MEAT CONSUMPTION AS AN INDICATOR OF ECONOMIC WELL-BEING — CASE STUDY OF A DEVELOPED AND DEVELOPING ECONOMY

Abstract

ABSTRACT
The aim of the study was to verify the criterion of meat consumption as a marker of economic well-being, in economies at different phases of development. Meat consumption per capita is a widely used variable which is used to indicate the economic bases for the exclusion of meat and meat products from the diet. The study was performed simultaneously in Austria (a developed country) and Poland (a developing country) in 2015.
Descriptive statistics, econometric and descriptive models were used to process the research material. Respondents were classified according to the wealth criterion, measured by the average income per household member in a given country. In the case of the developing economy, it was discovered that the meat consumption function takes the shape of an indifference curve. In the developed economy, once the income per
household member exceeds 157% of the average national income, consumers exclude meat and other meat products from their diet for health reasons and reservations concerning the quality and origin of the meat.
The consumption of meat in Poland is determined by income amount, at a greater degree than in a developed economy. Low income in Polish families is the reason for the exclusion of meat consumption.

Full text

©
Copyright by Wydawnictwo SGGW
ORIGINAL PAPER
www.oeconomia.actapol.net

joanna_bereznicka@sggw.pl
Acta Sci. Pol.
Oeconomia 17 (2) 2018, 17–26
ISSN 1644-0757 eISSN 2450-047X DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2018.17.2.17
Received: 07.03.2018
Accepted: 29.05.2018
INTRODUCTION
Meat is the basic group of food in many consumers’
diet both in the developing and in the developed coun-
tries as it is a source of protein, ferrum, B vitamins, as
well as elements important for building healthy tissues
[Cosgrove et al. 2005, McAfee et al. 2010]. What is
more, Johnson [2015] indicates this is an important
dietary component in every age group. It promotes
proper growth and development in children and ensures
wellbeing and health of adults and seniors. The global
per capita meat consumption reached 41.3 kg in 2005
when compared to 30 kg in 1980. Those changes were
different in the developing and in the developed coun-
tries. Depending on the economic development level
MEAT CONSUMPTION AS AN INDICATOR OF ECONOMIC
WELL-BEING — CASE STUDY OF A DEVELOPED
AND DEVELOPING ECONOMY
Joanna Bereżnicka

, Tomasz Pawlonka
Warsaw University of Life Sciences – SGGW
ABSTRACT
The aim of the study was to verify the criterion of meat consumption as a marker of economic well-being, in
economies at different phases of development. Meat consumption per capita is a widely used variable which
is used to indicate the economic bases for the exclusion of meat and meat products from the diet. The study
was performed simultaneously in Austria (a developed country) and Poland (a developing country) in 2015.
Descriptive statistics, econometric and descriptive models were used to process the research material. Re-
spondents were classified according to the wealth criterion, measured by the average income per household
member in a given country. In the case of the developing economy, it was discovered that the meat con-
sumption function takes the shape of an indifference curve. In the developed economy, once the income per
household member exceeds 157% of the average national income, consumers exclude meat and other meat
products from their diet for health reasons and reservations concerning the quality and origin of the meat.
The consumption of meat in Poland is determined by income amount, at a greater degree than in a developed
economy. Low income in Polish families is the reason for the exclusion of meat consumption.
Key words: well-being, meat, consumption, consumer preferences, incomes, household
and the society wealth, it was found out that the meat
consumption increased from 76.3 to 82.1 kg per capita
in the developed economies and from 14.1 to 30.9 kg
per capita in the developing economies. Importantly,
according to FAO prognosis [2006], meat consumption
will double by 2050 because of increased income in the
developing countries and will result from the economic
growth [Delgado 2003]. Additionally, according to the
prognoses, in the decades to come meat consumption
will approach a high though stabilising meat and meat
product consumption level in the developing countries,
similar to the one found in the developed ones [Vranken
et al. 2014].

www.oeconomia.actapol.net18
Bereżnicka J., Pawlonka T. (2018). Meat consumption as an indicator of economic well-being – case study of a developed and
developing economy. Acta Sci. Pol. Oeconomia 17 (2) 2018, 17–26, DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2018.17.2.17
The major purpose of this study was to verify the
meat consumption index as the social prosperity in-
dicator, taken as the relationship between income per
one household member and the level of meat and meat
product consumption broken down into consumers
from a developed country, namely Austria (per capita
GDP of more than EUR 47 thousand in 2016), and
from a developing country, i.e. Poland, with the per
capita GDP of about EUR 26 thousand).
LITERATURE REVIEW
Prosperity is a highly complex notion, and its nature
has been studied by both economists and philosophers
for ages. Prosperity should be understood as “doing
well”, as derived from Latin prosperus. However, a
question emerges of how this doing is to be manifested
and what spheres of social life it is to cover. Accord-
ing to Biernacki [2006], “doing well” or well-being
satisfies the needs of a person with respect to basic
goods, and since the goods should be useful, consum-
ing them serves to satisfy those needs. It is important
to prioritize those needs. For some people it is a prior-
ity to satisfy the necessities (eating, drinking), while
others believe a sign of good life is to fulfill their
spiritual needs. Such a diversity makes the definition
and then measurement of prosperity ambiguous in
terms of methodology and interpretation. Usually we
speak of an economic prosperity and a social prosper-
ity. According to Sen [1991], the economic prosperity
is used to measure and evaluate the social prosperity,
indicating the ethical value or “goodness” of interests
of the whole community. The economic prosperity, on
the other hand, means the utility of income [Kasprzyk
2012]. The prosperity measurement cannot be, how-
ever, reduced to measuring the economic development
level of a state, as Kuznets turned the attention of
NATO in 1934 to the fact that the welfare of a na-
tion may be only slightly connected with the national
income [Cobb et al. 1995]. The debate subject is,
therefore, still the problem of what should be included
in the prosperity calculation. According to Drabsch
[2012], the aspects to be included in the deliberations
on prosperity, are happiness, life satisfaction or quality
of life. The prosperity concept based on the anticipated
utility theory is a direction of a broadly studied quality
of life which takes its single aspect in economy, i.e. the
economic prosperity. Although this is a far-reaching
simplification, it has been proved that there is a rela-
tion between income and the economic prosperity and
this is a positive one. According to Campbell [1976],
it cannot be assumed nonetheless that the objective
improvement of living conditions is accompanied by
the satisfaction with its current level.
Economic sciences have attempted to determine
the prosperity levels in particular countries or regions,
but prosperity has still been a multi-dimensional and
highly subjective phenomenon. The complexity of
this phenomenon is confirmed by the report published
in 2009 by a commission led by Stiglitz, postulat-
ing development of further indicators describing the
prosperity of individuals, societies and the sustainable
development. However, despite efforts and searches
no uniform prosperity measurement has been devel-
oped. Obviously, for international comparisons HDI,
(human development index) is used, being a synthetic
measurement of e.g. prosperity, including three fields
of life [Nefs 2009]:
life expectancy (average life expectancy);
knowledge, evaluated based on the illiteracy and
solarization;
life standard, assessed based on the per capita GDP.
As human development index was assessed to be
a measure not reflecting the social prosperity level
fully, other measures were developed to determine the
level of socio-economic development, including also
the prosperity level. Those are the quality of life in-
dex (QLI) and the better life index (BLI) developed
by OECD. The latter enables to compare the prosper-
ity of countries based on such categories as housing
conditions, financial expenditure, income, work safety
and other. The studies carried out by Łopatka [2015]
reveal that with respect to income, life satisfaction and
housing situation Poland has achieved results below
the average, while in such categories as security or
education it is a leader, coming even before Austria
which leads in terms of social prosperity calculated
based on BLI.
The economic prosperity is a social prosperity
component and is defined as a relationship between
increasing wealth and its distribution in the society. As
a result it should be claimed that depending on the dis-
•
•
•

www.oeconomia.actapol.net 19
Bereżnicka J., Pawlonka T. (2018). Meat consumption as an indicator of economic well-being – case study of a developed and
developing economy. Acta Sci. Pol. Oeconomia 17 (2) 2018, 17–26, DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2018.17.2.17
tribution method and the capacities of wealth develop-
ment by individuals creating the society, there may be
significant differences in the prosperity level. A hu-
man creating a household which strives to achieve a
specific standard of life in its actions, and the level
of its prosperity is conditional primarily on the spend-
able income per one family member, is a part of the
community. The income height, in turn, determines
the living standard diversification in terms of quan-
tity and quality [Kołodziejczak 2013]. The quantita-
tive changes are reflected by the changed consumption
volume which, according to Keynes [1956], is the only
and ultimate business activity objective. Consumption
results in increased domestic product and, consequent-
ly, the overall prosperity level. Although consumption
has been criticised many times, it is beyond doubt that
consumption is a component facilitating economies’
growth although this may be just a short-term effect.
In the context of consumption, attention should be
paid to food consumption, including meat. As indicat-
ed in the reference works, the income increase is ac-
companied by greater meat consumption in the devel-
oping countries, characterised by higher opulence of
the society [Meissner et al. 2013], which may in turn
lead to increased prices and destabilise food security
[Hermann 2009]. However, as mentioned by Škare et
al. [2016], the wealthy countries are expected to get
even reacher, and the poor ones to get poorer. No out-
look on the changes in meat consumption should ne-
glect the fact that higher income enables the consum-
ers to eat food of higher quality [Simo-Kengne et al.
2015] which is important both from the perspective of
climate protection or health aspects, i.e. increased risk
of cardiovascular diseases [Frazer 1999, Kelemen et
al. 2005, Kontogianni et al. 2008] or of cancer [Cross
et al. 2007, Kimura et al. 2007, Kabat et al. 2009].
As indicated by Vranken et al. [2014], the relation-
ship between meat consumption and income may take
the shape of upturned U because of problems related
to environmental pollution and adverse effect of meat
on health. However, it should be kept in mind that not
all countries must be characterised by such a relation-
ship because of the cultural and religious differences
between them that affect the meat consumption level.
As mentioned by Hubel et al. [2006], nationality has
a significant impact on decisions related to food prod-
uct purchase and consumption. What is more, there
are certain mentions of doubts concerning the growth
limit for the meat consumption [Vranken et al. 2014],
concerns paying attention to the dependence between
education and meat consumption level [Allais et al.
2010] and studies pointing to the need to consider
ethical behaviour towards animals [Holm and Møhl
2000], or ensuring animal well-being in meat produc-
tion. In developed economies consumers are interested
to a higher degree in food production ensuring animal
well-being [Henchion et al. 2014].
According to Henchion et al. [2014], the consump-
tion trends indicate that the price and income will be
less decisive for changes in this area. Most research-
ers claim that in the future the consumer choices will
depend more on the quality or other factors, i.e. nutri-
tive values or health-promoting properties. Obviously,
the food quality is assessed subjectively by consumers
(usually as sensory values), but the consumers demand
food products (including meat ones) to be safe, healthy
and guarantee high quality [Trienekens et al. 2012].
Nonetheless, the global meat consumption keeps
increasing and is driven by population and income
increase. However, price changes and other factors
shaping meat consumption will affect not only the
change in its consumption volume but rather choices
of consumers who will decide to resign from red meat
consumption for the benefit of white meat, produced
in a way friendly for the environment and considering
animal well-being (and consequently more expensive
and healthier).
DATA AND METHODS
The study was carried out from January to March 2015
in two independent study samples, i.e. among Austrian
and Polish consumers. To collect the study material,
the diagnostic polling method, with the survey tech-
nique based on standardised survey questionnaire, was
used. Likert and Guttman scales were used to create
the survey questionnaire. Conclusions from the results
obtained were drawn based on the description of the
diagnosed phenomena and prospective regularities us-
ing the cause and effect analysis. Identification of a
relationship between the income per one household
member and the meat and meat product consumption

www.oeconomia.actapol.net20
Bereżnicka J., Pawlonka T. (2018). Meat consumption as an indicator of economic well-being – case study of a developed and
developing economy. Acta Sci. Pol. Oeconomia 17 (2) 2018, 17–26, DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2018.17.2.17
level was examined using an abridged econometric
model verification procedure. The following assump-
tion was made:
economic well-being = f(society wealth)
society wealth = Σ of household income
meat consumption = f(household income, culture,
religion, other)
meaning: economic well-being
≅
f(meat
consumption)
As the objective of this study was not to measure
the effect of culture and religion on the meat consump-
tion volume and as we compare European countries
where certain differences in approach to meat con-
sumption may take place but both countries originate
from a similar culture, we decided the deviations in
this respect should be considered a residual compo-
nent (and together with other not included variables
deemed incidental variables).
In connection with the proposed above-mentioned
objective, two hypotheses were formulated:
H.1. The consumption of meat and meat products
increases together with the increase in the income
per one household member among Polish respond-
ents.
H.2. The consumption of meat and meat products
increases together with the increase in the income
per one household member among Austrian re-
spondents.
The identification of the relationships between the
endogenous variable (meat consumption in kg) and
the exogenous variable (per capita household income)
was carried out based on the non-linear regression
analysis. The studied relationships, expressed in al-
gebraic terms, were subject to simplified verification
procedure, suitable to study the econometric model
goodness measures [Kufel 2011], eliminating the non-
-fitting observations.
The study of Austrian respondents enabled to
gather 468 completed questionnaires and the one of
Polish respondents brought 1,248 ones, meaning
1,716 respondents were examined altogether. To ver-
ify the relationship between the per capita income in
a household and the meat and meat product consump-
tion level, the answers of respondents who resigned
•
•
from eating meat for any non-economic reasons where
eliminated from both study samples. As a result, the
basic sample of Austrian respondents comprised 419
observations, and the one of Polish respondents 1,232
records (with 1.3% of observations removed). Such a
sample was subject to further verification procedure,
its first stage being elimination of any discrepant ob-
servations. From both study samples, the observations
discrepant from the theoretical line of the estimated
model much above the calculated standard error (the
standard deviation value would change during every
consecutive model estimation by a repeated regres-
sion analysis) were removed. The elimination crite-
rion adopted was the range equal to 2σ. This meant the
observations where the residual component, resulting
from the differences between value Y of the estimated
model and the actual Y, went beyond the (–2σ; +2σ)
were eliminated. This was repeated until the maximum
permissible number of observations was eliminated,
i.e. to the limit of 20% of observations [Gawlik 2008],
or until the residual component did not exceed –/+2σ.
Following each elimination of a group of observations
exceeding (–2σ; +2σ), a repeated regression analysis
was carried out to identify the best relationship possi-
ble. Having eliminated the maximum number of non-
-fit cases, the final regression analysis was carried out,
resulting in the algebraic econometric model form. For
those relationships, the following were analyzed: the
goodness measures and the multiple correlation co-
efficient, standard error, Spearman’s rank correlation
coefficient and variation coefficient.
Eventually, 19.89% of observations were elimi-
nated from the study sample in the developing coun-
try, meaning the final, refined study sample included
987 observations. For Austria, those were 19.57% and
337 observations respectively. For both study samples
the regression lines, determining the actual data to the
highest degree, were estimated based a on non-linear
estimation.
Consumer preferences related to buying and eat-
ing meat and meat products were studied, considering
also the income criterion. For every country, a group
of consumers with income above the median for the
sample, i.e. a group of wealthy consumers (marked as
POL1, AUS1), and a group POL2, AUS2, including
consumers with the per capita income below the me-

www.oeconomia.actapol.net 21
Bereżnicka J., Pawlonka T. (2018). Meat consumption as an indicator of economic well-being – case study of a developed and
developing economy. Acta Sci. Pol. Oeconomia 17 (2) 2018, 17–26, DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2018.17.2.17
dian for the sample, i.e. a group of less wealthy con-
sumers were distinguished. Table 1 presents the basic
statistics describing the income value in Poland and
Austria.
Table 1. Statistics describing the level of per capita income
in the studied countries (EUR) in 2015
Specification Poland Austria
Minimum 160.00 316.00
Maximum 1 000.00 3 850.00
Mediana 480.00 1 610.00
Source: Own calculations based on the collected data.
The assessment of income per one household
member revealed that for Polish respondents this was
the amount of about PLN 1,852.71 (i.e. about EUR
450) when compared to about EUR 1,616.49 per one
household member among Austrian respondents). This
distinct difference in the income value between Polish
and Austrian respondents results from the economic
development level in the two countries and the social
wealth. For Austrian consumers, it was found out that
the poorest group of consumers has the income per one
household member of about EUR 316. For Polish con-
sumers, the lowest income value per one household
member is about PLN 709 (EUR 160). The wealthi-
est households among the respondents from Austria
had the average income per one household member of
EUR 3,850 when compared to PLN 4,380 (ca. EUR
1,000) of the average income per one household mem-
ber in Poland.
The data in Table 1 prove also that about a half
of Polish consumers had the income below EUR
480 while in Austria that was 1,610, meaning that a
“poorer” household member in Austria could spend
the amount more than three times higher than the one
in Poland.
RESULTS
The first step to assess the significance and scale of
meat and meat product consumption depending on the
income per one household member was the choice of
consumers who did not eat meat or meat products for
any reasons other than the income limitations and/or
excess meat and meat product prices. The scale of ex-
cluding meat and meat products from the diet among
Austrian respondents was higher than for the Polish
ones, reaching the level of 10.5%, when compared to
2.1% of the Polish consumers. The diagnosed differ-
ence may be related to the consumers’ habits, tradi-
tion and the specific nature of the national or regional
cuisine [Stoličná 2011]. The diagnosed reasons for
meat exclusion and the scale of this phenomenon in
the studied countries are presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Reasons for meat exclusion from the diet among
respondents in Poland and Austria (%)
Reason for exclusion Poland Austria
Vegetarian, vegan 9.52 36.00
Meat products are unhealthy 11.00 32.00
Low taste properties 17.00 26.00
High price 39.00 0.00
Low quality of meat products 19.00 0.00
Source: Own calculations based on the collected data.
Among the Austrian respondents, no difference was
noticed in relation to the consumers’ motives for elimi-
nating meat from their diet from the income criterion
perspective. The Austrian consumers’ motives related
to excluding meat and meat products were, therefore,
independent from the income. Among the Polish re-
spondents, it was noticed that the excess price criterion
was selected in more than 74% of cases by the consum-
ers classified into POL2 group of respondents. Similar
results were obtained by Szwacka-Mokrzycka [2016,
2017]. That criterion was less important among consum-
ers with higher income, i.e. POL1 group. In this group,
the factors related to quality, sensory values and health-
promoting properties of meat dishes were much more
significant. Unfortunately for some Polish respondents
meat and meat products are excluded from the diet due
to their high price when compared to the income earned,
for them meat and meat products may be almost luxury
goods for this group. This insight is, therefore, an im-
portant indicator of poverty of some part of the society
which was forced to resign from certain product types
because of insufficient funds. Consequently, this motive
does not belong to conscious convictions of customers

www.oeconomia.actapol.net22
Bereżnicka J., Pawlonka T. (2018). Meat consumption as an indicator of economic well-being – case study of a developed and
developing economy. Acta Sci. Pol. Oeconomia 17 (2) 2018, 17–26, DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2018.17.2.17
and is a result of economic constraints. This situation,
i.e. poverty of families, is improving thanks to the so-
cial benefit programmes implemented in Poland, which
have contributed to the significant reduction in poverty
areas, especially among children.
The graphic presentation of the modelled relation-
ships is shown in Figure 1.
The verification of hypotheses H1 and H2 did not
provide any explicit results. The hypotheses assumed
the positive value of the coincidence coefficient and
the proportional (linear) increase in meat consumption
in relation to the income level increase. For economet-
ric verification of hypotheses H1 and H2 the goodness
measures were used, the values of which are presented
in Table 3. The relevant numbers are listed in Table 3.
The study of goodness measures for the model cre-
ated to verify the study hypothesis H1 did not confirm
its correctness due to the excessive (above 10%) value
of the variation coefficient. It was similar for the hy-
pothesis H2.
The verification of goodness measures for the
model relationships between the level of per capita
household income and the meat and meat product con-
sumption did not corroborate the econometric correct-
ness of the observed relationships.
The estimated relationships, though not confirmed
econometrically, were characterized by very high mul-
tiple correlation coefficient values and high determi-
nation coefficient values. This means they are grounds
for observing certain regularities resulting from the es-
timated regression functions. From the perspective of
verifying the formulated study hypotheses, attention
should be paid also to the shape and direction of the
observed relationships.
For Polish consumers, it was found out that, in
line with the hypothesis H1 proposed, the consump-
M
M
eat consum
p
ption (kg)
Inc
com
come per one
mpared to the
household me
average incom
ember when
me in the econnomy
Fig. 1. Per capita household income and the meat and meat product consumption level in Poland and Austria
Source: Own compilation.
Table 3. Goodness measures for the developed models
Hipothesis Multiple
correlation R2Ve
(%) RSR2
H1 0.818 0.6693 18.14 0.7800 0.6689
H2 0.867 0.7515 11.25 0.7982 0.7500
Source: Own calculations.

www.oeconomia.actapol.net 23
Bereżnicka J., Pawlonka T. (2018). Meat consumption as an indicator of economic well-being – case study of a developed and
developing economy. Acta Sci. Pol. Oeconomia 17 (2) 2018, 17–26, DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2018.17.2.17
tion of meat and meat products grows together with
the increase in the income per one household mem-
ber. The increase in consumption, however, deceler-
ates, meaning further income rise leads to the lower
than proportional increase in meat and meat product
consumption. Consequently, the estimated regression
line takes the shape of a logarithmic function. From
the economic perspective, it takes the shape similar
to the utility function. This means we should point to
the diminishing marginal utility of every meat and
meat product unit consumed additionally. This can
be grounds also for concluding that the demand for
meat and meat products in the developing economy
is not satisfied and is largely predetermined by the
income height, as proven by the monotonic function.
Consequently, although the econometric correctness
of the estimated model has not been proven, there
are grounds to confirm the hypothesis H1. Meat and
meat products are considered to be ordinary goods by
consumers from a developed country.
For Austrian consumers, it was found out that in
accordance with the hypothesis H2 presented, the
increase in the income per one household member
is accompanied by the increase in meat and meat
product consumption, but solely when the income
does not exceed 170% of the average income per one
household member in Austria. The estimated func-
tion maximum is at (170.59%; 105.03 kg), being the
function extremum. Particular attention should be
paid to the fact that just like for the consumers from a
developed economy, the income rise leads to a lower
than proportional increase in meat and meat product
consumption (for x ε(0 ; 170.59%). The estimated
quadratic function becomes a decreasing function as
the domain of a function increases above 170.59%.
As a result, along with a subsequent income growth,
consumers resign from eating meat and meat prod-
ucts. This is indicative of a substitution effect. In
such a situation meat and meat products are consid-
ered inferior goods, and as the income grows, they
are replaced with other food products. As the esti-
mated function is not monotonic, the hypothesis H2
was verified negatively.
The study carried out enabled also to determine
the scale of spending on meat and meat products as
percentage of income per one household member. The
study was broken down into wealthy and less wealthy
customers in two independent study samples. The list
of results obtained is presented in Figure 2.
The list of spending on meat and meat products,
presented in Figure 2, shows that the Polish and Aus-
trian family uses 10% of its income for that purpose
on average. At the same time, it should be stated
that there are significant differences in the scale of
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
POL1
AUS1
POL2
AUS2
POL
AUS
Groups of respondents
Share in income (%)
Fig. 2. Share of spending on meat and meat products in the income based on separate groups of respondents (description
in the text)
Source: Own research.

www.oeconomia.actapol.net24
Bereżnicka J., Pawlonka T. (2018). Meat consumption as an indicator of economic well-being – case study of a developed and
developing economy. Acta Sci. Pol. Oeconomia 17 (2) 2018, 17–26, DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2018.17.2.17
spending between the groups of wealthy consum-
ers (POL1, AUS1) as those households spent 9 and
7% of their income respectively to buy meat and
meat products. The households with lower income
(POL2, AUS2) spent about 14% of their income on
that type of goods. The study carried out revealed
that the respondents classified as less wealthy spend
4.6 p.p. on average, expressed as percentage of the
income, on meat and meat products. Despite a lower
nominal level of spending on meat and meat prod-
ucts among less wealthy consumers, because of the
clearly lower average income level among the less
wealthy respondents, the ultimate share of spending
on meat and meat products among the less wealthy
respondents is clearly higher than for the wealthier
ones. The identified regularity indicates a lower meat
consumption level among less wealthy consumers or
purchase of food of inferior quality, which is cheaper.
The presented results of studies among the Polish and
Austrian respondents enable also to classify meat and
meat products economically from the income flex-
ibility perspective. On that basis it was calculated
that the income flexibility of demand for meat and
meat products among Polish respondents equals 0.31,
when compared to 0.18 among Austrian respondents.
In both cases, meat and meat products can be consid-
ered ordinary, basic goods, as confirmed also by the
study results of Kwasek [2008]. Among the Polish
respondents, the income flexibility value was higher,
meaning the income rise results in increased demand
for meat and meat products to a higher degree. Simul-
taneously, the income decrease may result in lower
meat and meat product consumption to a higher de-
gree than among the Austrian respondents. The iden-
tified difference proves the higher sensitivity of the
Polish respondents to the income constraints which
may result from still low income when compared to
highly developed countries, e.g. Austria.
The diagnosed difference between the Polish and
Austrian respondents may suggest that a tendency per-
ceivable since 2011 may become stronger in the Polish
society in the future, in accordance with which con-
sumers reduce consumption of meat and meat products
despite the increased social wealth. This change in most
cases is not accompanied, however, by any economic
pressure but it is a conscious choice of consumers. Si-
multaneously, the rule that less wealthy respondents
declared lower consumption of meat than the wealthier
ones has been observed both among Austrian and Polish
respondents. Consequently, it can be declared that the
economic criterion related to the per capita income in
a household may be significant for the amount of the
meat and meat products consumed. In both groups of
respondents it was found out that the consumption of
meat and meat products is lower among less wealthy
respondents by about 11 p.p. on average.
The study revealed also the approach of consum-
ers in the developed and in the developing country to
meat and meat products. In the developing economy, it
was found out that the income is a significant determi-
nant of the meat and meat product consumption level.
However, meat is considered to be ordinary goods,
with the effect of diminishing marginal utility to be
considered. This effect grows as the income rises. The
study also indicated existence of similar relationship
among consumers from the developed country, with
this result observed solely among the less wealthy
group of consumers. The increase in the consumers’
wealth led to reduced consumption of meat and meat
products, as indicated by the substitution effect. This
group of respondents considered meat to be inferior
goods.
REFERENCES
Allais, O., Bertail P., Nichè, V. (2010). The effects of a fat
tax on French households’ purchases: a nutritional ap-
proach. American Journal Agricultural Economics, 92
(1), 228–245.
Biernacki M. (2006). Kilka uwag o pomiarze dobrobytu
społecznego. Mathematical Economics, 3 (10).
Campbell, A. (1976). Subjective measure of well-being.
American Psychologist, 31 (2), 117–124.
Cosgrove, M., Flynn, A., Kiely, M. (2005). Consumption of
red meat, with meat and processed meat in Irish adult in
relation to dietary quality. British Journal of Nutrition,
93, 933–942.
Cross, A.J., Leitzmann, M.F., Gail, M.H., Hollenbeck, A.R.,
Schatzkin, A., Sinha, R. (2007). A prospective study of
red and proposed meat intake in relation to cancer risk.
PLos Medicine, 4 (12), 1973.

www.oeconomia.actapol.net 25
Bereżnicka J., Pawlonka T. (2018). Meat consumption as an indicator of economic well-being – case study of a developed and
developing economy. Acta Sci. Pol. Oeconomia 17 (2) 2018, 17–26, DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2018.17.2.17
Delgado, C.L. (2003). Rising Consumption of Meat and
Milk in Developing Countries Has Created a New Food
Revolution. The Journal of Nutrition, 133 (11), 3907S–
–3910S.
Drabsch, T. (2012). Measuring Wellbeing. Briefing Paper, 4.
FAO (2006). Livestock’s long shadow. Environmental issue
and options. Rome.
Fraser, G. (1999). Associations between diet and cancer,
ischemic heart disease, and all-cause mortality in non-
Hispanic white California Seventh-Day Adventists.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 70, 532S–538S.
Gawlik, L. (2008). Budowa I weryfikacja modelu ekonom-
etrycznego dla określenia liniowej zależności pomiędzy
kosztami pozyskania węgla a wielkością wydobycia.
Gospodarka Surowcami Naturalnymi, 24 (1), 27–44.
Henchion, M., McCarthy, M., Resconi, V.C., Troy, D.
(2014). Meat consumption: Trends and quality matters.
Meat Science, 98, 561–568.
Herrmann, M. (2009). Food security and agricultural devel-
opment in times of high commodity prices. United Con-
ference on Trade and Development. Discussion Paper,
196.
Holm, L., Møhl, M. (2000). The role of meat in very day
food culture: an analysis of an interview study in Copen-
hagen. Appetite 34, 277–283.
Hubel, R., Laessle, R.G., Lehrke, S., Jass, J. (2006). Labora-
tory measurement of cumulative food intake in humans:
Results on reliability. Appetite, 46 (1), 57–62.
Johnson, A. (2015). The role of the red meat in a healthy New
Zeland diet. Retrieved from www.beeflambnz.co.nz/re-
sources/Role_of_Red_Meat_Report.pdf [accessed:
27.11.2017].
Kabat, G.C., Cross, A., Park, Y., Schatzkin, A., Hollenbeck,
A.R., Rohan, T.E. (2009). Meat intake and meat prepara-
tion in relation to risk of postmenopausal breast cancer
in the NIH-AARP diet and healthy study. International
Journal of Cancer, 124, 2430–2435.
Kasprzyk, B. (2012). Subiektywizm ocen dobrobytu eko-
nomicznego (na przykładzie gospodarstw domowych
w regionie podkarpackim. Nierówności Społeczne
a Wzrost Gospodarczy, 25, 191–201.
Kelemen, L.E., Kushi, L.H., Jacobs, D.R., Cerhan, J.R.
(2005). Associations of dietary protein with diseaseand
mortality in a prospective study of postmenoausal wo-
men. American Journal of Epidemiology, 161, 239–249.
Keynes, J.M. (1956). Ogólna teoria zatrudnienia, procentu
i pieniądza. PWN, Warszawa.
Kimura, Y., Kono, S., Toyomura, K., Nagano, J., Mizoue, T.,
Moore, M.A., et al. (2007). Meat fish and FAT intake In
relationto subsite-specific risk of colorecal cancer. The
Fukoka Colorectal Cancer Study. Cancer Science, 98,
590–597.
Kołodziejczak, M. (2013). Struktura wydatków i poziom
konsumpcji wybranych produktów spożywczych w gos-
podarstwach domowych w Polsce i w Niemczech. Za-
gadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej, 3, 112–123.
Kontogianni, M.D., Panagiotakos, D.B., Pitsavos, C., Chrys-
ohoou, C., Stefanadis, C. (2008). Relationship between
meat intake and the development of acute coronary syn-
dromes: The CAARDIO2000 case-control study. Euro-
pean Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 62, 171–177.
Kufel, T. (2011). Ekonometria, Rozwiązywanie problemów
z wykorzystaniem programu GRETL. Wydawnictwo
Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
Kwasek, M. (2008). Dochodowa elastyczność popytu na
żywność. Wiadomości Statystyczne, 5, 39–51.
Łopatka, A. (2015). Ekonomia dobrobytu. Rachunku naro-
dowe w kontekście pomiaru dobrobytu. Współczesne
Problemy Ekonomiczne, 11, Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwer-
sytetu Szczecińskiego, 858.
McAfee, A.J., McSorley, E.M., Cuskelly, G.J., Moss, B.W.,
Wallace, J.M.W., Bonham, M.P., Fearon, A.M. (2010).
Red meat consumption: An overview of the risks and
benefits. Meat Science, 84, 1–13.
Meissner, H.H., Schulz, M.M., Palmar, A.R. (2013). Sus-
tainability of the South African livestock sector towards
2050. Part 1. Worth and impact of the sector. South Afri-
can Journal of Animal Science, 43 (3), 298–319.
Nefs, D. (2009). HDI project report. Retrieved from: http://
www.india.jbs.cam.ac.uk/engagement/tataises/down-
loads/report_nefsd.pdf.
Simo-Kengne, B., Dikgang, J., Prugsamatz Ofstad, S.
(2015). Casual relationship between meat consumption
and economic growth in SEAFO countries: Evidence
from panel Granger causality test. [In:] Biennial Con-
ference of the Economic Society of South Africa, Cape
Town. Retrieved from: http://2015.essa.org.za/fullpa-
per/essa_3072.pdf [accessed: 13.10.2017].
Sen, A. (1991). Capability and Well-being. The Quality of
Life. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Škare, M., Pržiklas, Družeta, R. (2016). Poverty and eco-
nomic growth: a review. Technological and Economic
development of Economy, 22 (1).
Stoličná, R., (2011). Tworzenie się kultury kulinarnej Eu-
ropejczyków. Studia Etnologiczne i Antropologiczne,
11, 209–219.
Szwacka-Mokrzycka, J. (2016). Stimulators and barriers of
demand for food (Polish case). Acta Scientarum Polono-
rum Oeconomia, 15 (3), 123–133.

www.oeconomia.actapol.net26
Bereżnicka J., Pawlonka T. (2018). Meat consumption as an indicator of economic well-being – case study of a developed and
developing economy. Acta Sci. Pol. Oeconomia 17 (2) 2018, 17–26, DOI: 10.22630/ASPE.2018.17.2.17
Szwacka-Mokrzycka, J. (2017). Changes in food consump-
tion in Poland and other EU countries. Acta Scientarum
Polonorum Oeconomia, 16 (4), 169–178.
Trienekens, J., Wognum, P., Beulens, A., van der Vorst, J.
(2012). Transparency in complex dynamic food supply
chains. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 26 (1), 55–65.
SPOŻYCIE MIĘSA JAKO WYZNACZNIK DOBROBYTU EKONOMICZNEGO
– PRZYPADEK GOSPODARKI ROZWINIĘTEJ I ROZWIJAJĄCEJ SIĘ
STRESZCZENIE
Celem badania była weryfikacja kryterium konsumpcji mięsa jako wskaźnika dobrostanu ekonomicznego
w gospodarkach na różnych etapach rozwoju. Zużycie mięsa na osobę jest powszechnie stosowaną zmienną,
która służy do wskazywania ekonomicznych podstaw wykluczania mięsa i produktów mięsnych z diety. Ba-
danie przeprowadzono równolegle w Austrii (kraj rozwinięty) i Polsce (kraj rozwijający się) w 2015 roku. Do
przetworzenia materiału badawczego wykorzystano statystyki opisowe, modele ekonometryczne i modele
opisowe. Badanych klasyfikowano według kryterium zamożności mierzonego średnim dochodem na człon-
ka gospodarstwa domowego w danym kraju. W przypadku rozwijającej się gospodarki odkryto, że funkcja
konsumpcji mięsa przyjmuje kształt krzywej obojętności. W rozwiniętej gospodarce, w której dochód na
członka gospodarstwa domowego przekracza 157% średniego dochodu narodowego, konsumenci wyklucza-
ją mięso i inne produkty mięsne ze swojej diety ze względów zdrowotnych i z powodu zastrzeżeń w kwestii
jakości i pochodzenia mięsa. Konsumpcja mięsa w Polsce jest determinowana przez wielkość dochodów
w większym stopniu niż w rozwiniętej gospodarce. Mały dochód w polskich gospodarstwach domowych jest
przyczyną wyłączenia mięsa z konsumpcji.
Słowa kluczowe: dobrobyt, spożycie mięsa, preferencje konsumentów, dochody, gospodarstwa domowe
Vranken, L., Avermaete, T., Petalios, D., Mathijs, E. (2014).
Curbing global meat consumption. Emering evidence of
second nutrition transition. Environmental Science &
Policy, 39, 95–106.