Napolitano F, Pacelli C, Girolami A, Braghieri A
Dipartimento di Scienze delle Produzioni animali, Università degli Studi della Basilicata, Via dell'Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza, Italy.
J Dairy Sci. 2008 Mar;91(3):910-7. doi: 10.3168/jds.2007-0709.
This study aimed to verify whether consumers confirm their willingness to pay extra costs for higher animal welfare standards in a situation where a potential purchase performed by consumers, such as the Vickrey auction, is used. A 104-member consumer panel was asked to rate its willingness to pay (WTP) for plain and low-fat yogurts in 3 information conditions: tasting without information (blind WTP), information about animal welfare without tasting (expected WTP), tasting with information about animal welfare (actual WTP). Information was provided to the consumers under the form of labels indicating the level of animal cleanliness and freedom of movement (5-point scale, from poor to very good). Consumers were influenced by information about low standards of animal welfare (low cleanliness and low freedom of movement) and moved their willingness to pay in the direction of their expectations. However, the discrepancy between expectancy and actual WTP was not totally assimilated, indicating that WTP was also expressed in relation to other aspects (e.g., the sensory properties of the products). Conversely, the information concerning high standards of animal welfare (high cleanliness and high freedom of movement) was able to affect expectancy but had an effect on actual WTP only when the most acceptable yogurt was offered to the consumers. In the case of discordant information on animal welfare, partly indicating high levels of welfare (freedom of movements) and low levels of welfare (cleanliness), expected WTP was always lower than blind WTP. However, when the least acceptable product was presented, they completely assimilated their actual WTP to the expectations. Conversely, with the most acceptable yogurt, no assimilation occurred and sensory properties prevailed in orienting consumer WTP. Within each product, consumers expressed a higher WTP for products with labels indicating high welfare standards as compared with yogurts with labels reporting intermediate and low welfare standard. These results show that information about animal welfare, if given to the consumers, can be a major determinant of consumer WTP for animal-based food products. However, information about high standards of animal welfare should be paired with products presenting a good eating quality.
本研究旨在验证在消费者进行潜在购买(如维克里拍卖)的情况下,消费者是否会确认愿意为更高的动物福利标准支付额外费用。一个由104名消费者组成的小组被要求在三种信息条件下对原味酸奶和低脂酸奶的支付意愿(WTP)进行评分:无信息品尝(盲测WTP)、无品尝的动物福利信息(预期WTP)、有动物福利信息的品尝(实际WTP)。信息以标签的形式提供给消费者,标签标明动物清洁程度和行动自由度的水平(5分制,从差到非常好)。消费者受到动物福利低标准信息(低清洁度和低行动自由度)的影响,并将其支付意愿朝着预期方向移动。然而,预期与实际WTP之间的差异并未完全被同化,这表明WTP也与其他方面(如产品的感官特性)有关。相反,关于动物福利高标准(高清洁度和高行动自由度)的信息能够影响预期,但只有当向消费者提供最可接受的酸奶时,才会对实际WTP产生影响。在动物福利信息不一致的情况下,部分表明高福利水平(行动自由度)和低福利水平(清洁度),预期WTP总是低于盲测WTP。然而,当展示最不可接受的产品时,他们将实际WTP完全调整到预期水平。相反,对于最可接受的酸奶,没有发生调整,感官特性在引导消费者WTP方面占主导地位。在每种产品中,与标签标明中等和低福利标准的酸奶相比,消费者对标签标明高福利标准的产品表达了更高的WTP。这些结果表明,如果向消费者提供动物福利信息,它可能是消费者对动物源性食品WTP的一个主要决定因素。然而,关于动物福利高标准的信息应与具有良好食用品质的产品相结合。