Sunday 27 May 2012
Headlines
Did you find this story interesting? (0) (0)
21/03/2007
The millions who ignore welfare
Millions of consumers completely ignore animal welfare issues when shopping in the supermarket, says a new report.
Well over a third of the population fall into this category and would be unlikely to change even if they had more disposable cash. The findings—which could be of critical importance to the continued expansion of the free range market—are revealed by a major new study carried out for Freedom Food.
Called Consumer Attitudes to Animal Welfare the report is based on interviews with focus groups across Britain and a national survey. Ironically it concludes that the growth in sales of organic, free range and higher welfare food is partly a response to a decline in consumer confidence following scares like salmonella in eggs, BSE and avian influenza.
"Shoppers perceive greater traceability in higher welfare products than in their conventional counterparts," it says.
Greater concern about animals’ living conditions is also based on media sources and TV shows like Gordon Ramsay’s ’The F Word’ and Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall’s ’River Cottage’.
The report says 67 per cent of consumers think animal welfare is an important issue and express most welfare concern about animals’ living conditions, what they are fed and hygiene on farms.
It divides consumers into four types. These are:
High Welfare… shoppers who always buy higher welfare foods but represent just 10 per cent of the total. They are knowledgeable about food and seek out free range, organic and Fairtrade ranges. Surprisingly they are equally represented in all socio-economic groups.
Some Welfare… the 32 per cent who buy the higher welfare products that have "high visibility" such as eggs. But they do not seek out welfare information and their purchases may be driven not by ethical implications but by health or quality.
Little Welfare… 20 per cent fall into the category that buy one or two higher welfare products which are likely to be free range eggs and organic fruit because these require "a minimal amount of investment". Price is a major barrier for this group.
No Welfare… the largest group representing the 36 per cent of shoppers who never buy higher welfare products. "These consumers are unlikely to think about any factors when purchasing food other than price and value as they are disengaged with food in general," says the report, "they simply do not think about the food they consume and therefore lack the motivation to change their purchasing patterns. It is unlikely that given increased income this group would actually change behaviour." They are most strongly represented in the lowest economic groups.
The report points out that over 50 per cent of the population is currently making at least one or two purchase decisions as a result of their attitude to animal welfare. "However," it says, "this group is unlikely to be large enough to sustain market growth, and therefore new consumers will need to be converted." It suggests that potential in the market may lie in converting the occasional or infrequent purchasers. But for the free range industry this also represents a limiting factor because the limited purchases they already make are likely to include free range eggs.
Twenty per cent of shoppers said that the reason they buy higher welfare was because of the way the animals are treated. But 16 per cent cited the fact that "the product is better for you" and 14 per cent the fact that "it tastes better".
Over 40 per cent said price was an important factor but only 7 per cent said it was the primary factor in selecting food.
"Higher welfare food has an expensive image," says the report. "As a result price is cited as one of the main barriers to purchase."
Consumers often "overstate their propensity to purchase specific products". "This does not mean that they lie," says the report, "but simply what they think they consider when they shop is often different to what actually happens in practice."
They may be prompted to buy higher welfare products away from the shopping trip but by the time they get into the supermarket they lose or forget this motivation. Or simply fall back on routine. A third of shoppers claim to always buy the same products every time they shop. So one key to improving sales is to establish the routine, says the report.
But its proposals for achieving this are limited. It talks of "merchandising and point of sale best practice", placing all higher welfare foods together in one site in the supermarket and making products competitively priced with standard products "so that the price differential doesn’t seem that large". Another suggestion is money-off coupons.
But the report highlights the limited impact that Freedom Food has made on the food market. Many consumers were unaware of the assurance scheme, the report says. Only 24 per cent said they would trust it in regard to animal welfare in the production of food. That is considerably less than the number who trust Marks & Spencer and on a par with the other major supermarkets and the Soil Association. By contrast 41 per cent said they trust the Lion Quality mark.
And when it came to identifying the organisations that they would prefer to regulate welfare issues over 80 per cent of consumers named environmental health officers or trading standards officials. Twenty two per cent named the RSPCA but 18 per cent named farmers themselves.
"Many consumers thought that if schemes covered standards of production and food safety then they should be administered and inspected by government agencies," says the report. "This supports earlier findings that illustrate how consumers want government to protect the welfare of animals rather than allow the market to self regulate their animal welfare practices."
For more free range stories visit http://www.theranger.co.uk
Well over a third of the population fall into this category and would be unlikely to change even if they had more disposable cash. The findings—which could be of critical importance to the continued expansion of the free range market—are revealed by a major new study carried out for Freedom Food.
Called Consumer Attitudes to Animal Welfare the report is based on interviews with focus groups across Britain and a national survey. Ironically it concludes that the growth in sales of organic, free range and higher welfare food is partly a response to a decline in consumer confidence following scares like salmonella in eggs, BSE and avian influenza.
"Shoppers perceive greater traceability in higher welfare products than in their conventional counterparts," it says.
Greater concern about animals’ living conditions is also based on media sources and TV shows like Gordon Ramsay’s ’The F Word’ and Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall’s ’River Cottage’.
The report says 67 per cent of consumers think animal welfare is an important issue and express most welfare concern about animals’ living conditions, what they are fed and hygiene on farms.
It divides consumers into four types. These are:
High Welfare… shoppers who always buy higher welfare foods but represent just 10 per cent of the total. They are knowledgeable about food and seek out free range, organic and Fairtrade ranges. Surprisingly they are equally represented in all socio-economic groups.
Some Welfare… the 32 per cent who buy the higher welfare products that have "high visibility" such as eggs. But they do not seek out welfare information and their purchases may be driven not by ethical implications but by health or quality.
Little Welfare… 20 per cent fall into the category that buy one or two higher welfare products which are likely to be free range eggs and organic fruit because these require "a minimal amount of investment". Price is a major barrier for this group.
No Welfare… the largest group representing the 36 per cent of shoppers who never buy higher welfare products. "These consumers are unlikely to think about any factors when purchasing food other than price and value as they are disengaged with food in general," says the report, "they simply do not think about the food they consume and therefore lack the motivation to change their purchasing patterns. It is unlikely that given increased income this group would actually change behaviour." They are most strongly represented in the lowest economic groups.
The report points out that over 50 per cent of the population is currently making at least one or two purchase decisions as a result of their attitude to animal welfare. "However," it says, "this group is unlikely to be large enough to sustain market growth, and therefore new consumers will need to be converted." It suggests that potential in the market may lie in converting the occasional or infrequent purchasers. But for the free range industry this also represents a limiting factor because the limited purchases they already make are likely to include free range eggs.
Twenty per cent of shoppers said that the reason they buy higher welfare was because of the way the animals are treated. But 16 per cent cited the fact that "the product is better for you" and 14 per cent the fact that "it tastes better".
Over 40 per cent said price was an important factor but only 7 per cent said it was the primary factor in selecting food.
"Higher welfare food has an expensive image," says the report. "As a result price is cited as one of the main barriers to purchase."
Consumers often "overstate their propensity to purchase specific products". "This does not mean that they lie," says the report, "but simply what they think they consider when they shop is often different to what actually happens in practice."
They may be prompted to buy higher welfare products away from the shopping trip but by the time they get into the supermarket they lose or forget this motivation. Or simply fall back on routine. A third of shoppers claim to always buy the same products every time they shop. So one key to improving sales is to establish the routine, says the report.
But its proposals for achieving this are limited. It talks of "merchandising and point of sale best practice", placing all higher welfare foods together in one site in the supermarket and making products competitively priced with standard products "so that the price differential doesn’t seem that large". Another suggestion is money-off coupons.
But the report highlights the limited impact that Freedom Food has made on the food market. Many consumers were unaware of the assurance scheme, the report says. Only 24 per cent said they would trust it in regard to animal welfare in the production of food. That is considerably less than the number who trust Marks & Spencer and on a par with the other major supermarkets and the Soil Association. By contrast 41 per cent said they trust the Lion Quality mark.
And when it came to identifying the organisations that they would prefer to regulate welfare issues over 80 per cent of consumers named environmental health officers or trading standards officials. Twenty two per cent named the RSPCA but 18 per cent named farmers themselves.
"Many consumers thought that if schemes covered standards of production and food safety then they should be administered and inspected by government agencies," says the report. "This supports earlier findings that illustrate how consumers want government to protect the welfare of animals rather than allow the market to self regulate their animal welfare practices."
For more free range stories visit http://www.theranger.co.uk
No Comments
Nobody has posted any comments on this story.
|
Farming items for Sale
|
John Deere - 7930 Auto-Quad, TLS - Ballyclare
(Price on Application)
(Price on Application)
Fendt 415 - Newry(GBP 64000)
McCormick CX95LP TRACTOR - St Clears
(Price on Application)
(Price on Application)
New Holland TD95 D - Chulmleigh(GBP 14400)
Case IH CX100, Deluxe Cab, 2wd - Ballyclare(GBP 12300)
Related News
DEFRA animal health and welfare plan ignores reality - 07 Jun 2007The Tenant Farmers Association has rejected plans contained in a DEFRA consultation document for greater sharing of the responsibility and costs of an...
Farm Animal Welfare Council's opinion on the welfare of Farmed Gamebirds - 13 Nov 2008The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) today publishes it Opinion on the Welfare of Farmed Gamebirds on its website. Approximately 40 million gameb...
Vet warns suckler farmers against ignoring pneumonia threat for older calves - 24 Sep 2003Suckler farmers planning autumn housing should not overlook spring-born calves as the stress of housing, weaning and moving can substantially increase...
Government ignoring rural homes crisis - Baroness Miller - 28 Mar 2007The Liberal Democrats will attack the Government in the House of Lords today for failing to implement the recommendations of the Commission on Afforda...
Evidence ignored in badger cull row - 24 Oct 2007The UK government's chief scientist stands accused of allowing political expediency to overrule good science after recommending the culling of bad...
Government ignoring the needs of rural communities - 03 Mar 2008Government has done little to address the problems that blight rural England despite numerous reports that have highlighted them for years, says a new...
Decision on set-aside 'flanking' measures ignores report recommendations - 29 Jul 2008The decision by the Secretary of State to impose an additional cross-compliance requirement in response to the setting of set-aside at zero per cent d...
European Commission guilty of ignoring its own legislation - 14 Jan 2009Eurogroup for Animals, which represents animal welfare organisations from all over Europe, will be filing a complaint of maladministration against the...
Government cannot ignore strong farmer objections to disease responsibility and cost sharing - 07 Jul 2009The National Beef Association has called on Defra to open its mind to what livestock farmers are saying about disease cost and responsibility sharing ...
Defra’s fly-tipping statistics ignore private landowners, says the CLA - 01 Oct 2009The CLA today said Defra’s latest statistics on fly-tipping have ignored incidents on private land. CLA President Henry Aubrey-Fletcher said:...
