Search

New EU regulations require more stringent country-of-origin labeling, while imports of broiler meat from non-EU countries are increasing. In light of these trends, we have studied citizens' and producers' perceptions of broiler meat originating from Belgium versus Brazil and their perception of broiler production in Belgium versus Brazil. A particular focus was the association between country of origin and perceived level of animal welfare. We also investigated the perception of scaling-up and outdoor access in terms of perceived level of animal welfare. Cross-sectional survey data was collected among Flemish citizens (n = 541) and broiler producers (n = 114). In accordance with literature on general farm animal welfare, both stakeholder types claimed to allocate great importance to broiler welfare and generally agreed with the Welfare Quality model of broiler welfare. Citizens disagreed with the producers that 1) consumers are not willing to pay more for higher welfare products, 2) that broilers suffer little, 3) that broiler welfare in current Belgian production units is generally non-problematic, 4) that scaling-up production units would not have a positive impact on profitability nor a profoundly negative impact on broiler welfare, and 5) that the impact of providing broilers with outdoor access is negative for consumers, farmers, and broilers. Country of origin had a strong influence on the perception of both broiler production and broiler meat. Belgian citizens, and producers (much more than citizens) considered nearly all aspects related to broiler production and broiler meat to be significantly superior for chicken produced in Belgium compared to Brazil. Further research should focus on how these perceptions influence purchase intentions and production decisions. Future avenues for research are to quantify market opportunities for country-of-origin labeling and to investigate to which extent stakeholders' perceptions correspond with reality.

Concern about the welfare of production animals is growing among various stakeholders, including the general public. Citizens can influence the market for premium welfare products by expressing public concerns, and consumers—the actors who actually purchase products—can do so through their purchasing behavior. However, current market shares for premium welfare products are small in Europe. To better align purchase behavior with public and individuals’ concerns, insight is needed into determinants that influence the intention to purchase premium welfare products. A cross-sectional online survey of 787 Flemish milk consumers was conducted to investigate attitudes toward and intention to purchase animal-friendly milk. More than half of the sample (52.5%) expressed the intention to purchase animal-friendly milk. Linear regression modeling indicated that intention was positively influenced by (1) higher perceived product benefits from animal-friendly milk (milk with more health benefits and higher quality); (2) higher personal importance of extrinsic product attributes such as local production and country of origin; (3) higher personal importance of animal welfare; (4) a more natural living oriented attitude toward cows; and (5) a more positive general attitude toward milk. Intention was negatively influenced by (1) a stronger business-oriented attitude toward cows; and (2) by a higher personal importance attached to price. These insights in key components of purchase intention can assist producers, the dairy industry, and retailers to position and market animal-friendly milk.

The aim of this paper is to provide up-to-date information about the status of broiler production in Flanders (the northern region of Belgium) and the opinion of Flemish broiler producers on animal welfare. Our review revealed that intensification of Flemish broiler production has continued, as characterised by a decreasing number of production plants with up-scaled production. Results of a quantitative survey of Flemish broiler producers showed that the typical broiler house is 21 years old and houses 35,000 mixed-sex Ross broilers indoors on wood shavings or straw. The commonly-used modal management implies thinning one-fifth of the flock at the age of 35 days. The remaining broilers are slaughtered when they are 42 days old and weigh an average of 2.4 kg. The median unassisted mortality rate is 2% and another 0.5% are culled. Further scaling-up of production units is not viewed favourably by producers, particularly as related to consumer acceptance. Producers state they place great importance on animal welfare and do not agree that broiler welfare is poor. A small minority of producers plan to invest in improving broiler welfare in the near future. They see few advantages in paying more attention to broiler welfare or providing outdoor access to improve their public image and consumer acceptance. Producers define animal welfare mainly in terms of good health, feeding and housing and consider aspects that relate to the birds’ ability to express appropriate behaviour as less important. We discuss how this concept of ‘animal welfare’ corresponds to that reported by other people with farming backgrounds. Unfortunately this belief contradicts the perception of citizens and consumers and the assumptions underlying the proposed European standards for monitoring farm animal welfare as developed by the Welfare Quality® consortium.

Stocking density is a prominent topic in public debates on animal welfare and was one of the reasons for the European Commission to set limits to the stocking density on broiler farms. The objective of this paper was to calculate in detail the financial impact of changes in technical and management variables due to decreasing stocking densities in line with new European Union (EU) regulations. Therefore, the productive performance indicators such as BW, mortality, or feed conversion and farm technical data such as water consumption and heating of 3 independent experiments conducted at a poultry research station in Flanders (Belgium) were combined. Using the partial budget technique only those elements that change with stocking density have been taken into account. Reducing stocking density implies a recalculation of all costs on a reduced number of birds. This yields an economic situation that leaves hardly any profit margin for most of the broiler producers under the present market conditions. It was found that the critical threshold of stocking density for maintaining profitability under the present market and technical conditions is around 46 kg/m(2), thus well above the EU maximum of 42 kg/m(2). It is shown, however, that with changing broiler feed and meat prices, the impact might be less negative in economic terms.

In most European countries, male piglets being reared for meat are physically castrated without anaesthesia in order to avoid boar taint and to safeguard sensory meat quality. This method is increasingly criticised for its violation of piglet welfare. Alternative methods are being researched and castration with anaesthesia or analgesia and vaccination (immunisation) against gonadotropin-releasing hormone (using Improvac (R), Pfizer GmbH) have been proposed as possible solutions. In addition to efficacy, the successful introduction and adoption of the vaccine method by stakeholders in pig supply chains are expected to depend on a favourable reception by consumers. This large-scale quantitative cross-country study (n = 4031) involving representative samples of consumers in France, Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium does not support the reserved attitude of stakeholders who fear potential low market acceptance. The vaccine method was actually preferred by the majority of consumers surveyed (69.6% of the participants) and it was perceived as equally effective in terms of avoiding boar taint; 43.8% of the consumers reported an intention to seek out pork from pigs where the vaccine had been used to control boar taint, whereas 33.7% reported an intention to avoid pork from pigs physically castrated with anaesthesia. Consumers' favourable dispositions to the vaccine method were independent of dominant ethical, health or price orientations when purchasing pork.

This study examines traditional food chain goals and explores the match with general consumer perceptions and preferences in relation to traditional food as a food product category. Chain goals were selected using focus group discussions and in-depth interviews (84 chain members, three European countries, five traditional food categories), as well as a literature review and a small scale survey (26 chain members, three European countries, three traditional food categories). Consumer data was gathered in six European countries via qualitative focus group discussions (95 participants), word association tests (721 participants), and a quantitative survey (4,828 participants). The study identifies five key chain goals: “To maintain traditionalism,” “To increase efficiency,” “To improve responsiveness,” “To improve quality,” and “To create chain balance.” Traditionalism and quality goals were relevant and important to consumers, whereas efficiency, responsiveness, and chain balance goals were not directly recognized by or apparent to them. [EconLit citations: D12; D74; L14]. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The Welfare Quality® project has developed an operational definition of farm animal welfare, which consists of 12 criteria grouped into four principles (‘good feeding’, ‘good housing’, ‘good health’ and ‘appropriate behaviour’). As part of a larger survey, 204 farmers, 72 vegetarians, and a representative sample of 459 adult citizens in Flanders (Belgium) scored the importance of each of the 12 criteria on a 1–10 scale, and divided 100 points across the four principles according to the perceived relative weights for farm animal welfare. These data were analysed to verify quantitatively whether (1) the grouping of 12 criteria into the four principles, and (2) the relative weights used by Welfare Quality® for aggregating the 12 criteria into an overall welfare judgement correspond with the perception of these three stakeholder groups from a region and setting not previously covered by Welfare Quality® studies. Moreover, the effects of various socio-demographic variables on the importance allocated to the welfare criteria and principles were investigated. Vegetarians and females gave consistently higher importance scores to all 12 criteria as compared with farmers, citizens and males, respectively, particularly for the (criteria belonging to the) principle ‘appropriate behaviour’. Farmers allocated more weight to ‘good feeding’ than did vegetarians or citizens. These differences confirm that farmers view animal welfare more in terms of biological functioning (instead of affective states or natural living) as compared to other citizens, and vegetarians in particular. As the concept has a different meaning to different people, any operational definition of animal welfare is unlikely to match equally well with the perception of every single stakeholder group or person. The structure of the Welfare Quality® operational definition with the 12 criteria aggregated into four principles, corresponds well with the opinion of the stakeholders as they judged all 12 criteria as rather important to extremely important for farm animal welfare. Factor analysis restricted to contain four factors confirmed the grouping of the criteria into the correct principles. Exploratory factor analysis using Eigenvalues > 1 as extraction criterion indicated, however, that from the citizen perspective two principles (‘good feeding & health’ and ‘appropriate behaviour & housing’) rather than four would suffice. The main discrepancy with the Welfare Quality® approach concerns the aggregation procedure: the stakeholders did not consider all four principles as equally important, and the relative importance allocated to criteria corresponded poorly across principles. Some of these discrepancies were consistent across the three different stakeholder groups.

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.

Farm animal welfare has become increasingly important and relevant from the societal point of view throughout the livestock production chain, with space allowance for farm animals being one of its most topical and vividly debated sub-matters. Anticipating on the increasing power of the citizens' voice in Western society, this study focuses on societal concerns related to space allowance in Flemish animal production. This paper reports a quantitative analysis of cross-sectional surveys conducted among citizens of Flanders during 2000–2002 (n = 521) and during 2006 (n = 459). Compared with other animal welfare aspects, the survey participants perceived stocking densities and pen sizes as very essential for attaining an acceptable level of farm animal welfare. In addition, they evaluated stocking densities and pen sizes in current Flemish animal production as inadequate. Combined these results indicate that societal concern, defined as the difference between perceived importance and evaluative belief, is very high for stocking density and pen size, though less for group size. Societal concern about stocking density was found to be higher among younger people and households without children, while societal concern was not significantly associated with living environment (rural versus urban). Gender (higher concern among women in dataset 2006) and educational (higher concern among higher educated people in dataset 2000–2002) differences were not consistently significant in all datasets. The findings from this study suggest that larger gains in terms of animal welfare image among the public can be realised from providing farm animals with more space relative to reducing animal group size.

Animal welfare is of increasing importance in livestock production and consumption debates. However, discordance exists between citizens' and farmers' perception of animal welfare. Since the search for, and the realization of improvements towards farm animal welfare is strongly driven by citizen expectations, it is of utmost importance to better understand this perceptual discordance. A quantitative study was done in Flanders, Belgium during 2006, including citizens as well as farmers, to obtain a detailed insight in the way the multi-dimensional concept of farm animal welfare is valued. This allowed to discriminate between issues of agreement and disagreement. In general, a similar interpretation of farm animal welfare in terms of animal welfare related aspect's ranking was found. Differences were mainly related to aspects dealing with the ability to engage in natural behaviour on the one hand and with production process-related aspects on the other hand. Citizens evaluate the current state of animal welfare as rather problematic, while farmers report a more satisfactory evaluation of the present condition of farm animal welfare. Especially differing opinions regarding the ability to engage in natural behaviour, together with aspects related to pain, stress and the availability of space seem to contribute to the discordance between farmers and citizens in terms of evaluative beliefs.

[EN] Stocking density is a prominent issue in public debates on farm animal welfare. Public perceptions and economic impact of reduced stocking density should be considered, along with effects on animal performances and welfare. In this paper, experimental data and accountancy data based on 15 Belgian farms were combined to calculate the financial impact of different stocking densities on broiler rabbit farm profitability. Using the partial budget technique, only those elements that change with stocking density were taken into account. From the experiment, feed conversion and feed intake were found to increase slightly though significantly with decreasing stocking density, although only 5% and 6% of the variation, respectively, were explained by stocking density. However, reducing stocking density implies a recalculation of all costs in a reduced number of broiler rabbits, which has a negative impact on farm profitability. Reducing stocking density from the standard situation of 15 rabbits per m² to 10 rabbits per m² reduced added value by 22 euros per doe. In general, farm income was low and amounted to only 28.10 euros per doe during 2006-2008 for the reference situation of 15 rabbits per m². Below a density of 9 rabbits/m², a negative farm income was calculated. Sensitivity analysis showed that rabbit meat price has a stronger influence on the added value at a given density than rabbit feed price., This research is funded by the Agency for Innovation by Science and Technology in Flanders (IWT Vlaanderen), Brussels, Belgium. We gratefully acknowledge the Flemish Association of Poultry and Rabbit Breeders, and especially Ilka Hertogs for their willingness to provide the used accountancy data.

Within the European food market, traditional food products (TFP) represent a growing segment. Nonetheless, European consumers' definition and perception of TFP have not been thoroughly addressed thus far. The specific aim of this study was to provide an all-embracing consumer definition of the concept of TFP that is comfortable for the largest possible majority of European food consumers. Cross-sectional survey data were collected from representative consumer samples from Belgium, France, Italy, Norway, Poland, and Spain in November 2007, yielding a total sample of 4,828 participants. The study elaborates on country-specific peculiarities and identifies consumer segments that differ in the emphasis they place in the conceptualization of TFP. The following definition emerged, A traditional food product is a product frequently consumed or associated to specific celebrations and/or seasons, transmitted from one generation to another, made in a specific way according to gastronomic heritage, naturally processed, and distinguished and known because of its sensory properties and associated to a certain local area, region or country. Cross-European homogeneity was found in the elements to include in the definition, across and within-country heterogeneity existed regarding the specific emphasis of particular elements. Four consumer segments were distinguished by whom TFP are predominantly defined as multiconcept, usual/familiar, authentic/typical, and inherited. The first segment displayed a very broad conceptualization, without a clear differentiation. For the latter three segments, particular elements dominated their conceptualization. Product positioning, marketing, and communication challenges for TFP facing these consumer segments are discussed. [EconLit citations: D12; M39; Q13]. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.