16 pages., via online journal, The sustainable intensification of animal production systems is increasing as a consequence of increased demand for foods originating from animals. Production diseases are particularly endemic in intensive production systems, and can negatively impact upon farm animal welfare. There is an increasing need to develop policies regarding animal production diseases, sustainable intensification, and animal welfare which incorporate consumer priorities as well as technical assessments of farm animal welfare. Consumers and/or citizens may have concerns about intensive production systems, and whether animal production disease represent a barrier to consumer acceptance of their increased use. There is a considerable body of research focused on consumer willingness-to-pay (WTP) for improved animal welfare. It is not clear how this relates specifically to a preference for reduced animal production disease incidence in animal production systems. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to establish the publics’ WTP for farm animal welfare, with a focus on production diseases which arise in intensive systems. Systematic review methodology combined with data synthesis was applied to integrate existing knowledge regarding consumer WTP for animal welfare, and reduced incidence of animal production diseases. Multiple databases were searched to identify relevant studies. A screening process, using a set of pre-determined inclusion criteria, identified 54 studies, with the strength of evidence and uncertainty for each study being assessed. A random effects meta-analysis was used to explore heterogeneity in relation to a number of factors, with a cumulative meta-analysis conducted to establish changes in WTP over time. The results indicated a small, positive WTP (0.63 standard deviations) for farm animal welfare varying in relation to a number of factors including animal type and region. Socio-demographic characteristics explained the most variation in the data. An evidence gap was highlighted in relation to reduced WTP for specific production diseases associated with the intensification of production, with only 4 of the 54 studies identified being related to this. A combination of market and government based policy solutions appears to be the best solution for improving farm animal welfare standards in the future, enabling the diverse public preferences to be taken into consideration.
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.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 201 Document Number: D11702
Notes:
9 pages., Online via publisher website., Presentation of these cited megatrends in agriculture includes references to expanded communications challenges involving genetic modification/biotechnology and public scrutiny of livestock treatment.
318 pages., Book in the University of Illinois online collection. Search other sources or contact ACDC., Pages 37-51 in Ferguson, D.; Lee, Caroline; and Fisher, Andrew. 2017. Advances in sheep welfare. Woodhead Publishing, Duxford, United Kingdom.
Cooke, Andrew (author), Mullan, Siobhan (author), Morten, Charlie (author), Hockenhull, Joanna (author), Le-Grice, Phil (author), Le Cocq, Kate (author), Lee, Michael R. F. (author), Cardenas, Laura M. (author), and Rivero, M. Jordana (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2023-06-29
Published:
United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 206 Document Number: D12951
14 pages, Animal welfare encompasses all aspects of an animal’s life and the interactions between animals. Consequently, welfare must be measured across a variety of factors that consider aspects
such as health, behaviour and mental state. Decisions regarding housing and grazing are central to farm management. In this study, two beef cattle systems and their herds were compared
from weaning to slaughter across numerous indicators. One herd (‘HH’) were continuously
housed, the other (‘HG’) were housed only during winter. Inspections of animals were conducted to assess body condition, cleanliness, diarrhoea, hairlessness, nasal discharge and ocular discharge. Hair and nasal mucus samples were taken for quantification of cortisol and
serotonin. Qualitative behaviour assessments (QBA) were also conducted and performance
monitored. Physical health indicators were similar between herds with the exception of
nasal discharge which was more prevalent in HH (P < 0.001). During winter, QBA yielded differences between herds over PC1 (arousal) (P = 0.032), but not PC2 (mood) (P = 0.139).
Through summer, there was a strong difference across both PC1 (P < 0.001) and PC2 (P =
0.002), with HG exhibiting more positive behaviour. A difference was found in hair cortisol
levels, with the greatest concentrations observed in HG (P = 0.011), however such a pattern
was not seen for nasal mucus cortisol or for serotonin. Overall, providing summer grazing
(HG) appeared to afford welfare benefits to the cattle as shown with more positive QBA
assessments, but also slightly better health indicators, notwithstanding the higher levels of cortisol in that group.
690 German survey recipients were given one of four different fictitious "newspaper articles" describing negative effects of meat consumption - either in terms of adverse effects on human health, on climate change, on animal welfare or on personal image. Findings showed that animal welfare and health arguments had the strongest effects at reducing meat consumption in both men and women.
Croney, C.C. (author), Apley, M. (author), Capper, J.L. (author), Mench, J.A. (author), Priest, S. (author), and Department of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan 66506
Department of Animal Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman 99164
Department of Animal Science, University of California, Davis 95616
Department of Communication, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2015-01-20
Published:
USA: American Society of Animal Science
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 164 Document Number: D08306
