Discussions about animal welfare and environmentally friendly food production have increased in recent years. The debate takes on various forms and is mixed in with various issues, as recent news from the UK about the pressure of whaling opponents on retail chains not to sell fish from certain Icelandic companies testifies.
This debate is actually a bit relative, as a large part of humanity can not afford to wonder whether the animals that are put to death have suffered or not before slaughter. Such questions of conscience are, therefore, first and foremost the luxury of rich nations. But these speculations are a fact nonetheless and will probably have an increasing impact on consumer behavior in important Icelandic markets in the coming years.
In aquaculture, emphasis has been placed on establishing various regulations regarding aquaculture, and one of the points of view that has been discussed is precisely animal welfare in aquaculture production. It is therefore important to examine whether different treatment of fish in relation to animal welfare actually affects the quality of the product. If that is the case, it could affect consumers.
In the autumn of 2006, an extensive study was carried out as part of the participation of the Fisheries Research Institute (now Matís, ohf) in the EU-funded SEAFOODplus project. The aim was to examine whether farmed cod, which were produced with special regard to animal welfare on the one hand, and on the other hand produced in the traditional way, had different quality characteristics. A consumer survey was also conducted to examine whether consumers had different tastes for these products and whether different information about the fire had an effect on how consumers liked the products.
In the latest issue. Rannísblaðið covered two of the members of the study, Emilía Martinsdóttir and Kolbrún Sveinsdóttir, about the study. In short, the results indicate that if consumers did not know whether the farmed fish had been farmed with special regard to the welfare of the fish or not, they would have preferred farmed cod that were farmed in the traditional way.
It turned out, however, that when consumers received information about the farming methods, they preferred the fish that was farmed for the welfare of the fish and found it natural that fish that were farmed in such conditions were more expensive than traditional farmed fish.
These results suggest that food labeling and what information is given on the packaging is important for consumers. They also suggest that people not only use traditional senses when evaluating food, but also eat "with the heart."
Recently was also a discussion of this topic on the SEAFOODplus website