Search

    Start Over Publication Year 2022 Subject Term workshops Within Last x Years within 5 Years

    2. Science communication challenges about antimicrobial resistance in animal agriculture: insights from stakeholders

    <span class="translation_missing" title="translation missing: en.bibleaves.discover_item">Discover Item</span>
    Collection:
    Agricultural Communications Documentation Center (ACDC)
    Contributers:
    King, Andy J (author), Wald, Dara M (author), Coberley, Denise D (author), Dahlstrom, Michael F (author), and Plummer, Paul J (author)
    Format:
    Journal Article
    Publication Date:
    2022-04
    Published:
    England: British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
    Location:
    Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 205 Document Number: D12710
    Journal Title:
    JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance
    Journal Title Details:
    Vol. 4 Iss. 2
    Notes:
    4pgs, Background Communicating about antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) requires technical knowledge, consideration of audience values and appropriate identification of communication strategies for multiple audiences. Within the context of animal agriculture, communicating about AMR represents an important and complex endeavour for veterinarians, governmental agencies, producers and the industry to convey policy and practice information regarding the use of antimicrobials in food animals. Objectives To assess the science communication challenges related to AMR by identifying the motivations, goals and struggles of animal agriculture stakeholders when communicating about AMR and AMS. Methods Participants attending a meeting on AMR communication in animal agriculture (N = 80) completed a workshop on science communication, including small group meetings with oral/written comments collected. Participants included veterinarians, government agency representatives, industry stakeholders and producers. Results Results indicated participants believed providing more accurate information would resolve misunderstanding and concern about AMR to other stakeholders, counter to recommendations of science communicators. Other participants noted beliefs about the utility of stories in trying to explain how AMS is normative and consistent with the values of all parties interested in animal agriculture. Participants noted the importance of public engagement, even if the participants’ perceived target audiences did not include the public. Conclusions Communicating about AMR and AMS in animal agriculture contexts provide unique challenges. Few evidence-based recommendations are available for science communicators in these contexts and more research is needed to improve the quality of communication about AMR and AMS in animal agriculture.