Swedish Consumer Preferences for Animal Welfare and Biotech: A Choice Experiment

156 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Evaluating animal welfare with choice experiments: an application to Swedish pig production (2005, background): “In Lagerkvist et al. (2006), ‘‘No castration’’ was intensely disliked; 21% lower than the base scenario price.”
Measuring the consumer benefits of improving farm animal welfare to inform welfare labelling (2012, background): “, 2005); changes to the housing system, castration techniques, tail docking and restraint in pig production (Lagerkvist et al., 2006); or changes in fodder, outdoor production, transport, and the choice of breed in livestock production (Carlsson et al.”
The first time is the hardest: A test of ordering effects in choice experiments (2012, background): “A number of studies also show that a respondent’s consistency in choices depends on the complexity of the task, on the positions of the choice sets in the sequence, and on his/her cognitive capability (see, e.g., Dellaert et al. 1999; DeShazo and Fermo 2002; DeSarbo et al. 2004; Lagerkvist et al. 20”