Beef animal welfare, attitudes and Willingness to Pay: A regional comparison across the Pyrenees

  • Pierre Sans Université de Toulouse, INP-Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire, UR-1303 ALISS, 23 Chemin des Capelles. 31076 Toulouse Cedex 3
  • Ana I. Sanjuán-López CITA, Agro-Food Economics and Natural Resources Dept., Avda Montañana, 930. 50059 Zaragoza / European Commission JRC-IPTS, AGRILIFE Unit, Edificio Expo, Inca Garcilaso 3. 41092 Seville
Keywords: meat, animal welfare labelling, WTP, cross-regional


Attitudes towards beef animal welfare (AW) and Willingness to Pay (WTP) for AW certification are investigated among consumers in two Spanish and two French regions located on both sides of the Pyrenees (n=1213). Attitudes were measured through a scale of 11 animal practices, on which, consumers report their degree of concern and trust on the supply chain compliance. Attitudes significantly differed across regions, especially with respect to those AW practices carried out by farmers, while trust lies behind concerns. Three segments based on individual consumer attitudes are defined by opposing those consumers who are more concerned and who trust more on the compliance with AW standards (n=264, 22%) to those less concerned and who are more uncertain about stakeholders´ compliance with AW rules (n=356, 29%). Consumer location, gender, age and education significantly differed across attitudinal clusters. Results from a contingent valuation survey show that WTP for certified animal friendly beef ranged between 20.6% and 22.6% over the average market price of standard beef, in Spain and France, respectively. Both, consumers’ socio-demographic characteristics and habits regarding beef meat purchasing and attitudes towards farmers influenced this WTP (the more consumers trust in farmers’ involvement in animal welfare, the highest is their WTP), while a negative overall attitude significantly reduced WTP.


Download data is not yet available.


Andreoni J, 1990. Impure altruism and donations to public goods: a theory of warm-glow giving. Econ J 100: 464-77.

Bennett R, 1997. Farm animal welfare and food policy. Food-Policy 22(4): 281-88.

Bennett R, Blaney R, 2002. Social consensus, moral intensity and willingness to pay to address a farm animal welfare issue. J Econ Psychol 23(4): 501-520.

Bennett R, Blaney R, 2003. Estimating the benefits of farm animal welfare legislation using the contingent valuation method. Agr Econ 29(1): 85-98.

Bennett R, Kelhlbacher A, Balcombe K, 2012. A method for the economic valuation of animal welfare benefits using a single welfare score. Animal Welfare 21: 125-130.

Blokhuis HJ, Keeling LJ, Gavinelli A, Serratosa J, 2008. Animal welfare's impact on the food chain. T Food Sci Technol 19 (S1): S79-S87.

Carlsson F, 2013. Non-market valuation: stated preference methods. In: The Oxford handbook of the economics of food consumption and policy; Lusk JL, Roosen J & Shogren JF, eds). New York (USA), pp: 181-214.

Carlsson F, Frykblom P, Lagerkvist CJ, 2005. Consumer preferences for food product quality attributes from Swedish agriculture. Ambio 34: 366-370.

Carlsson F, Frykblom P, Lagerkvist CJ, 2007a. Consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare: mobile abattoirs versus transportation to slaughter. Eur Rev Agr Econ 34(3): 321-344.

Carlsson F, Frykblom P, Lagerkvist CJ, 2007b. Farm animal welfare—Testing for market failure. J Agr Appl Econ 39(1): 61-73.

Carson RT, Mitchell RC, 1995. Sequencing and nesting in contingent valuation surveys. J Environ Econ Manage 28(2): 155-173.

Darby MR, Karni E, 1973. Free competition an optimal amount of fraud. J Law Econ 16: 67-88.

De Backer CJS, Hudders L, 2015. Meat morals: relationship between meat consumption consumer attitudes towards human and animal welfare and moral behavior. Meat Sci 99: 68-74.

de Barcellos MD, Krystallis A, de Melo Saab MS, Kügler JO, Grunert KG, 2011. Investigating the gap between citizens' sustainability attitudes and food purchasing behaviour: Empirical evidence from Brazilian pork consumers. Int J Consum Stud 35(4): 391-402.

de Jonge J, van Trijp HM, 2013. Meeting heterogeneity in consumer demand for animal welfare: A reflection on existing knowledge and implications for the meat sector. J Agr Environ Ethics 26(3): 629-661.

de Jonge J, van Trijp HM, Goddard E, Frewer L, 2008. Consumer confidence in the safety of food in Canada and the Netherlands: The validation of a generic framework. Food Qual Prefer 19(5): 439-451.

EC, 2012. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committe on the European Union Strategy for the protection and Welfare of animals 2012-2015. COM(2012) 6 final/2. Available in [December 2014].

Eurobarometer, 2007. Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed animals - Wave 2. Available in [December 2014].

Fernqvist F, Ekelund L, 2014. Credence and the effect on consumer liking of food - A review. Food Qual Prefer 32, Part C: 340-353.

Fishbein M, Ajzen I, 1975. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, USA. 578 pp.

Flachaire E, Hollard G, 2007. Starting point bias and respondent uncertainty in dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys. Resour Energ Econ 29(3): 183-194.

Gracia A, Zeballos G, 2011. Animal welfare concern and attitudes towards more animal welfare friendly meat products: characterization and segmentation. ITEA 107(1): 33-47.

Gracia A, Loureiro ML, Nayga RM, 2011. Valuing an EU animal welfare label using experimental auctions. Agr Econ 42(6): 669-677.

Hanemann WM, Loomis J, Kanninen B, 1991. Statistical efficiency of double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Am J Agr Econ 73: 1255-1263.

Hanemann WM, Loomis J, Kanninen BJ, 1999. Statistical analysis of discrete response CV data. In: Valuing Environmental preferences; Bateman IJ & Willis KG, eds). New York (USA), pp: 302-442.

Harpman DA, Welsch MP, 1999. Measuring goodness of fit for the doublebounded logit model. Comment. Am J Agr Econ 81: 235-237.

Heerwagen L, Mørkbak M, Denver S, Sandøe P, Christensen T, 2015. The role of quality labels in market-driven animal welfare. J Agr Environ Ethics 28(1): 67-84.

Herriges JA, 1999. Measuring goodness of fit for the double-bounded logit model. Comment. Am J Agr Econ 81: 231-234.

Ipsos-LE, 2013. Consumer market study on the functioning of voluntary food labelling schemes for consumers in the European Union EAHC/FWC/2012 86 04. Final Report. Available in [December 2014].

Kahneman D, Knetsch JL, 1992. Valuing public goods:The purchase of moral satisfaction. J Environ Econ Manage 22: 57-70.

Kehlbacher A, Bennett R, Balcombe K, 2012. Measuring the consumer benefits of improving farm animal welfare to inform welfare labelling. Food Policy 37(6): 627-633.

Krinsky I, Robb AL, 1986. On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. Rev Econ Stat 68: 715-719.

Lagerkvist CJ, Hess S, 2011. A meta-analysis of consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare. Eur Rev Agr Econ 38(1): 55-78.

Lagerkvist CJ, Carlsson F, Viske D, 2006. Swedish consumer preferences for animal welfare and biotech: A choice experiment. AgBioForum 9(1): 51-58.

Liljenstolpe C, 2008. Evaluating animal welfare with choice experiments: An application to Swedish pig production. Agribusiness 24(1): 67-84.

Lusk JL, 2011. The market for animal welfare. Agr Human Values 28(4): 561-575.

MAAPRAT, 2009. Consommation de viande. Available in [September 2014].

MAGRAMA, 2010. Panel de consumo alimentario. Available in [September 2014].

Markosayan A, McCluskey JJ, Wahl T, 2009. Consumer response to information about a functional food product. Apples enriched with antioxidants. Can J Agr Econ 57(3): 325-341.

Mittal V, Kamakura WA, Govind R, 2004. Geographic patterns in customer service and satisfaction: An empirical investigation. J Market 68(3): 48-62.

Moran D, McVittie A, 2008. Estimation of the value the public places on regulations to improve broiler welfare. Anim Welfare 17(1): 43-52.

Napolitano F, Braghieri A, Piasentier E, Favotto S, Naspetti S, Zanoli R, 2010a. Effect of information about organic production on beef liking and consumer willingness to pay. Food Qual Prefer 21(2): 207-212.

Napolitano F, Girolami A, Braghieri A, 2010b. Consumer liking and willingness to pay for high welfare animal-based products. T Food Sci Technol 21(11): 537-543.

Nocella G, Hubbard L, Scarpa R, 2010. Farm animal welfare, consumer willingness to pay, and trust: Results of a cross-national survey. Appl Econ Perspect Policy 32(2): 275-297.

Nocella G, Boecker A, Hubbard L, Scarpa R, 2012. Eliciting consumer preferences for certified animal-friendly foods: Can elements of the theory of planned behavior improve choice experiment analysis? Psychology & Marketing 29(11): 850-868.

Olynk NJ, Ortega DL, 2013. Consumer preferences for verified dairy cattle management practices in processed dairy products. Food Control 30(1): 298-305.

Park T, Loomis JB, Creel M, 1991. Land economics. Confidence intervals for evaluating benefits estimates from dichotomous choice contingent valuation studies. Land Econ 67(1): 64-73.

Sanjuán AI, Resano H, Zeballos G, Sans P, Panella-Riera N, Campo MM, Khliji S, Guerrero A, Oliver MA, Sañudo C, et al., 2012. Consumers' willingness to pay for beef direct sales. A regional comparison across the Pyrenees. Appetite 58(3): 1118-1127.

Sans P, de Fontguyon G, Giraud G, 2008. Value-based labels for fresh beef: an overview of French consumer behaviour in a BSE crises context. Int J Consum Stud 32(5): 407-413.

Sans P, Guillot C, Magdelaine P, 2011. Caractéristiques de la consommation des viandes de volaille: une comparaison des données du panel Kantar Worldpanel avec celles de l'enquête «Budget de famille» de l'Insee. 9èmes Journées de la Recherche Avicole, Tours (France), 29-30/03. pp: 24-28.

Santini F, Guri F, Gomez y Paloma S, 2013. Labelling of agricultural and food products of mountain farming. JRC Scientific and Policy Reports. Available in [December 2014].

Scarpa R, Zanoli R, Bruschi V, Naspetti S, 2013. Inferred and stated attribute non-attendance in food choice experiments. Am J Agr Econ 95(1): 165-180.

Taylor N, Signal T, 2009. Willingness to pay: Australian consumers and 'on the farm' welfare. J Appl Anim Welfare Sci 12(4): 345-359.

Thelen S, Ford JB, Honeycutt Jr ED, 2006. The impact of regional affiliation on consumer perceptions of relationships among behavioral constructs. J Busin Res 59(9): 965-973.

Toma L, McVittie A, Hubbard C, Stott AW, 2011. A structural equation model of the factors influencing British consumers' behaviour toward animal welfare. J Food Prod Market 17(2/3): 261-278.

Toma L, Stott AW, Revoredo-Giha C, Kupiec-Teahan B, 2012. Consumers and animal welfare. A comparison between European Union countries. Appetite 58(2): 597-607.

Tonsor G, Olynk N, Wolf C, 2009. Consumer preferences for animal welfareattributes: The case of gestation crates. J Agr Appl Econ 41(3): 713-730.

Van Loo EJ, Caputo V, Nayga Jr RM, Verbeke W, 2014. Consumers' valuation of sustainability labels on meat. Food Policy 49 (1): 137-150.

Vanhonacker F, Verbeke W, 2014. Public and consumer policies for higher welfare food products: challenges and opportunities. J Agr Environ Ethics 27(1): 153-171.

Vanhonacker F, Verbeke W, Poucke Ev, Tuyttens FAM, 2007. Segmentation based on consumers' perceived importance and attitude toward farm animal welfare. Int J Sociol Agr Food 15(3): 91-107.

Verain MCD, Bartels J, Dagevos H, Sijtsema SJ, Onwezen MC, Antonides G, 2012. Segments of sustainable food consumers: a literature review. Int J Consum Stud 36(2): 123-132.

How to Cite
SansP., & Sanjuán-LópezA. I. (2015). Beef animal welfare, attitudes and Willingness to Pay: A regional comparison across the Pyrenees. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 13(3), e0105.
Agricultural economics