for male and female dairy calves (64%; 9/14 interview participants). Low input care practices were more commonly consistent between male and female calves, such as colostrum protocols (71%; 10/14 interview participants) and navel care (100%; 14/14 interview participants) than more costly treatments. Of the producers that provided disease prevention products to female calves (79%; 11/14 interview participants), only a few also administered them to male calves (27%; 3/11 interview participants). Three major themes were constructed from the open-ended questions, including factors affecting male dairy calf care, attitude toward male calf welfare, and opportunities to improve male dairy calf welfare. Producers described multiple factors that influenced male calf care on the dairy, such as time and money required to care for them. There was divergence in concern among producers about male calf welfare, with some producers expressing concern, particularly for calves slaughtered soon after birth; yet others described feelings of indifference about the topic. Potential ways to improve male calf welfare, including greater sale prices and the involvement in specialized marketing schemes, were suggested by some producers. These findings highlight potential concerns for male calf welfare and ways to improve future care on dairy farms.

Consumer awareness of sustainable supply chains: A choice experiment on Parma ham PDO

The food system produces emissions at all stages, from agriculture and its inputs, and the livestock sector is nowadays one of the most significant contributors to environmental problems. The European swine production system is mainly intensive and generates high external costs such as water and air pollution. As a response to these emerging issues, there is a growing interest in the relationships between marketing and sustainability, with people that have begun to pay much more attention to health, environmental friendliness, and quality of products. The aim of this study is to understand if there is a market for a high-quality "Parma ham PDO", produced in sustainable supply chain at an environmental, health and animal welfare level. In this paper, we use discrete choice experiments to investigate Italian consumer's preferences and their willingness to pay (WTP) for Parma ham PDO with different characteristics, amongst which the use of air scrubber technology reducing pollutants emissions. Results seem to encourage the pork industry in better exploring pollutant emissions' reduction, showing a consumers' willingness to pay for this production technology. Similarly, results of this study can suggest the existence of a niche market for this typology of production.

Identifying barriers to decreasing meat consumption and increasing acceptance of meat substitutes among Swedish consumers

A key lifestyle change people could make to reduce their environmental impact is to reduce their meat consumption. However, meat is still a staple in many people's diet, and some consumers are reluctant to cut down. Meat substitutes, if accepted as adequate replacements for meat, may offer a suitable alternative without leaving consumers feeling dissatisfied. The aim of the present study was to identify psychological barriers to reducing meat consumption and increasing use of meat substitutes among Swedish consumers. Participants engaged in focus group discussions around purchasing, preparing, and consuming meat and meat substitutes. Four main themes were identified through thematic analysis: uncertainty, scepticism, health, and identity. These are discussed in relation to previous work on the barriers to reducing meat consumption. Strategies to communicate the environmental impact of meat to consumers and effect change through behavioural interventions are considered.