Animal Welfare as a Field of Economics

Tyler Cowen recently posted a good question: Why isn’t there an economics of animal welfare field. As someone who has conducted research on this topic for more than a decade, I found the two sentences in Cowen’s post a bit amusing:

“I do understand there is plenty about animal welfare in ag econ journals and departments, but somehow the way the world is tiered that just doesn’t count. Yes that is unfair, but the point remains that this subfield remains an underexploited intellectual profit opportunity.”

My sense is that he means this work doesn’t “count” in the academic status game. Maybe so, but I can assure you that the work agricultural economists have done on the issue has “counted” in the real world of policy, law, farming/ranching, and agribusiness.

If you’re curious about this topic and want an intro to the topic, I can offer some of my co-authored work (mostly led by my colleague Bailey Norwood who suggested we get into this area more than a decade ago).

• Norwood, F.B. and J.L. Lusk. Compassion by the Pound: The Economics of Farm Animal Welfare. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2011.

• Lusk, J.L. and F.B. Norwood. “Animal Welfare Economics.” Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy. 33(2011):463-483.

• Lusk, J.L. “The Market for Animal Welfare.” Agricultural and Human Values. 28(2011):561-575.

• Norwood, F.B., and J.L. Lusk. “A Calibrated Auction-Conjoint Valuation Method: Valuing Pork and Eggs Produced under Differing Animal Welfare Conditions.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 62(2011):80-94.

• Lusk, J.L. and F.B. Norwood. “Speciesism, Altruism, and the Economics of Farm Animal Welfare.” European Review of Agricultural Economics. 39(2012):189-212.

• Paul, A.S., J.L. Lusk, F.B. Norwood, and G.T. Tonsor. “An Experiment on the Vote-Buy Gap with Application to Cage-Free Eggs.” Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics. 79(2019):102-109.

We have published many, many more papers on this topic, but the above gives a good sense of the theoretical and empirical contributions that currently exist. And, of course other economists such as Dan Sumner, Nicolas Treich, Glynn Tonsor, John Bovay have made many excellent contributions as well.

P.S. While not often considered a book on “animal welfare,” I’ve long enjoyed this 1995 book by Kagel, Battalio, and Green entitled Economic Choice Theory: An Experimental Analysis of Animal Behavior

A textbook on Food Economics

I had the pleasure to read an early release version of the new textbook: Food Economics: Agriculture, Nutrition, and Health by Will Masters and Amelia Finaret. A description is below.

“Food Economics and its accompanying online resources are designed for advanced undergraduate or introductory graduate courses in agriculture, food, and nutrition policy. The book covers the standard diagrams taught in principles-level courses, with concrete examples and practical insights regarding food production, consumption, and trade. Online resources include data sources, and course materials, including slides, exercises, exams, and answer keys.”

You can download the book here. The course materials are here.

Some new research

Below are a few new papers I’ve co-authored with a number of colleagues over the past couple months.

• The effect of the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (NBFDS) on consumer preferences and acceptance of bioengineered and gene-edited food with Vincenzina Caputo and Valarie Kilders.

  • Abstract: The National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard in the United States mandates disclosure of foods with bioengineered ingredients. However, some gene-edited foods are excluded from the Standard. This study explores consumer preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for bioengineered and gene-edited foods, with a focus on romaine lettuce, in comparison to conventional, organic, and non-GMO alternatives. Our analysis includes three disclosure formats: the BE label, text, and QR code. We also determine the impact of information-seeking behavior on consumer valuations and the factors influencing such behaviors. Findings reveal a preference for conventional, organic, and non-GMO products over gene-edited and bioengineered options. However, the BE label is identified as the most favored disclosure method. In fact, under the BE disclosure, and particularly among information seekers, WTP for gene-edited and bioengineered products sometimes exceed WTP for conventional options. The study discusses policy implications regarding how disclosure formats and access to information can influence consumer perceptions and acceptance of new food technologies.

• Modeling Impacts of Location- and Product-Targeted Demand Enhancement on Pork Producer Profitability with Glynn Tonsor

  • Abstract: Prior research has documented wide variation in consumer sensitivity to changes in pork prices across different pork products and locations. This heterogeneity in demand elasticities implies there are potential benefits in location- and product-specific promotion strategies. To explore this issue, an economic model of the pork sector was created linking retail demand for six pork products in 50 retail markets with the farm-level supply of hogs in the U.S. The model is used to determine the impacts of targeted demand enhancement strategies by identifying which products, and in which locations, promotion would produce the greatest return for pork producers.

• Consumer Sensitivity to Pork Prices - A 2018-2023 Comparison of 50 U.S. Retail Markets and 6 Pork Products with Glynn Tonsor

  • This study used weekly retail scanner data from 50 U.S. retail markets and six different pork products to estimate market- and product-specific own-price elasticity estimates. Beyond these market- and product-specific own-price elasticities for the full six years spanning 2018 to 2023, we also provide parallel estimates for each two-year period (2018-19, 2020-21, and 2022-23) showing temporal patterns in consumer price sensitivity.

• Value of Farm Data in Farmland Rental Markets with Nathan DeLay, Nathan Thompson, Jim Mintert, and Todd Kuethe in Land Economics.

  • Abstract: Precision farming data enhances agricultural productivity by informing site-specific resource management. These benefits may be capitalized into the underlying value of the farmland itself, raising rental rates. This paper uses a stated preference choice experiment to estimate farmers’ willingness-to-pay for farm data in farmland rental markets. Farmers are willing to pay a small premium to acquire data accrued by previous operators, depending on the field type and quality information provided by the landowner, as well as farmers’ use of precision agriculture technology. We find evidence that farm data confers both a “management value” and a “signaling value” to prospective tenants.

• Attracting and Securing Budgets for Agricultural and Applied Economics Departments with Matt Holt, Frances Homans, and Rudy Nayga in Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy

  • Abstract: The aim of this paper is to discuss the challenges in attracting and securing adequate budgets for departments of agricultural and applied economics, while recognizing that the institutional and political contexts matter. Agricultural and applied economics departments that operate with an entrepreneurial mindset, that maintain and grow their student numbers, and that have a vibrant demand for their extension and research activities will thrive. The good news is we often have considerable control over the factors that contribute to our longer-term success.

OSU Extension Bot

Agricultural Extension services around the country are continually trying to find new ways to provide useful science-based information to the public in the modern ways people search for and gather information. OSU Extension is no different, and against that backdrop, I’m pleased to link to our new ExtensionBot.

By now everyone is likely familiar with the AI driven large language models like ChatGTP, Claude, or Gemini. These “generative AI” models differ in a number of ways, including the information and data upon which they are trained.

Our ExtensionBot is trained on Extension Facts Sheets produced by Extension services around the country at different Land Grant Universities, and our particular chatbot is weighted to rely most heavily on those fact sheets produced by the faculty and staff in Oklahoma State University Extension. Many thanks to my colleague David Warren who led this effort. For more information, check out this article.

Try it out and see what you think here.

Innovation in Gene Editing and Plant Breeding

Yesterday I had the privilege of moderating a panel discussion focused on gene editing hosted by the Farm Foundation. The main speakers included:

• Allen Van Deynze, Ph. D., Director, Seed Biotechnology Center and Associate Director, Plant Breeding Center, University of California, Davis

• Richard Lawrence, Ph.D., Head of Genome Editing, Yield, Disease, and Quality Research, Bayer Crop Science

• Fan-Li Chou, Ph. D., Senior Vice President, Scientific Affairs and Policy, American Seed Trade Association

• Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D., Professor of Cooperative Extension in Animal Biotechnology and Genomics, University of California, Davis

You can watch the presentations and discussion here or at the video link below.