肉类的动物福利成本:来自比利时消费者假设情景调查的证据

IF 1.9 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy Pub Date : 2022-10-31 DOI:10.1080/21606544.2022.2138980
S. Bruers
{"title":"肉类的动物福利成本:来自比利时消费者假设情景调查的证据","authors":"S. Bruers","doi":"10.1080/21606544.2022.2138980","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A survey in Belgium with hypothetical scenarios concerning willingness to pay to avoid the experiences of farm animals is used to estimate the animal welfare costs of meat production. Most participants indicate that farm animals have lives not worth living. The median estimate of the animal welfare cost of chicken meat is 10 euro/kg, whereas its mean estimate is several orders of magnitude higher. The animal welfare costs of meat are likely much larger than the consumer utility of meat consumption, the consumer willingness to pay for higher animal welfare meat and the climate/environmental costs of meat. A demand shift from beef to chicken meat due to misaligned consumer concerns for animal welfare or a carbon tax on meat, could possibly increase animal welfare costs and decrease the non-anthropocentric social welfare function. Consumers could prioritize lowering chicken meat consumption and governments could implement a flat tax on meat.","PeriodicalId":44903,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":"12 1","pages":"324 - 341"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The animal welfare cost of meat: evidence from a survey of hypothetical scenarios among Belgian consumers\",\"authors\":\"S. Bruers\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21606544.2022.2138980\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT A survey in Belgium with hypothetical scenarios concerning willingness to pay to avoid the experiences of farm animals is used to estimate the animal welfare costs of meat production. Most participants indicate that farm animals have lives not worth living. The median estimate of the animal welfare cost of chicken meat is 10 euro/kg, whereas its mean estimate is several orders of magnitude higher. The animal welfare costs of meat are likely much larger than the consumer utility of meat consumption, the consumer willingness to pay for higher animal welfare meat and the climate/environmental costs of meat. A demand shift from beef to chicken meat due to misaligned consumer concerns for animal welfare or a carbon tax on meat, could possibly increase animal welfare costs and decrease the non-anthropocentric social welfare function. Consumers could prioritize lowering chicken meat consumption and governments could implement a flat tax on meat.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"324 - 341\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2022.2138980\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2022.2138980","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在比利时进行的一项调查中,假设人们愿意为避免农场动物的经历而付费,以估计肉类生产的动物福利成本。大多数与会者表示,农场动物的生活不值得过下去。鸡肉动物福利成本的中位数估计为每公斤10欧元,而其平均值估计要高出几个数量级。肉类的动物福利成本可能远远大于肉类消费的消费者效用、消费者愿意为更高的动物福利肉类支付的费用以及肉类的气候/环境成本。由于消费者对动物福利的担忧或对肉类征收碳税,需求从牛肉转向鸡肉,可能会增加动物福利成本,降低非人类中心的社会福利功能。消费者可以优先减少鸡肉消费,政府可以对肉类征收统一税。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The animal welfare cost of meat: evidence from a survey of hypothetical scenarios among Belgian consumers
ABSTRACT A survey in Belgium with hypothetical scenarios concerning willingness to pay to avoid the experiences of farm animals is used to estimate the animal welfare costs of meat production. Most participants indicate that farm animals have lives not worth living. The median estimate of the animal welfare cost of chicken meat is 10 euro/kg, whereas its mean estimate is several orders of magnitude higher. The animal welfare costs of meat are likely much larger than the consumer utility of meat consumption, the consumer willingness to pay for higher animal welfare meat and the climate/environmental costs of meat. A demand shift from beef to chicken meat due to misaligned consumer concerns for animal welfare or a carbon tax on meat, could possibly increase animal welfare costs and decrease the non-anthropocentric social welfare function. Consumers could prioritize lowering chicken meat consumption and governments could implement a flat tax on meat.
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
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
26
期刊最新文献
Non-market value of recreational areas for hiking: the case of the Apennines around Parma The externality cost of environmental (dis)amenities in the urban housing market: an emerging evidence from Pakistan Towards full decarbonization: does environmental tax and renewable energy matters in developing countries? Assessing regional convergence of greenhouse gas emissions in Spain: insights from economic activities Unlocking transparency in water information: a discrete choice experiment design
×
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学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
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