Manyweathers, Jennifer (author), Hernández-Jover, Marta (author), Hayes, Lynne (author), Loechel, Barton (author), Kelly, Jennifer (author), Felton, Simone (author), El Hassan, Marwan (author), Woodgate, Rob (author), and Maru, Yiheyis (author)
Format:
Journal Article
Publication Date:
2020-06-18
Published:
Italy: Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 205 Document Number: D12741
8pgs, A transdisciplinary pilot study with Australia's livestock industries is bringing multiple stakeholders together as equal partners, to examine the complex problems around animal disease management. These problems include disease surveillance and on-farm biosecurity practices. The pilot groups are established in industries susceptible to foot and mouth disease, namely dairy and beef cattle, pork, sheep and goats. The Agricultural Innovation Systems framework is being evaluated to determine its effectiveness as a tool to improve partnerships between stakeholders. These stakeholders include livestock producers (farmers), private and government veterinarians, local council representatives, and industry personal including from saleyards and abattoirs. Stimulation of innovative solutions to issues arising from conflicting priorities and limited resources around animal disease management are also expected. Using a participatory communication approach, the impact of the pilot on trust and relationships is being evaluated. The sustainability of the Agricultural Innovation Systems approach to address complex issues around animal health management is also being assessed. The aim of the study is to strengthen Australia's preparedness for an emergency animal disease outbreak, such as Foot and Mouth Disease.
20 pgs., Several U.S. federal government agencies collect and disseminate scientific data on a national scale to provide insights for agricultural trade, research, consumer health, and policy. Occasionally, such data have potential to provide insights to advance conversations and actions around critical and controversial issues in the broad agricultural system. Such government studies provide evidence for others to discuss, further interpret, and act upon, but to do so, they must be communicated well. When the research intersects with contentious socio-political issues, successful communication not only depends on tactics, but as this study illuminates, it also depends on relationship quality between research producers, study participants, and end-users. USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) conducted first-of-its kind national studies on cattle and swine producers’ use of antimicrobials. The use of antimicrobials in animal agriculture is considered a critical and controversial issue pertaining to antimicrobial resistance. In recognition of the anticipated wide-ranging interests in these studies, APHIS sought to understand stakeholders’ perceptions and experiences of the federal government research process and products with aim of improving their science communication and relations. This study reports on findings from in-depth interviews with 14 stakeholders involved in the antimicrobial use studies to make recommendations for improving communication and relations between the agency and its stakeholders. From this research, we draw implications that are transferrable to numerous types of government science communication efforts within agricultural sectors.
17 pages, The rise in the demand for animal products due to demographic and dietary changes has exacerbated difficulties in addressing societal concerns related to the environment, human health, and animal welfare. As a response to this challenge, Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) technologies are being developed to monitor animal health and welfare parameters in a continuous and automated way, offering the opportunity to improve productivity and detect health issues at an early stage. However, ethical concerns have been raised regarding their potential to facilitate the management of production systems that are potentially harmful to animal welfare, or to impact the human-animal relationship and farmers' duty of care. Using the Five Domains Model (FDM) as a framework, the aim is to explore the potential of PLF to help address animal welfare and to discuss potential welfare benefits and risks of using such technology. A variety of technologies are identified and classified according to their type [sensors, bolus, image or sound based, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)], their development stage, the species they apply to, and their potential impact on welfare. While PLF technologies have promising potential to reduce the occurrence of diseases and injuries in livestock farming systems, their current ability to help promote positive welfare states remains limited, as technologies with such potential generally remain at earlier development stages. This is likely due to the lack of evidence related to the validity of positive welfare indicators as well as challenges in technology adoption and development. Finally, the extent to which welfare can be improved will also strongly depend on whether management practices will be adapted to minimize negative consequences and maximize benefits to welfare.
18pgs, Building a strong and trustworthy communication network to report unusual signs of disease will facilitate Australia’s response to a foot and mouth disease (FMD) outbreak. In a four-year study, the FMD Ready Farmer-led surveillance project adopted the Agricultural Innovation Systems (AIS) framework, modelling transformation of how knowledge is co-created, valued, and communicated. The FMD Ready project has highlighted the need for multiple stakeholders’ voices to be heard, and the importance of regulatory bodies to listen. Relationships take time and need to be valued as a necessary tool in a participatory, innovative approach to animal health and disease management.
16 pages, After years of debates and opposition from pharmaceutical companies, the Final rule of the Veterinary Feed Directive (VFD) went into effect in January 2017 requiring antibiotics used for both humans and animals for the purpose of growth promotion to be discontinued. This study sought to determine the effects framing content regarding antibiotic use in livestock and antibiotic resistance had on public opinion. Using a between-subjects experimental survey research design, 297 respondents indicated their perceptions of antibiotic use in livestock and the development of antibiotic resistant bacteria before being randomly assigned to one of three conditions. Each condition was a mock Twitter account framed differently based on findings from previous studies. After reading their assigned mock Twitter page, respondents indicated their trust of the information contained in the account, their information seeking behavior, demographics, and their support for antibiotic use in livestock. Using an ANCOVA, results indicated the frame influenced trust of information (F = 8.7, p < .05) and information seeking behavior (F = 4.48, p = .01) while support was not significant (F = 2.7, p = .07). Results suggest the blame frame has the greatest influence on shaping public opinion of antibiotic use in livestock and the development of antibiotic resistance.
