Kadiyala, Suneetha (author), Morgan, Emily H. (author), Cyriac, Shruthi (author), Margolies, Amy (author), Roopnaraine, Terry (author), and Department of Population Health, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
Leverhulme Centre for Integrative Research on Agriculture and Health (LCIRAH), London, United Kingdom
Division of Nutritional Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, United States of America
St. Johns Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
Department of International Health, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
Independent consultant, Brasilia, DF, Brazil
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2016-10-13
Published:
India: Public Library of Science
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 164 Document Number: D08245
Clark, Beth (author), Panzone, Luca A. (author), Stewart, Gavin B. (author), Kyriazakis, Ilias (author), Niemi, Jarkko K. (author), Latvala, Terhi (author), Tranter, Richard (author), Jones, Philip (author), and Frewer, Lynn J. (author)
Format:
Online journal article
Publication Date:
2019-01-10
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 7 Document Number: D10240
Many members of the public and important stakeholders operating at the upper end of the food chain, may be unfamiliar with how food is produced, including within modern animal production systems. The intensification of production is becoming increasingly common in modern farming. However, intensive systems are particularly susceptible to production diseases, with potentially negative consequences for farm animal welfare (FAW). Previous research has demonstrated that the public are concerned about FAW, yet there has been little research into attitudes towards production diseases, and their approval of interventions to reduce these. This research explores the public’s attitudes towards, and preferences for, FAW interventions in five European countries (Finland, Germany, Poland, Spain and the UK). An online survey was conducted for broilers (n = 789), layers (n = 790) and pigs (n = 751). Data were analysed by means of Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA, exploratory factor analysis and structural equation modelling. The results suggest that the public have concerns regarding intensive production systems, in relation to FAW, naturalness and the use of antibiotics. The most preferred interventions were the most “proactive” interventions, namely improved housing and hygiene measures. The least preferred interventions were medicine-based, which raised humane animal care and food safety concerns amongst respondents. The results highlighted the influence of the identified concerns, perceived risks and benefits on attitudes and subsequent behavioural intention, and the importance of supply chain stakeholders addressing these concerns in the subsequent communications with the public.
Quandt, Amy (author), Salerno, Jonathan D. (author), Neff, Jason C. (author), Baird, Timothy D. (author), Herrick, Jeffrey E. (author), McCabe, J. Terrence (author), Xu, Emilie (author), and Hartter, Joel (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2020-08-11
Published:
United States: PLOS
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 204 Document Number: D12425
16 pages., Mobile phone use is increasing in Sub-Saharan Africa, spurring a growing focus on mobile phones as tools to increase agricultural yields and incomes on smallholder farms. However, the research to date on this topic is mixed, with studies finding both positive and neutral associations between phones and yields. In this paper we examine perceptions about the impacts of mobile phones on agricultural productivity, and the relationships between mobile phone use and agricultural yield. We do so by fitting multilevel statistical models to data from farmer-phone owners (n = 179) in 4 rural communities in Tanzania, controlling for site and demographic factors. Results show a positive association between mobile phone use for agricultural activities and reported maize yields. Further, many farmers report that mobile phone use increases agricultural profits (67% of respondents) and decreases the costs (50%) and time investments (47%) of farming. Our findings suggest that there are opportuni- ties to target policy interventions at increasing phone use for agricultural activities in ways that facilitate access to timely, actionable information to support farmer decision making.
