Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 730

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Consumer perception of organic food production and farm animal welfare

Harper, Gemma C., Makatouni, Aikaterini·2002·British Food Journal

Abstract

This paper is derived from a larger scale project investigating consumer attitudes towards organic food in the UK. Presents focus group results on consumer perceptions, attitudes and behaviour in relation to two key interrelated food trends: organic food and animal welfare. The results indicate that consumers often confuse organic and free‐range products because they believe that “organic” is equivalent to “free‐range” food. Focus group discussions were conducted to identify the main beliefs and attitudes towards organic food of both organic and non‐organic food buyers. Results indicate that, although health and food safety concerns are the main motives for organic food purchases, ethical concerns, specifically in relation to standards of animal welfare, play a significant influencing role in the decision to purchase organic food. The results are consistent with parallel research into consumer concerns about animal welfare, which showed that consumers are primarily concerned about food safety issues. Furthermore, the research illustrates the central outcome that animal welfare is used by consumers as an indicator of other, more important product attributes, such as safety and the impact on health. Indeed, ethical considerations seem to motivate the purchase of organic food and free‐range products and, therefore, may be viewed as interrelated. However, such ethical frameworks are closely related, if not contingent upon, the quality of the product, which includes perceptions of higher standards of safety and healthiness. Based on the qualitative data, suggests that the organic market could take advantage of research on consumer motivation to buy free‐range products, by embodying ethical concerns as an indicator of product quality.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/00070700210425723

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Bennett, R.M. (1996), “People’s willingness to pay for farm animal welfare”, Animal Welfare, Vol. 5, pp. 3‐11.
  2. Davies, A., Titterington, A.J. and Cochrane, C. (1995), “Who buys organic food? A profile of the purchasers of organic food in Northern Ireland”, British Food Journal, Vol. 97 No. 10, pp. 17‐23. · DOI · Paper page
  3. Fiddes, N. (1991), Meat: A Natural Symbol, Routledge, London.
  4. Grunert, S.C. (1993), “Green consumerism in Denmark: some evidence from OKO Foods‐projects”, Der Markt, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 140‐51. · DOI
  5. Harrison, R. (1992), “Case study: animal welfare”, in Berry, R.J. (Ed.), Environmental Dilemmas: Ethics and Decisions, Chapman & Hall, London.
  6. Latacz‐Lohmann, U. and Foster, C. (1997), “From niche to mainstream strategies for the marketing of organic food in Germany and the UK”, British Food Journal, Vol. 99 No. 8, pp. 275‐82. · DOI
  7. Roddy, G., Cowan, C. and Hutchinson, G. (1994), “Organic food: a description of the Irish market”, British Food Journal, Vol. 96 No. 4, pp. 3‐10. · DOI
  8. Sparks, P. and Shepherd, R. (1992), “Self‐identity and the theory of planned behaviour: assessing the role of identification with ‘green consumerism’”, Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 388‐99. · DOI · Paper page
  9. Tregear, A., Dent, J.B. and McGregor, M.J. (1994), “The demand for organically‐grown produce”, British Food Journal, Vol. 96 No. 4, pp. 21‐5. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Webster, A.J.F. (1995a), “Animal welfare: who are our clients?”, Irish Veterinary Journal, Vol. 48 No. 6, pp. 236‐9.
  11. Webster, A.J.F. (1995b), “Farm animal welfare: the law and its implications”, in Mepham, T.B., Tucker, G.A. and Wiseman, J. (Eds), Issues in Agricultural Bioethics, Nottingham University Press, Nottingham.

Cited by

See all 730

Metadata

Authors
Harper, G. C., & Makatouni, A.
Venue
British Food Journal
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2002-04-01
Volume
104
Issue
3/4/5
Pages
287-299
ISSN
0007-070X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2127873268
Cited by
730
References
1
FWCI
5.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.emerald.com/insight/site-policies (tdm)

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.