A survey of Chinese citizens' perceptions on farm animal welfare.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: You X
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4196765 | biostudies-other | 2014
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:In this paper, we explore the evolution of consumers' perceptions and concerns about the effects that intensification of production systems could have on the welfare of farm animals. Despite the differences in definitions of animal welfare that make perceptions about this complex subject extremely variable, there is a growing perception that farm animal welfare should be protected and improved. There is an increasing appreciation of animal welfare parameters over other quality attributes, and animal-friendly products are considered healthier, safer, tastier, more hygienic, authentic, environmentally friendly, and traditional by many consumers. The willingness to pay for the increases in price that higher levels of farm animal welfare could produce could be promoted by means of adequate information about management and housing conditions of the different farming species. Welfare-friendly products that are properly labeled with clear information provided by an internationally accepted, transparent, and traceable monitoring system will increase consumers' confidence in the food chain participants. Both consumers and citizens have the opportunity to improve the welfare of millions of farmed animals now and in the future, consumers by assuming their responsibility at the buying point, purchasing welfare-friendly products, and citizens by driving legislation to achieve some minimum standard of welfare conditions that could meet animals' needs.
| S-EPMC7143148 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Farm animal welfare in the People's Republic of China (henceforth, China) is not well represented in the international scientific literature. This may lead researchers, advocates and those with agricultural partnerships in China to assume that animal welfare is not a field of interest there. This study reports a literature review of published pig and poultry welfare research in China using Chinese scientific databases. We aimed to determine which areas of welfare research have recently received academic attention in China. From an understanding of areas being studied, current and emerging priority areas for research could be determined. This study identified 854 academic publications citing pig or chicken welfare in China published between 2008 and 2018. Within these publications, two broader areas of significant attention were addressed in the context of animal welfare; yield and product quality, such as feeding, biosecurity and antimicrobial resistance, including immunity and second, the relationship of animal welfare with the Chinese philosophy of 'ecological agriculture.' Holistic systems were advocated to maximize sustainability and maintain a healthy environment, such as the creation of fermented bedding for pigs. Environmental enrichment was also a focus of attention, demonstrating an interest in animals' mental welfare, which was usually conjectured from their behavior. Few of the articles were translated into English or other languages and therefore most were largely unavailable to the English-speaking global scientific community. This presents an opportunity to provide relevant animal welfare knowledge, which could improve animal welfare globally. China is a global animal trade leader and the home of the largest agricultural industries in the world. An increase in collaboration on animal welfare research and understanding of the advancements that have been made in China, as reviewed in this manuscript, could advance farm animal welfare from a global perspective.
| S-EPMC7142485 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Farm animal welfare is a major concern for society and food production. To more accurately evaluate animal farming in general and to avoid exposing farm animals to poor welfare situations, it is necessary to understand not only their behavioral but also their cognitive needs and capacities. Thus, general knowledge of how farm animals perceive and interact with their environment is of major importance for a range of stakeholders, from citizens to politicians to cognitive ethologists to philosophers. This review aims to outline the current state of farm animal cognition research and focuses on ungulate livestock species, such as cattle, horses, pigs and small ruminants, and reflects upon a defined set of cognitive capacities (physical cognition: categorization, numerical ability, object permanence, reasoning, tool use; social cognition: individual discrimination and recognition, communication with humans, social learning, attribution of attention, prosociality, fairness). We identify a lack of information on certain aspects of physico-cognitive capacities in most farm animal species, such as numerosity discrimination and object permanence. This leads to further questions on how livestock comprehend their physical environment and understand causal relationships. Increasing our knowledge in this area will facilitate efforts to adjust husbandry systems and enrichment items to meet the needs and preferences of farm animals. Research in the socio-cognitive domain indicates that ungulate livestock possess sophisticated mental capacities, such as the discrimination between, and recognition of, conspecifics as well as human handlers using multiple modalities. Livestock also react to very subtle behavioral cues of conspecifics and humans. These socio-cognitive capacities can impact human-animal interactions during management practices and introduce ethical considerations on how to treat livestock in general. We emphasize the importance of gaining a better understanding of how livestock species interact with their physical and social environments, as this information can improve housing and management conditions and can be used to evaluate the use and treatment of animals during production.
| S-EPMC6383588 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Prioritization of animal welfare issues can help identify which areas most require research funding and raise awareness of best practices. A modified Delphi method was used to obtain expert opinion on the highest priority welfare issues for UK farmed livestock. Fifty-eight UK-based experts were recruited onto the study, with a minimum of 3 years experience of working with either cattle, pigs, poultry, or small ruminants (12-16 experts per group). Experts were chosen to represent a broad range of opinions. Two rounds of surveys were conducted online using Online Survey, and the final round was an in-person workshop with 21 experts. In the first survey, experts were provided with a comprehensive list of species-specific welfare issues derived from the literature. Participants were asked to score each welfare issue, for (i) severity, (ii) duration, and (iii) prevalence on a 6-point Likert scale. The results of the first survey were reviewed and the welfare issues which scored a neutral-to-high response (scores 3-6) were carried forward. In round 2, participants were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the rankings that were made from the results of round 1. The final stage of the process was a workshop, which consisted of a combination of group exercises and discussions, to reach the final consensus. Welfare priority lists were divided into two categories: severity/duration, and prevalence, to identify the priority welfare issues affecting individual animals and the population, respectively. Across all farmed species common concerns were inadequate or inappropriate nutrition, inability of stockpeople to recognize or treat welfare issues (such as pain or behavioral problems), lameness, chronic or endemic health issues, euthanasia and mortality and morbidity of neonates. Specific concerns related to behavioral restriction and damaging or abnormal behavior in pigs, poultry and dairy animals, inadequate housing for pigs and poultry, consequences of breeding decisions in pigs and poultry, and lack of access to veterinary care in sheep and beef. This Delphi process resulted in consensus on the most significant welfare challenges faced by UK livestock species and can help to guide future research and education priority decisions.
| S-EPMC6967597 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Human perception can depend on how an individual frames information in thought and how information is framed in communication. For example, framing something positively, instead of negatively, can change an individual's response. This is of relevance to 'positive animal welfare', which places greater emphasis on farm animals being provided with opportunities for positive experiences. However, little is known about how this framing of animal welfare may influence the perception of key animal welfare stakeholders. Through a qualitative interview study with farmers and citizens, undertaken in Scotland, UK, this paper explores what positive animal welfare evokes to these key welfare stakeholders and highlights the implications of such internal frames for effectively communicating positive welfare in society. Results indicate that citizens make sense of positive welfare by contrasting positive and negative aspects of welfare, and thus frame it as animals having 'positive experiences' or being 'free from negative experiences'. Farmers draw from their existing frames of animal welfare to frame positive welfare as 'good husbandry', 'proactive welfare improvement' or the 'animal's point of view'. Implications of such internal frames (e.g., the triggering of 'negative welfare' associations by the word 'positive') for the effective communication of positive welfare are also presented.
| S-EPMC6523948 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Currently, no specific animal-based measures (ABMs) protocols are available for geese in commercial meat production systems. Following a critical review of the literature and consultation of experts, seven ABMs, potentially valid and feasible for the on-farm welfare assessment of geese, were identified and then tested in 12 farms in Poland to assess their inter-observer reliability. Two observers conducted the assessment, which was divided into two phases. First, a handling test assessed the human-animal relationship (HAR), and a 100% inter-observer reliability was achieved by the observers when evaluating the attitudes of stockpeople and the reactions of geese to humans. Next, an animal inspection was conducted, and the observers simultaneously and independently visually evaluated 100 randomly selected geese per farm and assessed whether the selected ABMs could be identified. In terms of inter-observer reliability, high correlation coefficients were found for plumage dirtiness (? = 0.745; p < 0.01), twisted wings (? = 0.890; p < 0.001), and broken/twisted wings (? = 0.858; p < 0.001). The results showed that plumage dirtiness, twisted wings, and broken/twisted wings are valid and reliable measures. Further research should address the reliability of ABMs of geese in other types of production systems.
| S-EPMC7278475 | biostudies-literature
Project description:While perceptions of animal welfare have been assessed in veterinary students and students internationally, there remains a gap in research concerning undergraduate and graduate student perspectives of animal welfare in animal science programs at colleges and universities across the United States. A survey was developed to assess current animal science student perspectives of the importance of animal welfare as part of their education, their knowledge of available educational opportunities, and resources they think should be included in animal welfare curricula. An online survey was distributed to a national listserv of university administrators of animal science programs in the United States. A total of 624 survey responses were statistically summarized. Most respondents were undergraduate students (78.0%, n = 487), between the ages of 18 and 24 (85.9%, n = 536), and female (86.1%, n = 537). Results indicated that despite most respondents not taking an animal welfare course previously (60.7%, n = 379), most students strongly agreed that the inclusion of an animal welfare course is an important part of the animal science curriculum (72.0%, n = 449), that animal welfare is an important component of their education (63.1%, n = 394), and that animal welfare courses would be helpful for their future careers (70.0%, n = 437). When asked what attributes would be most important in an animal welfare class, students identified many different types of information and resources. The majority of respondents answered that discussing current hot topics in animal welfare (76.1%, n = 475), ethical discussions (76.0%, n = 474), and practical, applied questions (75.3%, n = 470) were important course components. Suggestions for future research include investigating how animal science student perceptions change before and after taking an animal welfare course and exploring opportunities to expand formal welfare education in animal science departments. Inclusion of animal welfare into the curriculum is critical as many of the students currently enrolled in animal science departments will become the future stakeholders in animal-focused industries.
| S-EPMC8755489 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Meat consumption and public concern for farm animal welfare are increasing, despite limited public understanding of agriculture and animal welfare. Turkey is important in U.S. holiday meal traditions and turkey meat is a frequently consumed processed product (i.e., lunchmeat). However, little is known about public perceptions and knowledge of commercial turkeys. An online survey was administered to 1,695 respondents in November 2018 to examine U.S. (1) demographic factors affecting meat consumption, selection of labeled meat products, and concern for animal welfare, (2) public knowledge of turkeys, and (3) concerns regarding the welfare of turkeys and other species. A total of 95% of respondents consumed meat and 10% hunted for some of the meat they consumed. Meat consumption frequency depended on region of residence, income level, gender, age, and whether respondents hunted. Of the meat consumers, 86% purchased turkey products. More meat consumers looked for the USDA organic label (39%) and the Non Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) project label (38%) than animal-welfare food labels (14%) when buying meat products. More pet owners (39%) than non-pet owners (25%) looked for animal welfare food labels. Being a pet owner increased the probability of being concerned about farm animal welfare. Concern for the commercial turkey was similar to concern for other farm animal species; self-reported knowledge of turkey production was low (mean score 2.64; scale of 1 to 7, 7 = highest). Turkey welfare concerns (mean score; rank from 1 to 5; 5 = least concerning) included poor nutrition (2.471) and illness (2.508), followed by housing (2.732), hot or cold weather (3.308) and transportation (3.981). Turkey welfare attributes that respondents cared the most about (mean score; scale of 1-5, 5 = cared the least) included space to move around (2.366), followed by veterinary health and wellness (2.680), ability to perform natural behavior (2.812), no feather loss or visible injuries (3.304), and decreased aggression (3.837). Demographic factors are important determinants of meat consumption and animal welfare concern. Public knowledge of turkey production is limited, despite a large percentage of the population purchasing turkey products.
| S-EPMC6881301 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study was to understand the perceptions of Brazilian citizens about the general conditions of animal welfare in the poultry, beef, and dairy supply chains. To reach this aim, an online survey was conducted. The analysis was based on descriptive statistics and three logistic regression models. Results of descriptive statistics showed that citizens in Brazil had mostly negative perceptions about the conditions of animal welfare in the poultry, beef, and dairy supply chains. Results of the logistic regression models showed that citizens with a background in agricultural/veterinary sciences, and citizens who reported a higher level of knowledge about poultry and dairy supply chains were more likely to perceive the general conditions of animal welfare in these two supply chains as being bad. Citizens who reported previous contact with poultry farms were also more likely to perceive the general conditions of animal welfare in the poultry supply chain as being bad. In addition, the perception that farmers are mainly focused on the economic aspect of farming and less on animal welfare, the perception that animals do not have a good quality of life while housed on farms, and the perception that animals are not adequately transported and slaughtered, negatively impact on perceptions about the general conditions of animal welfare in the poultry, beef, and dairy supply chains.
| S-EPMC6300285 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The study compared the perception of ordinary citizens from Curitiba, Brazil (OB) and Clermont-Ferrand, France (OF), as well as OB, Brazilian veterinarians (VB), biologists (BB) and animal scientists (AB), concerning animal welfare and sentience. An online survey containing 18 open-ended, multiple choices and Likert scale questions was conducted from November 2014 to May 2016. The survey covered questions on demographics, perception of animal welfare, sheep welfare, sentience and animals' emotional capacities. In total, 1103 respondents participated in the survey (388 OB, 350 OF, 248 VB, 92 BB and 25 AB); data were compared using non-parametric tests. Brazilian citizens (46.9%) believed more than OF (3.7%) that welfare is not considered for farm animals and OB attributed higher scores of suffering to sheep during management procedures (median 4, severe suffering) than OF (3, moderate suffering). Additionally, OB gave higher scores of emotions to animals (5) than OF (4). In general, OB and BB had similar perceptions; OB and BB differed from VB and AB who were similar to each other. Citizens (46.9%) and BB (29.3%) believed more than VB (18.5%) and AB (12.0%) that welfare is not considered for farm animals; OB and BB also attributed higher scores of suffering to sheep during management procedures than VB and AB. Women and older respondents showed higher perception of animal welfare issues. There was no clear correlation between perception of animal welfare or sentience and education. Overall, ordinary citizens differed on their perceptions of welfare and sentience in livestock and specifically in sheep, and sheep suffering during management procedures. Ordinary citizens from Curitiba showed higher perception of animal welfare issues as compared to respondents from Clermont-Ferrand and to veterinarians and animal scientists. Ensuring a better consideration of welfare at farm level and in educational programs seems warranted according to the results of this study.
| S-EPMC6059438 | biostudies-literature