Bundling food labels: What role could the labels “Organic,” “Local” and “Low Fat” play in fostering the demand for animal‐friendly meat

• Published in: Agribusiness (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2022-04, Vol.38 (2), p.349-370
• Main Authors: Akaichi, Faical, Glenk, Klaus, Revoredo‐Giha, Cesar
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: animal welfare; Bundling; consumer; Consumers; Demand; Labels; local; Low fat; Meat; organic; Parameter identification; Pork; Segments; willingness to pay
• ISSN: 0742-4477; 1520-6297
• DOI: 10.1002/agr.21733

This study investigates whether and how the demand for animal‐friendly pork can benefit from the individual and joint use of the label “Animal Friendly,” “Organic,” “Local,” and “Low Fat.” A choice experiment was conducted to collect the data. The data were analyzed using the random parameter logit and the latent class models. Three consumer segments were identified. Consumers in Segment 1 (pro‐welfare consumers—39% of all respondents) were found to highly value the four labels. The results showed that their price premium for animal‐friendly pork could be increased significantly if the product is also labeled as “Local” or “Low Fat.” The members of Segment 2 (Welfare‐reluctant consumers—41% of all respondents) were found to negatively value the use of the label “Animal Friendly.” For “welfare‐reluctant” consumers, label bundling is of marginal effect. The rem1aining 20% of respondents (“Indifferent” “consumers”) were found to be indifferent to whether the labels “Animal Friendly,” “Organic,” and “Local” are used or not. However, their demand for animal‐friendly pork could significantly increase if the pork is also labeled as “Organic.” [EconLit Citations: C35, C83, D12, Q13, Q18].