Public attitudes to the welfare of broiler chickens

Animal Welfare

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 499-512

  Hall, Clare ^a   Sandilands, V ^a  

^a SCOTTISH AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Animal welfare; Broiler chickens; Cognitive mapping; England; Public attitudes; Q methodology

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANIMAL CARE; ANIMAL FOOD; ANIMAL HEALTH; ANIMAL WELFARE; ARTICLE; CHICKEN; COGNITION; CONSUMER ATTITUDE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOOD ANALYSIS; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PUBLIC OPINION; SOCIAL ATTITUDE; UNITED KINGDOM;

ANIMALIA; GALLUS GALLUS;

EID: 35948998507     PISSN: 09627286     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Barry J and Proops J 1999 Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology. Ecological Economics 28: 337-345
2. Dawkins M, Donnelly C and Jones T 2004 Chicken welfare is influenced more by housing conditions than by stocking density. Nature 427: 342-344
3. European Commission Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General 2000 The welfare of chickens kept for meat production (broilers). Report of the Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare, European Commission: Brussels, Belgium
4. FAWC 2001 Submission to the policy commission on the future of food and forming, farm animal welfare and the future of livestock farming. Farm Animal Welfare Council: London, UK. http://www.fawc.org.uk/letters/curry1.htm
5. FAWC 2006 Report on welfare labelling. Farm Animal Welfare Council: London, UK
6. Frewer LJ, Kole A, Van de Kroon S and de Lauwere C 2005 Consumer attitudes towards the development of animal-friendly husbandry systems. Joumal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18: 345-367
7. Harper G and Henson S 2001 Consumer concerns about animal welfare and the impact on food choice. Final Report EU Fair CT98-3678. Centre for Food Economics Research: University of Reading, UK
8. Köhler F 1999 Consumer concerns about animal welfare and the impact on food choke. The nature of consumer concerns about animal welfare. The German Focus Groups Report EU FAIR-CT98-3678, Kiel University, Germany
9. McEachern MG and Schröder MJA 2002 The role of livestock production ethics in consumer values towards meat. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15(2): 221-237
10. McVittie A, Moran D, Sandilands V and Sparks N 2005 Estimating non-market benefits of reduced stocking density and other welfare increasing measures for meat chickens in England. Final Report. 10 November 2005 Project no. AW0236. Defra, London, UK. http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/welfare/farmed/meatchks/pdf/ non-marketbenefits.pdf
11. Mintel 1999 The Green and Ethical Consumer. Mintel International Group Limited: London, UK
12. Mitchell L 2001 Impact of consumer demand for animal welfare on global trade. Changing structure of global food consumption and trade/ WRS-01-1. Economic Research Service, USDA: Washington DC, USA
13. Moynagh J 2000 EU regulation and consumer demand for animal welfare. Agbioforum 3: 107-114
14. Özesmi U and Özesmi S 2004 A participatory approach to ecosystem conservation: Fuzzy cognitive maps and stakeholder group analysis in Uluabat Lake, Turkey. Environmental Management 31: 518-531
15. Park KS and Kim SH 1995 Fuzzy cognitive maps considering time relationships. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 42: 157-168
16. Peláez CE and Bowles JB 1996 Using fuzzy cognitive maps as a system model for failure modes and effects analysis. Information Sciences 88: 177-199
17. Schmolck P 2002 PQMethod 2.11. Leibniz Computing Centre, Munich, Germany. http://www.rz.unibw-muenchen.de/~p41bsmk/qmethod/
18. Sørensen P, Su G and Kestin S 2000 Effects of age and stocking density on leg weakness in broiler chickens. Poultry Science 79: 864-870
19. Stach W, Kurgan L, Pedrycz W and Reformat M 2005 Genetic learning of fuzzy cognitive maps. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 153: 371-401
20. Swedeen P 2006 Post-normal science in practice: A Q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA. Ecological Economics 57(2): 190-208
21. Walter G 1997 Images of success: How Illinois farmers define the successful farmer. Rural Sociology 62(1): 48-68