Exploring Consumer Behavior and Preferences in Welfare-Friendly Pork Breeding: A Multivariate Analysis

Overview

Journal Foods

Specialty Biotechnology

Date 2023 Aug 26

PMID 37628013

Authors

Michela Pugliese

Annalisa Previti

Angelina De Pascale

Angela Alibrandi

Agata Zirilli

Vito Biondi

Annamaria Passantino

Salvatore Monti

Carlo Giannetto

Maurizio Lanfranchi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

This study investigates consumer behavior and interest in "welfare-friendly" forms of pork production, considering the growing presence of animal welfare-focused breeding practices. The aim is to outline the typical profile of pork consumers and identify the key attributes influencing their purchasing decisions. A survey was conducted on a sample of 286 individuals after excluding those who only consumed beef and/or poultry or identified as vegetarians/vegans. Regression coefficients (b), 95% Confidence Intervals (95% C.I.), and -values were reported for univariate and multivariate models. Statistical significance was determined at < 0.05 (indicated in bold). The findings indicate that younger participants show greater sensitivity towards consuming meat raised using welfare-friendly methods, raising considerations about the age composition of the sample. The research's originality lies in evaluating consumer interest in pork raised with animal welfare-respecting techniques. The use of appropriate statistical tools, such as multivariate and multilayer models, allows effective solutions for multidimensional hypothesis testing problems in non-parametric permutation inference.

Citing Articles

Dietary supplementation of grape seed proanthocyanidins improves growth performance, carcass traits, and meat quality in growing-finishing pigs.

Zheng Y, Li Y, Yu B, Luo Y, Huang Z, Zheng P Anim Nutr. 2025; 20:200-210.

PMID: 39967699 PMC: 11833782. DOI: 10.1016/j.aninu.2024.10.006.

Consumer animal welfare and healthy perception of fresh sausages' fiber fat replaced and elaborated with meat from non-castrated male pigs.

Egea M, Garrido M, Font-I-Furnols M, Panella-Riera N, Linares M, Penaranda I Food Sci Nutr. 2024; 12(9):6720-6734.

PMID: 39554314 PMC: 11561793. DOI: 10.1002/fsn3.4278.

Automatic Quality Assessment of Pork Belly via Deep Learning and Ultrasound Imaging.

Wang T, Yang H, Zhang C, Chao X, Liu M, Chen J Animals (Basel). 2024; 14(15).

PMID: 39123715 PMC: 11311109. DOI: 10.3390/ani14152189.

Willingness to Pay a Higher Price for Pork Obtained Using Animal-Friendly Raising Techniques: A Consumers' Opinion Survey.

Giannetto C, Biondi V, Previti A, De Pascale A, Monti S, Alibrandi A Foods. 2024; 12(23).

PMID: 38231599 PMC: 10706721. DOI: 10.3390/foods12234201.

Consumer Preferences for Cured Meat Products from the Autochthonous Black Slavonian Pig.

Jelic Milkovic S, Crncan A, Kristic J, Kralik I, Djurkin Kusec I, Gvozdanovic K Foods. 2023; 12(19).

PMID: 37835319 PMC: 10572601. DOI: 10.3390/foods12193666.

References

Zinsstag J, Schelling E, Waltner-Toews D, Tanner M . From "one medicine" to "one health" and systemic approaches to health and well-being. Prev Vet Med. 2010; 101(3-4):148-56. PMC: 3145159. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2010.07.003. View

Grunert K, Sonntag W, Glanz-Chanos V, Forum S . Consumer interest in environmental impact, safety, health and animal welfare aspects of modern pig production: Results of a cross-national choice experiment. Meat Sci. 2017; 137:123-129. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.11.022. View

Aluwe M, Heyrman E, Almeida J, Babol J, Battacone G, citek J . Exploratory Survey on European Consumer and Stakeholder Attitudes towards Alternatives for Surgical Castration of Piglets. Animals (Basel). 2020; 10(10). PMC: 7600221. DOI: 10.3390/ani10101758. View

Sweeney S, Regan A, McKernan C, Benson T, Hanlon A, Dean M . Current Consumer Perceptions of Animal Welfare across Different Farming Sectors on the Island of Ireland. Animals (Basel). 2022; 12(2). PMC: 8773355. DOI: 10.3390/ani12020185. View

Di Crosta A, Ceccato I, Marchetti D, La Malva P, Maiella R, Cannito L . Psychological factors and consumer behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS One. 2021; 16(8):e0256095. PMC: 8366984. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256095. View

Carnovale F, Xiao J, Shi B, Arney D, Descovich K, Phillips C . Gender and Age Effects on Public Attitudes to, and Knowledge of, Animal Welfare in China. Animals (Basel). 2022; 12(11). PMC: 9179387. DOI: 10.3390/ani12111367. View

Albernaz-Goncalves R, Olmos Antillon G, Hotzel M . Linking Animal Welfare and Antibiotic Use in Pig Farming-A Review. Animals (Basel). 2022; 12(2). PMC: 8773261. DOI: 10.3390/ani12020216. View

Dransfield E, Ngapo T, Nielsen N, Bredahl L, Sjoden P, Magnusson M . Consumer choice and suggested price for pork as influenced by its appearance, taste and information concerning country of origin and organic pig production. Meat Sci. 2011; 69(1):61-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2004.06.006. View

Winkel C, von Meyer-Hofer M, Heise H . Understanding German Pig Farmers' Intentions to Design and Construct Pig Housing for the Improvement of Animal Welfare. Animals (Basel). 2020; 10(10). PMC: 7600590. DOI: 10.3390/ani10101760. View

10.

Mathur M, Robinson T, Reichling D, Gardner C, Nadler J, Bain P . Reducing meat consumption by appealing to animal welfare: protocol for a meta-analysis and theoretical review. Syst Rev. 2020; 9(1):3. PMC: 6945605. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-019-1264-5. View

11.

Regan A, Sweeney S, McKernan C, Benson T, Hyland J, Dean M . The Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Food Consumers' Awareness of Antimicrobial Resistance, OneHealth, and Animal Welfare Information on Food Labels. Front Vet Sci. 2021; 8:678509. PMC: 8276886. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2021.678509. View

12.

Cervellati E, Stella G, Filotto U, Maino A . How COVID-19 changed Italian consumers' behavior. Glob Financ J. 2024; 51:100680. PMC: 8570799. DOI: 10.1016/j.gfj.2021.100680. View

13.

Estevez-Moreno L, Maria G, Sepulveda W, Villarroel M, Miranda-de la Lama G . Attitudes of meat consumers in Mexico and Spain about farm animal welfare: A cross-cultural study. Meat Sci. 2020; 173:108377. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2020.108377. View

14.

Broom D . A history of animal welfare science. Acta Biotheor. 2011; 59(2):121-37. DOI: 10.1007/s10441-011-9123-3. View

15.

Busse M, Kernecker M, Siebert R . Ethical issues in poultry production - Datasets from a German consumer survey. Data Brief. 2020; 31:105748. PMC: 7256461. DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2020.105748. View

16.

Davies P . Intensive swine production and pork safety. Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2010; 8(2):189-201. DOI: 10.1089/fpd.2010.0717. View

17.

Montossi F, Font-I-Furnols M, Del Campo M, San Julian R, Brito G, Sanudo C . Sustainable sheep production and consumer preference trends: compatibilities, contradictions, and unresolved dilemmas. Meat Sci. 2013; 95(4):772-89. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.04.048. View

18.

Kwasny T, Dobernig K, Riefler P . Towards reduced meat consumption: A systematic literature review of intervention effectiveness, 2001-2019. Appetite. 2021; 168:105739. DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2021.105739. View

19.

McKendree M, Croney C, Widmar N . Effects of demographic factors and information sources on United States consumer perceptions of animal welfare. J Anim Sci. 2014; 92(7):3161-73. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2014-6874. View

20.

Miller R . Drivers of Consumer Liking for Beef, Pork, and Lamb: A Review. Foods. 2020; 9(4). PMC: 7230179. DOI: 10.3390/foods9040428. View