The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A meta-analysis of consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare
Abstract
Farm animal welfare (FAW) concerns have prompted scientific research, development and standard setting (especially in the EU and USA) having ethical, production, economic, social, cultural and trade implications. We meta-analyse the literature on consumer willingness to pay (WTP) for FAW, examining 24 studies reporting 106 estimates of consumer FAW values. Meta-regressions indicate that respondent income and age significantly affect WTP, substantial geographical disparities are unsupported, information provision about farm animal living conditions significantly alters WTP estimates and suggestions that FAW be legislatively required significantly reduce WTP. We conclude that the public good aspect of FAW merits further investigation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Panel Data Econometrics in R : The plm Package
Croissant, Y., & Millo, G. (2008) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v027.i02 · Cited by 1,243
Definition of criteria for overall assessment of animal welfare
Botreau, R., Veissier, I., Butterworth, A., Bracke, M., & Keeling, L. (2007) · Animal Welfare · doi:10.1017/s0962728600031390 · Cited by 304
Cited by
Meta-analysis of consumers' willingness to pay for sustainable food products
Li, S., & Kallas, Z. (2021) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2021.105239 · Cited by 359
Rohm, H., Oostindjer, M., Aschemann-Witzel, J., Symmank, C., L. Almli, V., De Hooge, I., Normann, A., & Karantininis, K. (2017) · Foods · doi:10.3390/foods6120104 · Cited by 104
Metadata
- Authors
- Lagerkvist, C. J., & Hess, S.
- Venue
- European Review of Agricultural Economics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-11-30
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 55-78
- ISSN
- 0165-1587 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3618
- OpenAlex
- W2109585595
- Cited by
- 349
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 3.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
