Analysis of the commercial value of rabbit meat based on positioning of the different types of fresh meat
Abstract
In-depth knowledge of consumers' perceptions of value is considered a critical success factor in today’s competitive market. There is very little information about the perception that consumers have of rabbit meat compared to other types of meat (mainly beef and pork). To identify the consumer perception of rabbit meat in Spain, two marketing tools were used: positioning and image analysis. To this end, a survey was carried out in Spain mainland with an error of 3.53% and a confidence level of 95.5%. According to the positioning analysis, rabbit meat competed with turkey for the "low fat" and "healthy" attributes. Rabbit meat had in its favour that it was considered more “economical” than turkey. Commercially, rabbit meat did not compete with any other fresh meat and it was not associated with any other adjective. The image that consumers had of rabbit meat was that it is a clean, healthy and easy to find meat. Two clearly distinguished groups were also found: consumers who rated rabbit meat more positively and consumers that did so less positively. These two groups were defined by the variables “educational level”, “rabbit meat consumption by children under 18 residing in the home”, “geographical area” and “habitual residence”. For the variables “gender”, “age”, “number of people in the home” and “presence of children younger than 18 years in the home”, there were no significant differences. These results are very useful for the different value chain stakeholders, who can set different marketing strategies to improve rabbit meat consumption.
Downloads
References
Acebrón LB, Dopico DC, 2000. The importance of intrinsic and extrinsic cues to expected and experienced quality: an empirical application for beef. Food Qual Prefer 11: 229-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(99)00059-2
Baviera-Puig A, Buitrago-Vera J, Escribá-Pérez C, Montero-Vicente L, 2017. Rabbit meat sector value chain. World Rabbit Sci 25 (1): 95-108. https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2017.6565
Becker T, Benner E, Glitsch K, 2000. Consumer perception of fresh meat quality in Germany. Br Food J 102 (3): 246-266. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700010324763
Bernués A, Olaizola A, Corcoran K, 2003. Extrinsic attributes of red meat as indicators of quality in Europe: an application for market segmentation. Food Qual Prefer 14 (4): 265-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00085-X
Buitrago-Vera J, Escribá-Pérez C, Baviera-Puig A, Montero-Vicente L, 2016. Consumer segmentation based on food-related lifestyles and analysis of rabbit meat consumption. World Rabbit Sci 24 (3): 169-182. https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2016.4229
Casillas-Peñuelas R, Pérez-Esteve E, Fuentes A, Grau-Melo R, Pascual JJ, Barat-Baviera J, 2015. Elaboración de una salchicha a partir de carne de conejo. 40 Symposium de Cunicultura de ASESCU, Libro de Actas, Santiago de Compostela (Spain), May 28-29. pp: 111-114.
Cea MA, 2010. Métodos de encuesta. Teoría y práctica, errores y mejora. Editorial Síntesis, S.A., Madrid, Spain. 496 pp.
Cullere M, Dalle Zotte A, 2018. Rabbit meat production and consumption: State of knowledge and future perspectives. Meat Sci 143: 137-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.04.029
Escribá-Pérez C, Baviera-Puig A, Buitrago-Vera J, Montero-Vicente L, 2017. Consumer profile analysis for different types of meat in Spain. Meat Sci 129: 120-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.02.015
Font-i-Furnols M, Guerrero L, 2014. Consumer preference, behavior and perception about meat and meat products: An overview. Meat Sci 98 (3): 361-371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.06.025
Glitsch K, 2000. Consumer perceptions of fresh meat quality: cross-national comparison. Br Food J 102 (3): 177-194. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700010332278
Gracia A, de-Magistris T, 2016. Consumer's willingness to pay for indigenous meat products: The case of a Spanish sheep breed. Span J Agric Res 14 (2): e01SC01. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2016142-8230
Groot E, Albisu LM, 2015. A bottom-up model to describe consumers' preferences towards late season peaches. Span J Agric Res 13 (4): e0110. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2015134-7605
Grunert KG, 2006. Future trends and consumer lifestyles with regard to meat comsumption. Meat Sci 74 (1): 149-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2006.04.016
Grunert KG, Bredahl L, Brunsø K, 2004. Consumer perception of meat quality and implications for product development in the meat sector—A review. Meat Sci 66: 259-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(03)00130-X
Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC, 1999. Análisis multivariante, 5th ed. Prentice Hall, Madrid, Spain. 832 pp.
Henchion M, McCarthy M, Resconi VC, Troy D, 2014. Meat consumption: Trends and quality matters. Meat Sci 98 (3): 561-568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.06.007
Kallas Z, Gil JM, 2012. A dual response choice experiments (DRCE) design to assess rabbit meat preference in Catalonia: A heteroscedastic extreme‐value model. Br Food J 114 (10): 1394-1413. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070701211262984
Korzen S, Lassen J, 2010. Meat in context. On the relation between perceptions and contexts. Appetite, 5: 274-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2009.11.011
Kotler P, Keller KL, 2015. Marketing management, 15th ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA. 832 pp.
Kotler P, Armstrong G, 2017. Principles of marketing, 17th ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA. 736 pp.
MAGRAMA, 2017. Informe del consumo de alimentación en Espa-a 2016. https://www.mapama.gob.es/es/alimentacion/temas/informe_del_consumo_de_alimentos_en_espana_2016_webvf_tcm30-386079.pdf
Malhotra NK, 2008. Investigación de mercados, 5th ed. Pearson Educación, Naucalpan de Juárez, México. 864 pp.
McEachern MG, Schröder MJA, 2004. Integrating the voice of the consumer within the value chain: a focus on value‐based labelling communications in the fresh‐meat sector. J Consum Mark 21 (7): 497-509. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760410568716
Murcia JL, 2014. Tendencias en el consumo mundial de carnes. Distr Consum 132 (2): 32-37.
Prinsloo H, Groenewald A, Pelser T, 2014. Market positioning of branded meat products: A case of the feedlot industry in South Africa. Mediterr J Soc Sci 5 (1): 129-135. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n1p129
Resurreccion AVA, 2013. Sensory aspects of consumer choices for meat and meat products. Meat Sci 66: 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(03)00021-4
Sans P, Sanjuán-López AI, 2015. Beef animal welfare, attitudes and willingness to pay: A regional comparison across the Pyrenees. Span J Agric Res 13 (3): e0105. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2015133-7273
SPSS, 2011. Manual del usuario del sistema básico IBM SPSS Statistics 20. IBM Corporation, Armonk NY, USA. 473 pp.
Troy DJ, Kerry JP, 2010. Consumer perception and the role of science in the meat industry. Meat Sci 86 (1): 214-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.05.009
Verbeke W, Viaene J, 1999. Beliefs, attitude and behaviour towards fresh meat consumption in Belgium: empirical evidence from a consumer survey. Food Qual Prefer 10 (6): 437-445. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(99)00031-2
Verbeke WAJ, Viaene J, 2000. Ethical challenges for livestock production: Meeting consumer concerns about meat safety and animal welfare. J Agric Environ Ethics 12 (2): 141-151. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009538613588
Zouaghi F, Sánchez-García M, Hirsch S, 2017. What drives firm profitability? A multilevel approach to the Spanish agri-food sector. Span J Agric Res 15 (3): e0117. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2017153-10713
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the printed and online versions of this Journal are the property of Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a “Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International” (CC BY 4.0) License. You may read here the basic information and the legal text of the license. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 License must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the published by the Editor, is not allowed.
