No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Simple SummaryEuropean consumers recognize the added value of mountain dairy production and relate it to a composite of positive attributes. However, while consumers’ understanding of conventional dairy production and animal welfare has already been investigated, how consumers perceive animal welfare in traditional mountain dairy farming remains unexplored. This qualitative study aims at shedding light on consumers’ perceptions regarding animal welfare in mountain dairy cheese production systems. Focus group interviews were carried out with three major consumer groups that purchase mountain cheese including rural consumers living in mountain villages, urban consumers living in the plains, and urban consumers living in mountain cities. The results of this study show that all participants expect mountain farming to be on a smaller scale and mountain products to be healthier when compared to non-mountain farming systems. However, the verbal appreciation of certain husbandry and management choices especially in the case of urban consumers did not result in their recognition when pictures of traditional husbandry systems were provided, which displays a disconnection between the expectations towards mountain production systems and reality. These findings will support the development of a transparent science-based dialogue among mountain dairy chain actors on animal welfare and sustainable farming practices in mountain areas.AbstractThis qualitative study aims to investigate consumers’ perceptions toward dairy cow welfare in traditional mountain farms. While consumers’ understanding of conventional dairy production and animal welfare has already been investigated, how consumers perceive animal welfare in traditional mountain dairy farming remains still unexplored. Focus group interviews were conducted with consumers having different degrees of geographical proximity to mountains and with an explicit interest in local dairy products. The results of this qualitative study show that participants expect mountain farming to be on a smaller scale when compared to non-mountain farming systems and expect mountain products to be healthier. Similarly, all participants consider origin, locality, and small-scale production as relevant quality attributes of mountain cheese. However, the appreciation of these abstract features did not necessarily result in their recognition when sample pictures of traditional husbandry systems were provided especially in the case of urban participants. This study contributes to reveal the gap between urban consumers’ conception of mountain farming and the actual farming practices. It also indicates the need to promote an effective science-based dialogue on animal welfare that goes beyond an anthropomorphic perspective and tackles the complexity of farming systems in relation to the context in which they are located.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how the choice of buying managers to share or limit the sharing of strategic information with their suppliers relates to the presence or absence of goodwill and competence trust in the buyer–supplier relationship. Design/methodology/approach An interpretive single case study of a mid-sized retailer was used. In total, 17 semi-structured interviews examining information sharing events were conducted with buying managers, along with the analysis of company documents. Findings Goodwill and competence trust have a positive effect on strategic information sharing, yet this study reveals several tactics used by buying managers in the presence of competence trust only. With a lack of established trust, or earlier trust breaches, little to no information sharing occurs. Research limitations/implications This study featured cross-sectional data of a single case from the buyer’s perspective. This limits its generalizability, yet provides opportunities to test the findings through longitudinal studies, potentially gathering data from both buyers and suppliers. Practical implications Relating which types of information being shared for different forms of trust guides managers’ expectations on which type of trust they wish to build for each of their buyer–supplier relationships. Originality/value This study examines the trust and information sharing relationship in more detail, linking different types of trust to categories of strategic information. It also distinguishes between the different concepts of encouraging information sharing and deliberately limiting strategic information sharing.