消费者更愿意为了提高动物福利而不是为了环境的可持续性而购买有税收的产品

IF 9.6 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Sustainable Production and Consumption Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-26 DOI:10.1016/j.spc.2024.11.024
Jeanine Ammann , Gabriele Mack , Nadja El Benni , Rita Saleh
{"title":"消费者更愿意为了提高动物福利而不是为了环境的可持续性而购买有税收的产品","authors":"Jeanine Ammann ,&nbsp;Gabriele Mack ,&nbsp;Nadja El Benni ,&nbsp;Rita Saleh","doi":"10.1016/j.spc.2024.11.024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Taxes have been identified as efficient measures to facilitate sustainable behaviour change but tend to be unpopular. Sustainability levies, which are a special type of tax, are less investigated and could come with fewer prejudices. To test consumers' preferences for different sustainability levy options, we conducted an online survey in Switzerland with 481 participants (51 % female). They were presented with six products (i.e. fresh/processed vegetables, dairy, and meat) and for each product, they had four levy options to choose from. For vegetables, they were: (A) reduction of risks related to plant protection products, (B) more support for local farmers, (C) support for environmental sustainability, and (D) sustainability projects in general. For the animal products, option A was an increase in animal welfare. For all three comparisons (fresh vs. processed of vegetables, meat and dairy), the number of participants who chose the general sustainability information increased for processed products compared to fresh products. Further, we found that for the animal products, the majority of participants preferred the levy that increased animal welfare. For vegetables, participants preferred a levy that reduced risks related to plant protection products and supported local farmers. We found that when the sustainability levy was not defined, it tended to be understood as environmental sustainability. Using multinomial logistic regression, we identified the perception of farmers as a significant predictor of a levy choice to support local farmers. We conclude that animal products should ensure and transparently communicate animal welfare to drive sustainable behaviour change. Similarly, improving the public perceptions of farmers and encouraging interaction between farmers and consumers can help build public support for local farmers and promote the purchase of sustainable products.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48619,"journal":{"name":"Sustainable Production and Consumption","volume":"53 ","pages":"Pages 99-108"},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consumers would rather buy a product with a levy for enhancing animal welfare than for environmental sustainability\",\"authors\":\"Jeanine Ammann ,&nbsp;Gabriele Mack ,&nbsp;Nadja El Benni ,&nbsp;Rita Saleh\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.spc.2024.11.024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Taxes have been identified as efficient measures to facilitate sustainable behaviour change but tend to be unpopular. Sustainability levies, which are a special type of tax, are less investigated and could come with fewer prejudices. To test consumers' preferences for different sustainability levy options, we conducted an online survey in Switzerland with 481 participants (51 % female). They were presented with six products (i.e. fresh/processed vegetables, dairy, and meat) and for each product, they had four levy options to choose from. For vegetables, they were: (A) reduction of risks related to plant protection products, (B) more support for local farmers, (C) support for environmental sustainability, and (D) sustainability projects in general. For the animal products, option A was an increase in animal welfare. For all three comparisons (fresh vs. processed of vegetables, meat and dairy), the number of participants who chose the general sustainability information increased for processed products compared to fresh products. Further, we found that for the animal products, the majority of participants preferred the levy that increased animal welfare. For vegetables, participants preferred a levy that reduced risks related to plant protection products and supported local farmers. We found that when the sustainability levy was not defined, it tended to be understood as environmental sustainability. Using multinomial logistic regression, we identified the perception of farmers as a significant predictor of a levy choice to support local farmers. We conclude that animal products should ensure and transparently communicate animal welfare to drive sustainable behaviour change. Similarly, improving the public perceptions of farmers and encouraging interaction between farmers and consumers can help build public support for local farmers and promote the purchase of sustainable products.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48619,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sustainable Production and Consumption\",\"volume\":\"53 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 99-108\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sustainable Production and Consumption\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352550924003361\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainable Production and Consumption","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352550924003361","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

税收已被确定为促进可持续行为改变的有效措施,但往往不受欢迎。可持续性税是一种特殊类型的税,调查较少,偏见也较少。为了测试消费者对不同可持续性征税方案的偏好,我们在瑞士进行了一项有481名参与者(51%为女性)的在线调查。他们有六种产品(即新鲜/加工蔬菜、乳制品和肉类),每种产品有四种征税选项可供选择。对于蔬菜,它们是:(A)减少与植物保护产品相关的风险,(B)更多地支持当地农民,(C)支持环境可持续性,以及(D)一般的可持续性项目。对于动物产品,选项A是增加动物福利。对于所有三种比较(新鲜与加工蔬菜,肉类和乳制品),选择加工产品一般可持续性信息的参与者人数比新鲜产品增加。此外,我们发现对于动物产品,大多数参与者更倾向于增加动物福利的征税。对于蔬菜,与会者更倾向于征税,以降低与植物保护产品相关的风险,并支持当地农民。我们发现,当可持续发展税没有定义时,它倾向于被理解为环境可持续性。使用多项逻辑回归,我们确定了农民的看法是支持当地农民的税收选择的重要预测因素。我们的结论是,动物产品应该确保并透明地传达动物福利,以推动可持续的行为改变。同样,改善公众对农民的认知,鼓励农民和消费者之间的互动,有助于建立公众对当地农民的支持,促进可持续产品的购买。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Consumers would rather buy a product with a levy for enhancing animal welfare than for environmental sustainability
Taxes have been identified as efficient measures to facilitate sustainable behaviour change but tend to be unpopular. Sustainability levies, which are a special type of tax, are less investigated and could come with fewer prejudices. To test consumers' preferences for different sustainability levy options, we conducted an online survey in Switzerland with 481 participants (51 % female). They were presented with six products (i.e. fresh/processed vegetables, dairy, and meat) and for each product, they had four levy options to choose from. For vegetables, they were: (A) reduction of risks related to plant protection products, (B) more support for local farmers, (C) support for environmental sustainability, and (D) sustainability projects in general. For the animal products, option A was an increase in animal welfare. For all three comparisons (fresh vs. processed of vegetables, meat and dairy), the number of participants who chose the general sustainability information increased for processed products compared to fresh products. Further, we found that for the animal products, the majority of participants preferred the levy that increased animal welfare. For vegetables, participants preferred a levy that reduced risks related to plant protection products and supported local farmers. We found that when the sustainability levy was not defined, it tended to be understood as environmental sustainability. Using multinomial logistic regression, we identified the perception of farmers as a significant predictor of a levy choice to support local farmers. We conclude that animal products should ensure and transparently communicate animal welfare to drive sustainable behaviour change. Similarly, improving the public perceptions of farmers and encouraging interaction between farmers and consumers can help build public support for local farmers and promote the purchase of sustainable products.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sustainable Production and Consumption
Sustainable Production and Consumption Environmental Science-Environmental Engineering
CiteScore
17.40
自引率
7.40%
发文量
389
审稿时长
13 days
期刊介绍: Sustainable production and consumption refers to the production and utilization of goods and services in a way that benefits society, is economically viable, and has minimal environmental impact throughout its entire lifespan. Our journal is dedicated to publishing top-notch interdisciplinary research and practical studies in this emerging field. We take a distinctive approach by examining the interplay between technology, consumption patterns, and policy to identify sustainable solutions for both production and consumption systems.
期刊最新文献
Comparing and combining theory of planned behavior and dragons of inaction to explain pro-environmental consumption behavior Carbon-water eco-efficiency trade-offs and spatial inequalities in China's low-carbon urban transition: Evidence from county-level data Socio-technical opportunities for developing sustainable continence healthcare: A systematic literature review Scenario-based synergistic assessment of crop straw allocation for GHG mitigation and sustainable resource use in China Understanding a new emerging philosophy: Absolute Sustainability
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1