Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T13:49:05.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Willingness to pay for beef is highly transferrable between different consumer groups

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2017

S. P. F. Bonny ,
J.-F. Hocquette ,
D. W. Pethick ,
I. Legrand ,
J. Wierzbicki ,
P. Allen ,
L. J. Farmer ,
R. J. Polkinghorne  and
G. E. Gardner
S. P. F. Bonny*
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia INRA, UMR1213, Recherches sur les Herbivores, F-63122, Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France
J.-F. Hocquette
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1213, Recherches sur les Herbivores, F-63122, Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France Clermont Université, VetAgro Sup, UMR1213, Recherches sur les Herbivores, F-63122, Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France
D. W. Pethick
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia
I. Legrand
Affiliation:
Institut de l’Elevage, Service Qualite’ des Viandes, MRAL, 87060 Limoges, Cedex 2, France
J. Wierzbicki
Affiliation:
Polish Beef Association Ul, Kruczkowskiego 3, 00-380 Warszawa, Poland
P. Allen
Affiliation:
Teagasc Food Research Centre, Ashtown, Dublin 15, Ireland
L. J. Farmer
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Newforge Lane, Belfast, BT9 5PX, UK
R. J. Polkinghorne
Affiliation:
Birkenwood Pty Ltd, 431 Timor Road, Murrurundi, NSW 2338, Australia
G. E. Gardner
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Accurately quantifying a consumer’s willingness to pay (WTP) for beef of different eating qualities is intrinsically linked to the development of eating-quality-based meat grading systems, and therefore the delivery of consistent, quality beef to the consumer. Following Australian MSA (Meat Standards Australia) testing protocols, over 19 000 consumers from Northern Ireland, Poland, Ireland, France and Australia were asked to detail their willingness to pay for beef from one of four categories that best described the sample; unsatisfactory, good-every-day, better-than-every-day or premium quality. These figures were subsequently converted to a proportion relative to the good-every-day category (P-WTP) to allow comparison between different currencies and time periods. Consumers also answered a short demographic questionnaire. Consumer P-WTP was found to be remarkably consistent between different demographic groups. After quality grade, by far the greatest influence on P-WTP was country of origin. This difference was unable to be explained by the other demographic factors examined in this study, such as occupation, gender, frequency of consumption and the importance of beef in the diet. Therefore, we can conclude that the P-WTP for beef is highly transferrable between different consumer groups, but not countries.

Keywords

consumer testingbeefvaluedemographicsEurope
Type
Full Paper
Information
Advances in Animal Biosciences , Volume 8 , Supplement s1: Improving the quality and sustainability of beef production , October 2017 , pp. s72 - s75
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

a

Present address: School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia.

References

Bonny, SPF, Hocquette, J-F, Pethick, DW, Farmer, LJ, Legrand, I, Wierzbicki, J, Allen, P, Polkinghorne, RJ and Gardner, GE 2017a. Untrained consumer assessment of the eating quality of beef: 1. A single composite score can predict beef quality grades. Animal 11, 1389–1398.Google Scholar
Bonny, SPF, Hocquette, J-F, Pethick, DW, Farmer, LJ, Legrand, I, Wierzbicki, J, Allen, P, Polkinghorne, RJ and Gardner, GE 2017b. Untrained consumer assessment of the eating quality of beef: 2. Demographic factors have only minor effects on consumer scores and willingness to pay. Animal 11, 1399–1411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonny, SPF, Hocquette, J-F, Pethick, DW, Farmer, LJ, Legrand, I, Wierzbicki, J, Allen, P, Polkinghorne, RJ and Gardner, GE 2016. The variation in the eating quality of beef from different sexes and breed classes cannot be completely explained by carcass measurements. Animal 10, 987–995.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feuz, DM, Umberger, WJ, Calkins, CR and Sitz, B 2004. U.S. consumers’ willingness to pay for flavor and tenderness in steaks as determined with an experimental auction. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 29, 501–516.Google Scholar
Griffith, GR and Thompson, JM 2012. The aggregate economic benefits to the Australian beef industry from the adoption of meat standards Australia: updated to 2010/11. Australasian Agribusiness Review 20, 11–38.Google Scholar
Hocquette, J-F, Legrand, I, Jurie, C, Pethick, DW and Micol, D 2011. Perception in France of the Australian system for the prediction of beef quality (Meat Standards Australia) with perspectives for the European beef sector. Animal Production Science 51, 30–36.Google Scholar
Lyford, C, Thompson, J, Polkinghorne, R, Miller, M, Nishimura, T, Neath, K, Allen, P and Belasco, E 2010. Is willingness to pay (WTP) for beef quality grades affected by consumer demographics and meat consumption preferences? Australasian Agribusiness Review 18, 1–17.Google Scholar
Reicks, AL, Brooks, JC, Garmyn, AJ, Thompson, LD, Lyford, CL and Miller, MF 2011. Demographics and beef preferences affect consumer motivation for purchasing fresh beef steaks and roasts. Meat Science 87, 403–411.Google Scholar
Thompson, J, Polkinghorne, R, Gee, A, Motiang, D, Strydom, P, Mashau, M, Ng’ambi, J, deKock, R and Burrow, H 2010. Beef palatability in the Republic of South Africa: implications for niche-marketing strategies. In ACIAR technical reports, pp. 1–56. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research ACIAR, Canberra, ACT, Australia.Google Scholar
Watson, R, Gee, A, Polkinghorne, R and Porter, M 2008. Consumer assessment of eating quality – development of protocols for Meat Standards Australia (MSA) testing. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48, 1360–1367.Google Scholar