International Livestock Research Institute Assessing consumer preferences for quality and safety attributes of food in the absence of official standards: the case of beef in Ethiopia Mohammad A. Jabbar Samuel Amare Admassu International Livestock Research Institute Nairobi, Kenya

Background Demand for livestock products increasing in developing countries propelled by income, urban and population growth Demand for quality and safety of products also increasing but documented evidence scanty. Literature on food quality and safety based on developed countries Official quality and safety standards for meat and milk absent or defined by western norms with poor relevance and enforcement

Background 2 Consumers and market actors follow local informal standards to differentiate quality and safety Knowledge is poor about local quality and safety attributes and who prefers what attribute and if they are willing to pay for such attributes Such knowledge essential for producers and market actors to respond to consumer demand

Objectives To identify quality and safety attributes consumers in Addis Ababa city, Ethiopia, use in differentiating quality and safety of beef To assess the relative importance of the identified attributes and their price differences in consumers’ purchase decisions

Methodology Conjoint analysis derived from Lancaster’s theory of demand : utility a function of product attributes extensively used by marketing firms to evaluate potential attributes of new products and to determine the optimal mixture of multilevel attributes included in those products application requires creation of product profiles composed of selected attributes and attribute levels, and ask respondents to rate, rank or evaluate those product profiles

Methodology Rapid appraisal to identify beef attributes No official standards to define beef quality and safety except slaughter certificate for disease freeness PRA to establish quality and safety attributes Definition of quality and safety Objective dimension : physical characteristics e.g. fat content Subjective dimension: holistic vs excellence approach No definition provided, no distinction made between objective and subjective dimensions, left to respondents to perceive meaning and mention criteria and preferred indicators

Methodology Rapid appraisal results Quality attributes: fat content (high, low and purpose) and freshness (shelf life of chilled meat) Safety attributes: stamp of abattoir (disease/tape worm free?) and hygiene of sales outlet and staff Quality and safety not always separated – e.g. freshness may represent quality as well as safety Price: mixture of quality and safety, not high score Most willing to pay 10-15% more on prevailing price for desired quality and safety attributes

Methodology Detailed survey in Addis Ababa city Beef profiles defined by five attributes Fat content (low, high) Freshness (fresh, not fresh) Stamp of abattoir (present, absent) Hygiene of premise and staff (clean, unclean) Price (three levels) Orthogonal design to choose 12 profiles Stratified sample survey of 300 households

Results: estimated part worth Attribute Preferred level Income effect Fat content Low fat High income more sensitive, fat from many sources Freshness Fresh Low income more sensitive, frequently buy from butchers Abattoir stamp Present High income more sensitive, more concerned about tape worm Hygiene Clean High income very sensitive, more buy from super markets Price High (not sig) High income more sensitive (ns), Price weak indicator of quality

Frequency of purchasing food items (% respondents) Frequency of purchase All sample Low income Medium income High income Daily 2 3 1 3-4 times a week 4 6 Twice a week 13 10 14 12 Once weekly 26 28 38 As necessary 55 69 53 42 Total 100

Beef purchase from super market % respondents bought from super marker last month Low income 0 Medium income 11 High income 54 All sample 14

Relative importance values of attributes (% weight) in buying decisions All sample Low income Medium income High income Freshness 23.5 26.0 23.1 21.1 Hygiene 23.4 20.1 23.8 27.5 Stamp 18.9 18.1 18.8 20.2 Price 17.6 17.5 16.0 Fat content 16.6 16.7 16.9 15.2 All 100

Perception on quality and safety of recent purchases and WTP for enhancements All sample Low income Medium income High income Recently purchased beef % hh %hh Good quality 48 42 49 58 safe 45 39 44 54 Willing to pay for improvements Quality 64 53 63 81 Safety 51 83

Summary and conclusions Food quality and safety a major topic for public policy Avoid defining standards based on western norms which can’t be enforced and are not relevant for the current level of economic development Formulate quality and safety standards based on consumer preferences expressed in the informal market Given heterogeneous consumer choices, provide education, information and transparency and encourage consumers to make their own choices This will help producers and market actors to respond to consumer demand and help stimulate growth in the sector More systematic studies needed to formalise and gradually improve definition of standards based on consumer preferences PRA a useful tool when time and resource are constraints