The welfare of dairy cattle: perspectives of industry stakeholders

作者: B. A. Ventura , M. A. G. von Keyserlingk , D. M. Weary

DOI: 10.3920/978-90-8686-784-4_35

关键词: BusinessStakeholderKnowledge deficitKnowledge translationAnimal welfareMarketingWork (electrical)Economic growthWelfareFocus groupDairy cattle

摘要: The aim of the current study was to describe perspectives stakeholders within dairy industry on key issues affecting welfare cattle. A secondary examine if these believed that people outside should also have a voice in formulating solutions issues. Five heterogeneous focus groups were conducted during cattle meeting Guelph, Canada October 2012. Each group contained between 7–10 participants and consisted mix producers, veterinarians, researchers, students, specialists. 1-h facilitatorled discussions focused participants’ perceptions role different stakeholder addressing concerns. Discussions audio-recorded transcribed verbatim, resulting transcripts coded themes identified. Lameness uniformly recognized as most important issue facing cattle; cow comfort, painful procedures (like dehorning) production diseases mastitis) commonly discussed. Participants had mixed views roles solutions. Most felt producers others working (particularly veterinarians) be primarily responsible, but many acknowledged general public, consumers citizens, play an role. seemed two-fold knowledge deficit - first researchers second public agreed improved translation required develop These results indicate see value more inclusive engagement with non-industry about welfare. Future work will assess identify areas shared concern provide basis for policy better incorporate societal values.

参考文章(13)
Bernard Schiele, On and about the Deficit Model in an Age of Free Flow Springer, Dordrecht. pp. 93- 117 ,(2008) , 10.1007/978-1-4020-8598-7_6
D. E. F. McKeegan, B. McNeil, K. A. Ellis, K. Billington, Public opinion on UK milk marketing and dairy cow welfare Animal Welfare. ,vol. 18, pp. 267- 282 ,(2009)
Frans W. A. Brom, Food, Consumer Concerns, and Trust: Food Ethics for a Globalizing Market Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics. ,vol. 12, pp. 127- 139 ,(2000) , 10.1023/A:1009586529518
Michel Callon, Yannick Barthe, Pierre Lascoumes, Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy ,(2009)
Filiep Vanhonacker, Wim Verbeke, Els Van Poucke, Frank A.M. Tuyttens, Do citizens and farmers interpret the concept of farm animal welfare differently Livestock Science. ,vol. 116, pp. 126- 136 ,(2008) , 10.1016/J.LIVSCI.2007.09.017
Candace C. Croney, Words matter: implications of semantics and imagery in framing animal-welfare issues. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education. ,vol. 37, pp. 101- 106 ,(2010) , 10.3138/JVME.37.1.101
C. C. Croney, M. Apley, J. L. Capper, J. A. Mench, S. Priest, BIOETHICS SYMPOSIUM: The ethical food movement: What does it mean for the role of science and scientists in current debates about animal agriculture? Journal of Animal Science. ,vol. 90, pp. 1570- 1582 ,(2012) , 10.2527/JAS.2011-4702
J. Lassen, P. Sandøe, B. Forkman, Happy pigs are dirty! – conflicting perspectives on animal welfare Livestock Science. ,vol. 103, pp. 221- 230 ,(2006) , 10.1016/J.LIVSCI.2006.05.008
Gene Rowe, Lynn J. Frewer, A typology of public engagement mechanisms Science, Technology, & Human Values. ,vol. 30, pp. 251- 290 ,(2005) , 10.1177/0162243904271724
Hein Te Velde, Noelle Aarts, Cees Van Woerkum, Dealing with Ambivalence: Farmers' and Consumers' Perceptions of Animal Welfare in Livestock Breeding Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics. ,vol. 15, pp. 203- 219 ,(2002) , 10.1023/A:1015012403331