Supplementary online material of International Food and Agribusiness Management Review DOI: https://doi.org/10.22434/ifamr2016.0115. What do consumers think about farm animal welfare in modern agriculture? Attitudes and shopping behaviour Heinke Heise and Ludwig Theuvsen Chair-Management in Agribusiness, Georg-August-University of Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Platz der Göttinger Sieben 5, 37073 Göttingen, Germany Corresponding author: Heinke Heise email: hheise@gwdg.de
Table S1. Sample composition compared to basic population in Germany. Variable Sample composition Composition of the basic population in Germany Gender in % Male 51.4 49.21 Female 48.6 50.79 Ø Age in years 46.58 Educational level in % Still at school 2.7 3.7 Secondary modern school 32.0 33.8 Secondary school certificate 32.0 22.7 High school certificate 32.8 28.8 No school leaving certificate 0.6 3.6 Other 0.0 7.1 Net household income level in % 1000 13.6 14 1000-1,999 26.7 25 2,000-2,999 23.4 23 3,000-3,999 16.5 17 4,000 19.8 21 Place of residence in % Northern Germany 15.9 15.34 Western Germany 35.9 34.17 Eastern Germany 20.0 19.67 Southern Germany 28.3 28.83
Table S2. Results of the cluster analysis. 1 Variables 2 Involvement in agriculture and livestock production *** 0.33 bde -0.06 a 0.18 de -0.22 ac -0.42 ac I know a lot about agricultural topics. *** 0.04 de -0.28 0.00 de -0.48 ac -0.51 ac I regularly use media to keep informed about agricultural topics. *** 0.36 de 0.11 d 0.37 de -0.07 ac -0.31 abc I am interested in agricultural topics. *** 0.67 de 0.41 d 0.53 d 0.22 a -0.14 abc I know a lot about livestock production. *** 0.22 d -0.09 0.01 d -0.18 a -0.45 ac I regularly use the agricultural trade press for information on agricultural topics. *** -0.10 bde -0.70 a -0.39-0.73 a -0.68 a Perception of animal welfare in livestock production *** -0.02 de -0.18 cde 0.33 bd -0.63 abce 0.59 abd Farm animals in livestock production systems feel comfortable. *** -0.49 cde -0.40 cde -0.07 abd -0.91 abce 0.14 abd Farmers take good care of their farm animals. *** 0.03 cd 0.03 cd 0.33 abd -0.39 abce 0.26 d The health status of farm animals is good. *** -0.08 de -0.20 cd 0.15 bd -0.45 ace 0.34 abd Farm animals can show their natural innate behaviour in agricultural husbandry systems. *** -0.10 d -0.22 de -0.17 d -0.64 abce 0.18 bd The agricultural sector is honestly interested in improving farm animal welfare. *** 0.02 c -0.21 ce 0.42 abd -0.34 ce 0.26 bd A farm animal with good performance also feels comfortable. *** 0.13 dd -0.40 a -0.02 d -0.56 ae 0.04 d A farm animal that is not used to an outdoor paddock does not miss it. *** -1.53 e -1.63 e -1.30 be -1.64 e -0.52 abcd Conception of animal welfare and animal welfare standards *** 0.39 ce 0.39 ce 0.16 abe 0.32 ae -1.80 abcd Good health is particularly important for the level of farm animal welfare. *** 1.91 e 1.87 e 1.86 e 1.87 e 0.75 abcd The structural-technical systems used in barns are particularly important for the level of farm animal welfare. *** 1.78 e 1.65 e 1.71 e 1.64 e 0.55 abcd Animals must be able to engage in their natural innate behaviour; only then can they feel comfortable. *** 1.70 e 1.81 e 1.65 e 1.66 e 0.51 abcd The animal welfare standards for farm animals should be enhanced. *** 1.66 ce 1.73 ce 1.25 abde 1.74 ce 0.48 abcd Animal welfare and the market *** -0.12 bcde -1.13 acde 0.56 ab 0.54 ab 0.28 ab Higher national animal welfare requirements will lead to more imported meat. *** -0.23 abde -1.13 acde 0.31 ab 0.39 abe 0.21 bcd Higher national animal welfare requirements will lead to competitive disadvantages for German farmers on international markets. *** 0.19 bcd -0.72 acde 0.71 ace 0.77 ace 0.23 abd Products from more animal-friendly production systems will always occupy only market niches. *** -0.15 bcde -0.76 acde 0.25 ab 0.29 ab 0.22 ab Politicians, journalists and consumers cannot evaluate whether or not farm animals are kept under good conditions. *** -0.26 bc -0.69 acde 0.24 ac -0.07 b 0.12 b Social acceptance of meat consumption *** -1.07 bcde 0.54 ae 0.55 ae 0.51 ae -0.60 abcd Eating meat is socially accepted. *** 0.35 bcd 1.56 ae 1.55 ade 1.46 ae 0.64 bcd My friends and family accept the consumption of meat. *** 0.44 bcde 1.62 ae 1.63 ae 1.66 ae 0.84 abcd Animal welfare and farm size *** 0.07 cd 0.06 cd -0.74 abde 0.79 abce -0.08 cd Small farms are more easily able to implement higher animal welfare requirements than large farms. *** 0.50 ae 0.24 de -0.24 bcde 1.11 abcd 0.43 ce Animals feel more comfortable on small farms than on large farms. *** 0.81 ae 1.03 ade 0.26 bcde 1.33 abcd 0.65 ace 1 Values marked with letters (a, b, c, d, e) have significant differences between the corresponding clusters (Tamhane s T2 post hoc test); scale from +2= totally agree to -2= totally disagree ; n=516. 2 *** = variables are significant at P 0.001.
Table S3. Personal characteristics and lifestyle habits of the respondents. Variables 1 Age n.s. 47.31 47.91 47.67 43.15 46.26 Share of women * 61.9% 45.9% 43.5% 49.5% 39.0% High school certificate 28.8% 42.2% 28.7% 37.1% 26.0% Still at school/ in apprenticeship 5.9% 10.1% 4.3% 14.4% 6.5% No completed apprenticeship 11.0% 8.3% 7.8% 18.6% 9.1% Responsible for the household (househusband/wife) 12.7% 2.8% 9.6% 8.2% 6.5% Income 3,000-3,999 22.0% 11.9% 17.4% 19.6% 9.1% Income 4,000 16.9% 29.4% 17.4% 16.5% 18.2% Religious education as a child -0.16-0.24-0.49-0.59-0.22 Religious lifestyle -0.69-0.71-0.91-1.06-0.70 Place of residence: eastern Germany 18.6% 13.8 21.7% 28.9% 16.9% Place of residence: northern Germany 9.3% 22.9% 18.3% 15.5% 13.0% Grew up in a small city * 33.3% 22.5% 18.6% 15.7% 9.8% Meat consumption ** 89.8% 97.2% 99.1% 97.9% 93.5% No involvement in agriculture * 52.5% 54.2% 50.4% 68.0% 66.2% Indirect involvement in agriculture through friends or family * 44.9% 45.8% 47.0% 39.9% 29.9% 1 **, * and ns = variables are significant at P 0.01, 0.05 and 0.10 (not significant), respectively; scale from +2 = very religious to -2 = not at all religious ; nominal scale: significance in accordance with Chi-square; n=516.
Table S4. Purchase behaviour of the consumers. 1 Variables 2 I regularly buy products from animal-friendly production systems. *** 0.64 de 0.62 de 0.28 0.18 ab 0.05 bc I regularly buy products of animal origin from organic production systems. * -0.11 0.55 de -0.04-0.22 b -0.29 b It is easy to find products from animal-friendly production systems in retail. *** -0.26 b -0.76 ace -0.31 b -0.55-0.18 b For me, good animal welfare is the basis of my decisionmaking when buying products of animal origin. *** 0.78 cde 0.61 ce 0.20 ac 0.24 a -0.06 ab I always think about the way the animals were kept when buying products of animal origin. *** 0.66 cde 0.35-0.03 a 0.18 a -0.03 a When buying products of animal origin, I always pay attention whether they have an animal welfare label. *** 0.36 cde 0.15-0.10 a -0.22 a -0.12 a For me, price is the basis of my decision-making when buying products of animal origin. *** -0.23 cde -0.44 cde 0.14 ab 0.22 ab 0.30 ab I would love to buy products from animal friendly production systems more often, but they are too 0.24 cd 0.12 cd 0.64 ab 0.95 abe 0.38 d expensive. *** Animal welfare labels often try to cheat consumers. * 0.37 0.18 0.37 0.48 e 0.10 d I feel well-informed by labels about the way the animals were kept. *** -0.26 b -0.76 ace -0.31 b -0.55-0.18 b I trust animal welfare labels. * -0.03 d 0.01 d -0.10-0.40 ab -0.16 Willingness to pay a price premium for animal friendly products *** 89.8% 82.6% 75.7% 74.2% 51.9% Groceries purchased at the supermarket * 45.8% 41.3% 56.5% 52.6% 63.6% Meat purchased from a butcher * 19.5% 22.0% 16.5% 8.2% 10.4% 1 ***, * and ns = variables are significant at P 0.001, 0.05and P 0.10 (not significant), respectively. 2 Values marked with letters (a, b, c, d, e) have significant differences between the corresponding clusters (Tamhane s T2 post hoc test); scale from +2 = totally agree to -2 = totally disagree ; n=516.