Consumers would rather buy a product with a levy for enhancing animal welfare than for environmental sustainability

Abstract

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.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.