Consumers' Perception of and Preferences for Meat Safety and Quality in an Islamic LMIC Context: Empirical Evidence from Afghanistan

Global trends in meat production and consumption are shifting significantly between High-Income Countries (HICs) and Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). In HICs, there is a growing trend of reducing or eliminating meat consumption due to health and environmental concerns, ethical considerations, and animal welfare. This has led to increased research and production of plant-based and lab-grown meat alternatives. Conversely, LMICs are experiencing rising meat demand due to population growth, urbanization, and a growing middle class. However, this rising demand is accompanied by increased food safety concerns and Foodborne Diseases (FBDs) which cause approximately 600 million illnesses, 420,000 deaths, and 33 million disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) annually. Animals and animal-sourced foods (ASFs) including meat are a key contributor to FBDs. Meat contamination can occur at various stages of the supply chain: pre-harvest, harvest, and post-harvest stages. Afghanistan, as an example of an Islamic LMIC, provides a compelling case study where rapid urbanization and a growing middle class have increased demand for high-value foods like meat, prompting modernization efforts in the meat industry in the past two decades. Traditional butcheries, however, continue to dominate the market, alongside emerging supermarkets that offer both fresh domestic sourced meat and refrigerated imported meat. Motivated by these dynamics, this research investigates Afghan consumers’ perceptions and preferences regarding meat quality and safety across the supply chain. It addresses three key questions: (i) How do consumers perceive meat quality and safety from farm to fork? (ii) How can purchases be influenced toward safer meat choices? (iii) What are the most important meat attributes driving consumer choices, and how does meat attachment influence these preferences? Using a mixed-methods approach, the study includes three analyses: perceptions of meat safety and quality, willingness to pay (WTP) for different meats, and preferences for meat attributes and attachment attitudes. The first study explores consumer perceptions of meat quality and safety at pre-harvest, harvest, and post-harvest stages using data from seven Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with 52 participants in Kabul and Bamyan. The Total Food Quality Model (TFQM) was employed as the study’s analytical framework, and qualitative data were analyzed using MAXQDA software. Results revealed that at the pre-harvest stage, meats originating from the sedentary and nomadic livestock were perceived as safer than that from urban-raised animals. At the harvest stage, supermarket meat was viewed as more hygienic but less fresh. Consumers also raised concerns about its halal compliance, leading to lower trust in supermarket meat. In contrast, traditional butchery meat was deemed fresh and natural but unhygienic. At the post-harvest stage, key attributes influencing purchase decisions included color, freshness, place of origin, safety, and halal certification, with taste and tenderness being critical after purchase. Limited trust in supermarkets emphasized the need for better transparency and communication. The second study examines urban consumers’ WTP for four types of lamb meat, distinguished by their production systems (sedentary versus nomadic) and slaughtering and retail channels (traditional butchery versus supermarket). Using a second-price experimental auction mechanism, it assessed the impact of written framing, visual framing and psychological priming on WTP. Results showed no significant difference in WTP for sedentary versus nomadic meat at the aggregate level. However, higher-income and educated consumers preferred sedentary over nomadic meats. Participants also submitted higher bids for supermarket meat compared to traditional butchery meats. Moreover, written and visual framing effectively induced safer meat choices, while psychological priming had no significant impact. Findings further showed a positive and significant relationship between risk-taking attitude and WTP for safest meat choice, which may suggest opportunities for targeted marketing to promote food safety. The third study analyses consumer preferences for lamb meat attributes using a Best-Worst Scaling (BWS) approach and validates the Meat Attachment Questionnaire (MAQ) in an Islamic LMIC context. Results highlighted food safety certification, freshness, and halal labeling as the most important attributes, reflecting cultural and religious priorities. Preferences for meat attributes were generally heterogenous. High-income and educated consumers, as well as occasional consumers emphasized preferences for several attributes including food safety certification, cleanliness, breed, brand, and halal label. Additionally, confirmatory factor analysis validated the MAQ in an Islamic LMIC context, revealing that subscales such as hedonism and dependence were negatively associated with preferences for most meat attributes. This finding may underscore the role of cultural and psychological factors in shaping attitudes towards meat. Together, these studies provide valuable insights into Afghan consumer preferences and perceptions of meat safety and quality, with broader implications for LMICs undergoing meat industry modernization. Findings emphasize opportunities to build consumer trust in supermarkets by improving communication about halal compliance and food safety standards. Investments in infrastructure and hygiene training for traditional butcheries can address trade-offs between freshness and safety. Marketing strategies using written and visual framing can steer consumers toward safer meat choices. Policy and practical implications are also significant. Aligning meat production with cultural norms and halal requirements is essential for meeting Muslim consumer expectations, specifically by non-Muslim countries exporting meat to Muslim countries. Moreover, emphasizing food safety certification and transparency can enhance public health and trust among consumers, allowing supermarket to thrive in the market. The study also highlights the importance of fostering trust in formal institutions like supermarkets and offers transferable insights for other Islamic LMICs with similar dual meat supply chains. Future research could explore these dynamics across different meat types and regions, contributing to the literature on consumer behavior and meat industry modernization in LMICs.

Collections

Dissertationen/Habilitationen

Full item page

Consumers' Perception of and Preferences for Meat Safety and Quality in an Islamic LMIC Context: Empirical Evidence from Afghanistan

Files

Date

Authors

Advisors/Reviewers

Further Contributors

Contributing Institutions

Publisher

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

License

Quotable link

Abstract

Link to publications or other datasets

Description

Notes

Original publication in

Original publication in

Anthology

Collections

URI of original publication

Forschungsdaten

Series

Citation