The Importance of Animal Welfare and Country of Origin in Consumer Preferences: A Cross-National Study

Figures & data

Table 1. Sample characteristics.

	Italy		Poland		Japan		South Korea
Sample size n	490		419		440		469
	Absolute	Relative (in %)	Absolute	Relative (in %)	Absolute	Relative (in %)	Absolute	Relative (in %)
Gender
Male	253	51.6	227	54.2	220	50	253	53.9
Female	235	48	190	45.3	219	49.8	216	46.1
Non-binary	2	0.4	2	0.5	1	0.2	0	0
Employment
Employed	307	62.7	304	72.6	274	62.3	235	50.1
Unemployed	183	37.3	115	27.4	166	37.7	234	49.9
Education level^a
Basic	187	38.2	46	11	0	0	41	8.7
Medium	203	41.4	250	59.7	214	48.6	179	38.2
High	100	20.4	123	29.3	226	51.4	249	53.1
Age
20–29	74	15.1	73	17.4	78	17.7	76	16.2
30–39	87	17.8	82	19.6	69	15.7	86	18.3
40–49	111	22.7	88	21	106	24.1	121	25.8
50–59	132	26.9	83	19.8	93	21.1	111	23.7
60–69	86	17.6	93	22.2	94	21.4	75	16
Number of persons in one household
Single	33	6.7	29	6.9	95	21.6	48	10.2
2–4 people	423	86.3	354	84.5	331	75.2	396	84.4
5 and more people	34	6.9	36	8.6	14	3.2	25	5.3
Annual household income^b
Less than average income	119	24.3	192	45.8	108	24.4	41	8.7
Average income	142	29	142	33.9	65	14.8	67	14.3
More than average income	229	46.7	85	20.3	267	60.7	361	77
Owner of pets
Owner of pets	307	62.7	293	69.9	118	26.8	144	30.7
No pets	183	37.3	126	30.1	322	73.2	325	69.3

^aBasic: primary education, junior high school, 9 years of school; Medium: upper secondary education, senior high school, 10 and more years of school; High: college or university education.

^bAverage income: 20,800–25,400 EUR (Italy)/82,300–100,600 PLN (Poland)/3,290,000–3,660,000 YEN (Japan)/26,100,000–32,000,000 WON (South Korea).

Source: own calculation.

Table 2. Identified factors for the respective study countries.

Factor	Japan	South Korea	Italy	Poland
(1)	Preference for COO and especially domestic pork (α = 0.910)	Preference for COO and especially domestic pork (α = 0.879)	Preference for COO and especially domestic pork (α = 0.886)	Pro domestic pork (α = 0.917)
(2)	Positive perception towards domestic pork (α = 0.791)	Cheap imported pork required (α = 0.745)	Meat attributes are linked to husbandry system and WTP is given (α = 0.910)	Imports are cheaper and of lower quality (α = 0.510)
(3)	Meat quality and animals’ well-being is linked to husbandry system (α = 0.913)	Quality and taste are linked to husbandry system (α = 0.899)	Pro animal welfare (α = 0.914)	Interested in animal welfare with a given WTP and a link to meat quality (α = 0.914)
(4)	Pro animal welfare and WTP given (α = 0.878)	Accept German pork (α = 0.875)	Accept German pork (α = 0.823)	Reject German pork (α = 0.822)
(5)	Accept German pork (α = 0.833)	Pro animal welfare and WTP given (α = 0.850)	Reject German pork (α = 0.698)	Accept German pork (α = 0.799)
(6)	Agree with conventional husbandry system (α = 0.754)	Agree with conventional husbandry system (α = 0.770)

Notes. α = Cronbach’s alpha; COO = country of origin; WTP = willingness to pay.

Source: own compilation.

Figure 1. Cluster groups in Japan.

Source: own compilation.

Figure 2. Cluster groups in Italy.

Source: own compilation.

Figure 3. Cluster groups in South Korea.

Source: own compilation.

Figure 4. Cluster groups in Poland.

Source: own compilation.

Table 3. Profiles of clusters and relationships between the clusters in Japan, South Korea, Italy and Poland.

	Japan					South Korea
	Frequency in percent (%)			p-values*	Cramer’s V**	Frequency in percent (%)			p-values*	Cramer’s V**
Characteristics	Animal welfare- and quality-interested local advocates	Animal welfare-receptive cosmopolitans	Price sensitive and without expectations			Animal welfare- and quality-interested consumers	Price sensitive and without expectations	Local advocates and enthusiasts
Gender				0.397	0.068				0.074	0.105
Female	55.8	50.8	45.7			52.9	42.4	41.5
Male	44.2	49.2	53.8			47.1	57.6	58.5
Employed	62.8	63.8	60.9	0.858	0.026	48.9	46.9	56.8	0.23	0.079
Education^a				0.822	0.030				0.557	0.057
Low						6.3	10.2	10.2
Medium	47.8	46.9	50.3			38.5	40.1	34.7
High	52.2	53.1	49.7			55.2	49.7	55.1
Age group^b				0.159	0.116				0.043	0.103
Younger	28.3	32.3	37.1			30.5	41.8	29.74
Middle	52.2	40	44.7			49.4	47.5	53.5
Older	19.5	27.7	18.3			20.1	10.7	17.8
Number of persons in one household				0.393	0.068				0.94	0.029
Single	15.9	21.5	24.9			10.9	10.2	9.3
2–4 persons	79.6	76.2	72.1			83.9	83.6	86.4
>4 persons	4.4	2.3	3.0			5.2	6.2	4.2
P.a household income^c				0.017	0.117				0.013	0.116
Less than average income	24.8	20	27.4			5.7	14.1	5.1
Average income	8.8	12.3	19.8			14.9	15.8	11
More than average income	66.4	67.7	52.8			79.3	70.1	83.9
Owner of pets	30.1	28.5	23.9	0.433	0.062	33.9	22.6	38.1	0.009	0.141
Decreasing meat consumption	35.4	27.7	27.4	0.286	0.075	20.1	16.4	17.8	0.659	0.042
Meat condition				0.294	0.075				0.008	0.144
Fresh	89.4	89.2	84.3			92.5	81.4	87.3
Frozen	10.6	10.8	15.7			7.5	18.6	12.7
	Italy					Poland
	Frequency in percent (%)			p-values*	Cramer’s V**	Frequency in percent (%)			p-values*	Cramer’s V**
Characteristics	Animal welfare- and quality-interested local advocates	Animal welfare-receptive cosmopolitans	Price sensitive and without expectations			Animal welfare- and quality-interested consumers	Price sensitive and without expectations	Local advocates and enthusiasts
Gender				0.051	0.098				0.483	0.064
Female	53.7	38.8	49.2			42.9	47.2	45.9
Male	45.8	61.2	50			55.9	52.8	54.1
Employed	57.5	69.7	62.9	0.057	0.108	73.5	69.3	86.5	0.091	0.107
Education^a				0.833	0.039				0.693	0.052
Low	38.3	38.2	37.9			12.4	9.4	13.5
Medium	41.6	38.8	44.4			57.1	60.8	64.9
High	20.1	23	17.7			30.6	29.7	21.6
Age group^b				0.002	0.131				0.413	0.099
Younger	31.3	37.5	29.8			41.8	35.4	24.3
Middle	43.9	53.3	54.8			40	40.1	48.6
Older	24.8	9.2	15.3			18.2	24.5	27
Number of persons in one household				0.245	0.074				0.205	0.084
Single	7.9	7.2	4			8.8	6.1	2.7
2–4 persons	85.5	88.2	85.5			80.6	87.7	83.8
>4 persons	6.5	4.6	10.5			10.6	6.1	13.5
P.a. household income				0.32	0.069				0.871	0.038
Less than average income	24.3	27.6	20.2			45.3	47.2	40.5
Average income^c	26.2	27.6	35.5			35.9	32.1	35.1
More than average income	49.5	44.7	44.4			18.8	20.8	24.3
Owner of pets	65.9	53.3	68.5	0.014	0.132	66.5	72.2	73	0.441	0.062
Decreasing meat consumption	49.1	39.5	45.2	0.192	0.082	40	46.2	29.7	0.128	0.099

*Chi-square by Pearson (significant α ≤ 5% (p ≤ 0.05)); **Cramer-V correlation: <0.2 extremely weak; 0.2–0.4 weak; 0.4–0.6 medium weak (Brosius, 2011).

^bYounger = 20–39 years; middle = 40–59 years; Eldest = over 60 years.

Footnotes a) and c) see Table 1; Source: own calculation.

Figure 5. Descriptive analysis of statement “I have never heard the term animal welfare”.

Source: own calculation.

Figure 6. Descriptive analysis of statement “I would like to be more informed about the condition under which pigs are farmed”.

Source: own calculation.

Brosius, F. (2011). SPSS 19 (1st ed.). Heidelberg: MITP-Verlag.

 Google Scholar