食品伙伴網(wǎng)報道，據(jù)美國食品質(zhì)量新聞網(wǎng)消息稱，根據(jù)最新調(diào)查，目前在歐美，具有動物福利標簽的產(chǎn)品和可靠的檢測方法可滿足不斷增長的消費群體的特殊要求，即使此類食品價格相對較高，消費者依然買賬。
食品研究者們判斷一種食品會側(cè)重于檢測方面，一般通過pH、色澤、化學(xué)成分，而消費者則側(cè)重于感官方面，比如味道、氣味、外觀和質(zhì)地。然而，現(xiàn)在消費者們的判斷依據(jù)又增加了被稱為信任因素的成分，這種信任因素依據(jù)于認知或者營銷，但卻不是在消費者進行消費的那一刻。信任因素包括營養(yǎng)值以及在整個產(chǎn)品生產(chǎn)過程中的福利標準。
調(diào)查者發(fā)現(xiàn)，歐美的消費者選擇食品越來越多的依賴外在因素以及信任因素，并且動物福利問題在社會問題中也變得日益重要。去年歐盟委員會對數(shù)字標簽進行了概述，其意圖是幫助消費者識別動物福利產(chǎn)品和激勵生產(chǎn)者改善福利。而目前，在歐盟做動物福利屬于自愿行為，沒有統(tǒng)一的計劃，而這會是消費者在各標準之間產(chǎn)生混淆。而歐盟目前準備實施統(tǒng)一的標簽體系。
最近的2項調(diào)查表明，動物福利正在越來越多的關(guān)注，目前在英國的消費者心中，最令人憂慮的問題，已不再是食品添加劑，而是動物福利問題，占調(diào)查人數(shù)的40%（其中占女性消費者的46%和男性消費者的34%）。
原文報道：
Review finds reasons for standardised welfare labelling
By Jess Halliday, 17-Aug-2010
Welfare labelling of animal-based products and reliable monitoring methods could help meet growing demand for specific consumer segments, and promote higher incomes for those welfare food supply, according to a review.
The quality of animal-derived foods can be discerned in different ways. According to the review authors from Università della Basilicata in Potenza, Italy, food scientists tend to measure aspects like pH, colour and chemical composition, whereas consumers look at sensory aspects like taste, odour, appearance and texture.
However consumers are increasingly basing their views on so-called credence factors which are based on perceptions or marketing claims, but which are not evident at the moment of consumption. Credence factors include nutritional values, and welfare standards adhered to during the production process.
The reviewers found evidence that consumers are relying more and more on extrinsic clues and credence factors, and that animal welfare is becoming increasingly important in the hierarchy of societal issues.
They found evidence that “if expectations are negatively disconfirmed, the hedonic ratings and consumer willingness to pay move towards the expectations induced by information on animal welfare according to the sensitivity of different groups of consumers”.
They also suggest that labelling, together with scientifically validating monitoring schemes that cover the whole production process from farming to slaughter, could help promote higher incomes for farmers and enterprises specialising in welfare foods, as consumers are prepared to pay more for such products.
Legislation, on the other hand, can set minimum welfare standards but cannot provide that price advantage.
“Further studies are needed to verify whether the premium consumers place on animal welfare friendly products in terms of willingness to pay is at least as large as the price premium needed to cover the extra costs linked to increased animal welfare standards,” they wrote.
Ideas for Europe
Last year the European Commission outlined a number of labelling options to help consumers’ identify animal welfare-friendly products and incentivise producers to improve welfare.
Voluntary animal welfare schemes in the EU do exist, but there is no harmonised scheme and there is confusion amongst consumers about the standards they represent. Schemes in use include organic labelling, schemes run by various animal charities like the RSPCA’s Freedom Food, retailer’s schemes, and other marks like the Red Tractor, which may only refer to minimum legal requirements.
EU Health Commissioner Androulla Vassiliou drew attention to the benefits for the food industry, saying better labelling would be a “win-win” for consumers and producers.
“Producers applying higher standards can market their products more effectively,” she said.
It is also suggesting that a European Network for Reference Centres be established.
Top worry
Two recent surveys indicate that animal welfare is playing a greater role in food purchasing decisions in the UK, beating food additives as the most worrying issue in consumers’ minds.
Market researcher Mintel has found that as many as 4 in 10 UK shoppers say they are concerned about animal welfare overall - 46 per cent of women and 34 per cent of men. The other big concerns were British origin (a priority for 37 per cent), and food additives (36 per cent), and desire for locally produced foods (35 per cent).
Meanwhile, data analysis by charity Compassion in World Farming from the 12 months up to 22 March 2010 showed an increase in sales of free range, barn and organic eggs compared to the previous year – from 62.2 per cent to 66.4 per cent.
Sales of higher welfare fresh chicken meat were also seen to have absorbed more of the growth in the chicken market. They increased 22 per cent in the last year, while standard chicken say only 0.1 per cent year on year growth.
原文地址：http://www.foodqualitynews.com/Public-Concerns/Review-finds-reasons-for-standardised-welfare-labelling
