European consumers’ beliefs about the main pillars of the sustainability: a comparison between wild and farmed fish

Aquaculture can represent an alternative means of economic yield and food security. Despite this fact, consumers still have a more negative perception of farmed fish when compared with wild fish, including its sustainability. Understanding how consumers perceive sustainability is essential in building an effective strategy to encourage sustainable fish consumption. A survey with 2145 consumers was conducted in five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain) to inquire into consumers’ beliefs about the main pillars of the sustainability (environmental, social, and economic) when farmed and wild fish are compared, as well as to identify segments of consumers with similar beliefs about fish sustainability. Overall, results showed that European consumers perceived farmed fish as being more sustainable, locally obtained, providing environmental benefits, generating employment, improving human living conditions, generating rural development, and ensuring more fair fish prices than wild fish. Conversely, wild fish was perceived as ensuring animal welfare and being more organic but causing more environmental damage than farmed fish. Additionally, it seems that to effectively communicate aquaculture sustainability, it would be better to focus on single aspects of sustainability (beliefs) rather than focusing on the whole concept of sustainability. Finally, four segments of consumers were identified according to consumers’ beliefs, which were labelled accordingly: ambivalent, pro aquaculture, pro wild fish, and impartial. Results obtained may be helpful to provide each segment with tailored marketing strategies to stimulate farmed fish consumption and improve the overall image of the aquaculture sector to foster its full development in Europe.