Should organic animals be slaughtered differently from non-organic animals? A cluster analysis of German consumers

Abstract

Public criticism of livestock husbandry is increasing, and better animal welfare is a main buying motive for organic animal products. The slaughter process is a crucial point for animal welfare impacts, but there are no specific regulations regarding slaughtering methods according to the European organic label. Research is missing on what (organic) consumers expect and what they demand from slaughter when considering organic meat. We examined these questions in a survey with 1,604 consumers in Germany. We identified three groups of participants based on their different views on the treatment of organic and non-organic animals at slaughter. The results show that especially organic consumers expect specific regulations for the slaughter of organic animals to be in place already, and they therewith perceive advantages for meat quality. However, the cluster analysis reveals one group (36.8%) that is for a different slaughtering of organic animals and simultaneously favors the equal treatment of all animals at slaughter. Consumers in this ambivalent cluster justify their meat consumption by buying organic meat more often, which might be a coping strategy with the moral dilemma of meat consumption (“meat paradox”). A second cluster (32.4%) rejects different slaughtering methods and is highly interested in animal welfare. These consumers seem to plead for general animal welfare improvements. A third cluster (30.8%) is not interested in the slaughter methods at all. The results show that specific regulations for the slaughter of organic animals might reduce the risk of losing consumer trust and open up further differentiation strategies.

Exploring Consumer Preference towards the On-Farm Slaughtering of Beef in Germany: A Discrete Choice Experiment

“…As a result, consumers are generally unable to base their purchasing decisions on the slaughtering process. This creates a considerable knowledge deficit, and even informed consumer groups, such as organic consumers, know little about slaughter [ 65 ]. This deficit should be addressed by value chain actors, such as producers or the processing industry by providing more information on slaughtering.…”

“…The utility and odds ratio for organic production was lower than for on-farm slaughtering. This is quite unexpected because numerous consumers link organic production with additional qualities included in the choice experiment, such as favourable working conditions, fair wages, and even on-farm slaughtering [ 5 , 65 ]. However, the EU regulation for organic farming does not specify (on-farm) slaughter [ 69 ].…”

“…This could cause them to question the rationale behind consuming organic meat, as it serves as a justification to consume meat to overcome the meat paradox. Hence, it might be especially important for the organic sector to communicate neutrally on the issue of slaughtering and for policymakers to include on-farm slaughtering in organic regulations [ 65 ].…”

We have Some Calves left! Socially Accepted Alternatives to the Current Handling of Male Calves from Dairy Production

“…More specifically, this study will answer whether consumers are aware of the current handling of male calves from dairy production and how consumers evaluate alternative handling methods, namely the use of sexed semen, longer fattening periods, dual-purpose breeds, and the extension of inter-calving periods. Further, as individuals often have different perceptions of housing and handling conditions in livestock production (Boaitey 2022;Schütz et al 2020;Kühl et al 2022), this study additionally examines whether different consumer segments exist and how they perceive alternative handling practices for male dairy calves. The results provide detailed insights into what a future socially accepted alternative in male calf management could look like.…”

“…This result is in line with previous research showing that consumers' perception of housing and handling conditions of livestock is rarely influenced by sociodemographic characteristics (Schütz er al. 2020;Kühl et al 2022).…”