J. Env. Bio-Sci., 2014: Vol.

28 (2): 193-196 ISSN 0973-6913 (Print), ISSN 0976-3384 (On Line)

SHEEP AND GOAT MEAT CONSUMPTION PATTERNS IN SALEM CITY

CORPORATION OF TAMILNADU
V. Chandirasekaran and S. Sureshkumar
Department of Meat Science and Technology,
Veterinary College and Research Institute,
Namakkal - 637 002, Tamil Nadu.
e-mail: v.chandirasekaran@gmail.com

Received: 29-08-2014 Accepted: 29-09-2014

A study was carried out on meat consumption pattern in the three tier-II corporations, namely, Salem, Erode and Madurai of Tamil
nadu state. From the selected cities, 60 respondents from Salem Corporation were chosen using multistage random sampling
technique for enabling personal interview. The results have shown that 37 were males and 23 were females, among the 60
respondents, with an average age of 39.2 ± 2.9 and 27.3 ± 3.1, respectively. Among the respondents 57 of them were hindus, 2 of
them were muslims and 1 of them was Christian. Among them, 7 from hindu religion (3 males and 4 females) have reported that
they do not consume meat. Amongst all meats of food animals and fish, except beef and pork, the meats (Chevon, Mutton, Chicken
and Fish) were consumed by 53 of respondents of both gender. Beef and Pork were not consumed by all the 53 respondents,
including the muslims and christian. Preferences have shown that chicken and chevon were the most preferred meat types with
53 and 48 respondents out of 60 respondents, respectively and then followed by fish and mutton with 46 and 3 respondents,
respectively. The study revealed that there was no response for beef and pork from all 60 respondents.

Agriculture in India is considered as the mainstay of a majority
of people. It contributes around 20 per cent to the gross
domestic product (GDP) of the country. The livestock sector
contributes about 25 per cent to the agricultural output. Among
animal foods, meat is considered to be highly nutritious and,
thus, has become an integral component of human diet. It is a
rich source of valuable proteins, vitamins, minerals,
micronutrients and fats. In addition to the supply of long chain
3 omega fatty acids, meat consumption is supposed to supply
conjugated linolenic acid that provides multifaceted nutrient
for human health. At present most of the meat produced in
India is being sold in the form of fresh meat, while only less
than 3% is being sold as processed meat. Because of the
rapid urbanization and hurried way of life, there is a spurt in
the consumption of processed foods and a shift in the
consumption pattern. In Indian context, culture, traditions,
customs and taboos influence meat consumption to a great
extent especially in the rural societies. However, there have
been studies that show that urbanization has been causing a
rise in demand for meat products. As people move to cities,
they start getting into meat product consumption. In fact, the
demand for beef, cara beef, mutton, chevon, pork and poultry
meat in India is expected to reach the levels of 14.60, 35.52,
6.87, 9.35, 8.40 and 31.62 lakh tonnes5 respectively by 2020.
The per capita meat consumption in India is only around 44.39
gm/capita/day as compared to world consumption of 116.82
gm/capita/day. Food choice is not merely about obtaining
nutrition11. Demographic changes, convenience and price, the
importance of variety and new experiences, quality and health
concerns, and ethical and environmental issues; are some of
the most important determinants of food choice today and
challenges to satisfying consumer's demands 3,4,6,8. Our eating
habits are changing; more people are spending less time
planning and preparing their meals and are shifting towards
prepared meals and take out7. Meat consumption has shifted
over time from beef, veal, lamb, mutton and chevon to a greater
consumption of poultry and fish due to changing tastes, costs
and income1. Many studies existed on animal product
consumption, most of them were focused on urban household
animal product consumption in relatively small cities10. The
objective of this study is to find out the consumption pattern
and consumer preferences for quality attributes of Chevon,
Mutton and other meats (Beef, Pork, Fish, etc.,). The data
related to the above said title is not available for a tier-II and
fast growing city like salem and hence, the present study was
undertaken.
 Sheep and Goat Meat Consumption Patterns in Salem City
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The present study is a part of the Ph.D. thesis. Tamil Nadu
state is considered as the universe of study area. Among
the nine Tier-II corporation cities of Tamil Nadu, three
corporations, namely, Salem, Erode and Madurai corporations
were selected randomly. From the selected cities,60
respondents from Salem Corporation were chosen using
multistage random sampling technique for enabling personal
interview. The interview was conducted through a structured
and pilot-tested interview schedule. The collected data were
grouped, classified, analyzed using Statistical Package for
the Social Sciences12 and presented using tables.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Effect of Age, Gender and Religion on meat
consumption pattern : A total of 60 respondents were
used for data collection and out of them 37 were males and
23 were females with an average age of 39.2 ± 2.9 and 27.3
± 3.1, respectively. Among the respondents 57 of them were
hindus, 2 of them were muslims and 1 of them was Christian.
Among them, 7 from hindu religion (3 males and 4 females)
have reported that they do not consume meat. Amongst all
meats of food animals and fish, except beef and pork, the
meats (Chevon, Mutton, Chicken and Fish) were consumed
by 53 of respondents of both gender. Beef and Pork were
not consumed by all the 53 respondents, including the
muslims and christian. (Table-1). The religious and socio-
cultural taboos dictate consumption of meat9,13. Age had no
significant influence on meat consumption pattern. Mutton
consumption was denied by all 50 meat eaters belonging to
hindu religion.
Preferences for Chevon, Mutton and Other Meats :
Preferences of the respondents to Chevon, Mutton and other
meats are shown in Table-2. Among these, chicken and
chevon were the most preferred meat types with 53 and 48
respondents out of 60 respondents, respectively and then
followed by fish and mutton with 46 and 3 respondents,
respectively. The study revealed that there was no response
for beef and pork from all 60 respondents (Table-2). Chicken
as the most preferred meat, but, the preferences for beef
and mutton were in contrast 2,13. The variation in preference
(194)
pattern could be due to the cost of meat, availability and income
of respondent2. Beef and Pork consumption was negatively
influenced by religion, region and socio-cultural taboos 9.
Compared to all other meats, preference for Chevon and Mutton
were ranked 2nd and 4th, respectively.
Limitations of meat consumption pattern and consumer
preferences : As previously mentioned, the socio-cultural taboos
play a major role in meat preference and consumption pattern.
The respondents belonging to hindu religion strongly argued that
consumption of mutton may lead to health problems as compared
to that of chevon, for which they feel that it is good for health and
also very tasty when compared to other meats. To an extent,
the respondents also felt for the cost of chevon, mutton and
other meats. The religion of the respondent also played a vital
role in meat consumption pattern and ranked as the most limiting
factor in preference and consumption pattern13. The potential
constraints as limiting factors in meat consumption and
preference patterns are listed in Table-3. The pattern of meat
consumption in Tamil Nadu is in line with that in the country, in
general. In other words, the meat consumption habits of people
in the state depend considerably on culture, tradition,
urbanization etc. If undertaken by an organized sector, then
Chevon is having the highest potential for high retail sale at a
lower cost when compared to the local unorganized sellers. The
analysis on consumption pattern of various meats in Tier-II cities
would help in forecasting market demand and opportunities, and
provide information on nutritional status, intake and purchasing
power of different segments of the population. The results of this
study would give an idea for the producers when making decision
about the types of meat to produce and about the feasibility of
direct market outlets. The study of consumer preferences for
various meats can ultimately help the livestock distributors
including livestock exporters to better understand the existing
trends in livestock marketing. The knowledge of consumers'
preferences for various meats would help the producers and post-
harvest technologists target attributes which are economically
viable in their production and post-harvest technology
development, respectively. The results may also be used by the
scientists for public policy research in meat marketing,
technology assessment and research prioritization.
(195) Chandirasekaran and Sureshkumar

Table-1: Effect of gender and religion on meat consumption pattern

[ -Consuming; X - Not consuming.]

Table-2: Degree of preferences for Meat Types

Meat type Preference Degree of preferences

I II III IV V
Chicken 53 (60) 51(85%) 2(3.3%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%)
Chevon 48 (60) 38(63.3%) 9(15%) 0(0%) 1(1.7%) 0
Mutton 03 (60) 1(1.7%) 1(1.7%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 1(1.7%)
Beef 0 (60) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%)
Pork 0 (60) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%)
Fish 46 (60) 7(11.7%) 13(21.7%) 5(8.3%) 19(31.7%) 2(3.3%)

Table-3: Constraints in meat consumption and preference patterns

C ons tr aint s Nu m be r of R es po nde nts P erc e nta ge
R eligion 46 76 .7
S o cio- cu ltura l tab oos 11 18 .3
Co st of m e at 3 5
T ot al 60 10 0
 Sheep and Goat Meat Consumption Patterns in Salem City (196)

REFERENCES 8. McCarthy, M., S.O'Reilly, L.Cotter and M. de Boer. (2004).

1. Akbay,C. and I.Boz (2005). Livestock Research for Rural Appetite., 43(1):19.
Development, 17: 9. 9. Odo, B. I., B.N.Marire, S.O.Alaku, M.O.Akpa, D.C.Nwosu
2. Akinwumi, A.O., A.A.Odunsi, A.B.Omojola, J.R.Aworemi and M.A.Anikwe, (2004). Pig meat consumption in Enugu
and O.A.Aderinola. (2011). Int. J. Applied Agri. and Apicult. Metropolis. In:- Proccedings of the 9th Annual Conference
Res., vol; 7, (1-2), 96. of Animal Science Association Nigeria 13th - 16th

3. Costa, A. I. A. and W. M. F. Jongen. (2006). Trends in September. 211.

Food Science and Technology., 17:457. 10. Oguz, C. and Kucukeongar M. (2002). Tarim Ekonomisi

4. Costa, A. I. d. A., D. Schoolmeester, M. Dekker and W. M. Kongresi. Eylul., 2002.

F. Jongen. (2007). Food Quality and Preference., 18(1): 11. R i c h a r d s o n , N . J . , H . J . M . M a c F i e a n d R . S h e p h e r d . ( 1 9 9 4 ) .

77. Meat Science., 36:57.

5. FAO. (2002.) The State of Food Insecurity in the World. 12. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS),(2003).
Economic and Social Department, Food and Agriculture Application Guide. SPSS Inc.
Organization of the United Nations, Rome. 13. Tsegay, T. (2013). J. of Microbio., Biotechno. and Food
6. Grunert, K. G. (2006). Meat Science., 74:149. Sci., 2 (3): 959.

7. Linnemann, A. R., M. Benner, R. Verker and M. A. J. S. van

Boekel. (2006). Trends in Food Science and Technology.,
17:184.