HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Delezie, E. Articles by Decuypere, E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Delezie, E. Articles by Decuypere, E.

Consumer Perception Versus Scientific Evidence About Alternatives for Manual Catching of Broilers in Belgium

E. Delezie^*,1, W. Verbeke, J. De Tavernier and E. Decuypere^*

^* Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Department of Biosystems, Division Livestock-Nutrition-Quality, University of Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 30, B-3001 Heverlee, Belgium; Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Department of Agricultural Economics, Ghent University, Coupure Links 635, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium; and Faculty of Theology, Research Unit of Theological Ethics, Leuven, University of Leuven, Sint-Michielsstraat 6, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium

¹ Corresponding author: evelyne.delezie{at}ilvo.vlaanderen.be

Commercial broiler chickens are exposed to a number of potential stressors prior to slaughter, including catching, crating, and transportation. To ameliorate animal welfare and prevent product quality loss during these processes, numerous scientific studies have been performed. As a result, different technical innovations have been presented such as mechanical catching instead of manual catching. The success of a catching machine as an alternative for manual catching of broilers will not only depend on its economic, animal, and human welfare benefits but also on its acceptance by society and consumers. The aim of this research was to assess if individuals’ subjective perceptions of catching methods align with objective scientific facts. This research was focused on questions and issues related to the consumers’ expected bottlenecks and motives for accepting these technologies after being exposed to video segments of each catching method. In general, the gap between consumer perception and scientific evidence related to manual and mechanical catching is limited. For those bottlenecks where science is inconclusive, respondents also have no explicit preference. Despite absence of major gaps between consumer perception and expert knowledge, preferences of particular consumer segments do not align well with scientific evidence. This holds in particular for female, younger, urban individuals who attach high importance to animal welfare issues.

Key Words: catching poultry • bottleneck • consumer • perception • survey