Quality pays; Safety matters: Evidence from Research on Consumer
Perceptions and Valuation of Quality and Safety of Value Added Beef Products in ECA
Lusato R. Kurwijila1, Stella Makokha2 and Amos Omore3
1Sokoine University of Agriculture, P.O. Box 3004, Morogoro, Tanzania; 2Kenya Agricultural Research Institute, 14733-00800, Nairobi Kenya
3International Livestock Research Institute, P.O. Box 30709, Nairobi, Kenya
1. Message
Can consumers’ preferences for higher quality and their concerns for 5. Results and Discussion
safety of beef products drive growth for value addition in the beef Quality attributes demanded by beef consumers were tenderness,
industry? juiciness; special cuts, good beef color and less fibrousness in
2. Introduction Tanzania and cleanliness, presence of official stamp; color, fat
•The demand for meat in Africa will double to 22 kg per capita by 2050. content and age of slaughter, origin, size, fat cover, freshness, color,
• The growing demand for imported value added meat products in East and storage condition, palatability, tenderness, packaging, absence of
Central Africa is driving opportunities for value addition especially by gristle and blood spots respectively in Kenya and Ethiopia. Safety
small and medium scale enterprises (SMEs) to close the demand-supply attributes demanded were slaughter of cattle at recognized places,
gap in both conventional and niche markets (supermarkets and hotels). beef cuts packed in special bags, inspected and frozen among other
• Understanding consumer dynamics driving demand for valued added beef (Table 1). Absence of worms was an important safety criteria only in
products is key to exploiting the market opportunities. Ethiopia. Consumers in Kenya and Tanzania where this criteria was
reported showed willingness to pay higher for beef considered safe.
Table 1: Consumer criteria for quality and safety of beef and beef products
3.Objectives
To assess the dynamics of consumer demand for quality and safety of
beef products in the ECA region.
Tanzania
Ethiopia
Rwanda
Kenya
Quality Attributes Indicators
4. Materials and methods Fat content Good quality if low to moderate fat ‐ ‐ ‐
Gristles High quality if there is no gristle
• The study was conducted in Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Blood spot on the meat High quality if there is no blood spot ‐ ‐ ‐
Uganda and Southern Sudan along the value chain nodes (Fig 1) Shelf stay High quality if it is fresh
‐ ‐
‐
Sale turn over High quality if the turnover is high
• First: Rapid market assessments carried out in capital cities and Place of purchase Some butcher shops are known for their ‐ ‐ ‐
quality service
regional towns in each country. Information on market demands on Color High quality if it is blackish red
quality and safety attributes were recorded through informal and focus Marbling High if the meat shines (weak indicator)
‐ ‐ ‐
Price High if the meat is priced higher (weak
group discussions with various dairy value chain actors. indicator)
Safety Attributes Indicators
• Second: a structured consumer survey conducted to get in depth Tape worm and other Safe if tape worm and other hazardous ‐ ‐ ‐
consumer characteristics and preferences hazardous parasites parasites are perceived to be absent
Slaughtering Safe if meat inspection stamp present
• Third: in Kenya and Tanzania case studies on food safety risk Neatness of the butcher Safe if the butcher house and equipment
house use is clean and protected from flies
assessment were carried out Neatness of the butcher Safe if operators wears protective clothing
Beef Value Chain Consumers (overcoat)
Functions Neatness of the distributors Safe if the distributors wear neat work
Fig. 1: Generalised beef value chains in the study counties
to the butchers cloths
Length of storage stay Safe if the meat is same day meat
Export market
Supermarkets Butcheries/meat
shops
Groceries Roadside vendors Trust worthiness of the Safe if the butcher is trust worthy
Retailing
Butcher
Location Safe if shop surroundings are clean
Type of shop Super markets are perceived safer than ‐ ‐ ‐
Distribution
Large scale
Processors
Small scale
Processors Hides & Skins others outlets
Processors
Processing Formal
Table 2: Consumer willingness to pay for quality and safety of beef
Informal
Commercial abattoirs Slaughter slabs Export abattoirs
Slaughter
Commodity
Quarantine
consumers willing to pay more for Kenya Tanzania
Secondary Primary market
Dar es
Marketing
Terminal market
market
Regulatory authorities
Nairobi Eldoret Salaam Arusha
Brokers
Standards authorities
N=102 N=50 N=15 N=18
Production N=60 N= 28 N= 15 N=18
Beef
Traditional pastoralists
Commercial Ranches
Service providers Higher quality and safety of beef products 50 56 58.8 80.0
How much more? (K.shs) +13 +31 ‐ ‐
Input supply
Input suppliers
6. Conclusion
•Consumers have own criteria for quality and safety of locally produced
value added beef products
•There was greater agreement with regard to criteria for safety than for
quality across countries
•Indications in Kenya and Tanzania was that consumers are willing to
pay higher prices for safer and better quality products.