Exploring the Potential of Dutch Pig Farmers and Urban-Citizens to Learn Through Frame Reflection

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 1015-1036

  Benard, Marianne ^a   de Cock Buning, Tjard ^a  

^a ATHENA INSTITUTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Animal welfare; Consumer perceptions; Dialogue; Farmer perceptions; Learning; Reflection

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL WORKER; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ANIMAL WELFARE; CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; LEARNING; PERCEPTION; PIG;

ANIMALIA; SUIDAE;

EID: 84885659928     PISSN: 11877863     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10806-013-9438-y     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Aarts, M. N. C., & Hanning, C. (2001). Hoe oordelen we over de veehouderij? Den Haag: Rathenaut Insituut.
2. Bauer, R. (1964). The obstinate audience: The influence process from the point of view of social communications. The American Psychologist, 19(5), 319-328.
3. Beekman, V., & van der Weele, C. N. (2004). Naar een gereedschapskist voor constructieve ethiek. LEI.
4. Beekman, V., Dagevos, H., van der Weele, C. N., & de Greef, K. (2003). Diergericht ontwerpen: Consumentenwensen rond dierenwelzijn. Lelystad: Wageningen-UR.
5. Benard, M., Vriend, H., Haperen, P., & Beekman, V. (2010). Science and society in dialogue about marker assisted selection. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 23(4), 317-329.
6. Bennett, R. M., Anderson, J., & Blaney, R. J. P. (2002). Moral intensity and willingness to pay concerning farm animal welfare issues and the implications for agricultural policy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15(2), 187-202.
7. Blandford, D., & Fulponi, L. (1999). Emerging public concerns in agriculture: Domestic policies and international trade commitments. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 26(3), 409-424. doi: 10. 1093/erae/26. 3. 409.
8. Boogaard, B. K., Boekhorst, L. J. S., Oosting, S. J., & JT, S Ãrensen. (2011). Socio-cultural sustainability of pig production: Citizen perceptions in the Netherlands and Denmark. Livestock Science, 140(1-3), 189-200.
9. Boogaard, B. K., Oosting, S. J., & Bock, B. B. (2006). Elements of societal perception of farm animal welfare: A quantitative study in The Netherlands. Livestock Science, 104(1-2), 13-22.
10. Bos, A. P., Spoelstra, S. F., Groot koerkamp, P. W. G., De greef, K. H., & van Ejik, O. N. M. (2012). Reflexive design for sustainable animal husbandry: Mediating between niche and regime. In G. Spaargaren, A. Loeber, & P. Oosterveer (Eds.), Food practices in transition, Changing food consumption, retail and production in the age of reflexive modernity (pp. 229-256). London: Routledge.
11. Brom, F. W. A. (2000). Food, consumer concerns, and trust: Food ethics for a globalizing market. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 12(2), 127-139.
12. Commission, E. (2007). Attitudes of EU citizens towards animal welfare. Special Eurobarometer 270/wave 66. 1.
13. de Rooij, S. J. G., de Lauwere, C. C., & van der Ploeg, J. D. (2010). Entrapped in Group Solidarity? Animal Welfare, the Ethical Positions of Farmers and the Difficult Search for Alternatives. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 12(4), 341-361. doi: 10. 1080/1523908x. 2010. 528882.
14. Dunn, W. N. (1988). Methods of the second type: Coping with the wilderness of conventional policy analysis. Review of Policy Research, 7(4), 720-737.
15. EL&I, D. m. o. (2011). Letter and report on the Dutch societal perspectives on mass stables. (vol http://www. rijksoverheid. nl. Assessed 16 September 2011).
16. Fraser, D., Weary, D. M., Pajor, E. A., & Milligan, B. N. (1997). A scientific conception of animal welfare that reflects ethical concerns. Animal Welfare, 6, 186-205.
17. Frewer, L. J., Kole, A., Kroon, S. M. A. V., & Lauwere, C. (2005). Consumer Attitudes Towards the Development of Animal-Friendly Husbandry Systems. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 18(4), 345-367.
18. Gadamer, H. (1965). Wahrheit und methode: Grundzüge einer philosophischen hermeneutik.
19. Gross, A. G. (1994). The roles of rhetoric in the public understanding of science. Public Understanding of Science, 3(1), 3-23. doi: 10. 1088/0963-6625/3/1/001.
20. Hanssen, L., Dijkstra, A. M., Roeterdink, W., & Stappers, J. (2003). Wetenschapsvoorlichting: Profetie of professie. Stichting Weten: Een confrontatie tussen communicatietheorie en voorlichtingspraktijk.
21. Hine, R., Peacock, J., & Pretty, J. (2008). Care farming in the UK: Evidence and Opportunities. Report for the National Care Farmin Initiative (UK): University of Essex.
22. Hisschemöller, M., & Hoppe, R. (1995). Coping with intractable controversies: The case for problem structuring in policy design and analysis. Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 8(4), 40-60.
23. Horlings, L. G., & Hinssen, J. P. P. (2010). Sustainable innovation in intensive animal husbandry in the Netherlands. Paper presented at the Scaling and Governance: Wageningen.
24. Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of Focus Groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health & Illness, 16(1), 103-121.
25. Kupper, J. F. H. (2009). Democratizing Animal Biotechnology: Inquiry and Deliberation in Ethics and Governance. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.
26. Kupper, F., & De Cock Buning, T. (2011). Deliberating Animal Values: A Pragmatic-Pluralistic Approach to Animal Ethics. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 24(5), 431-450.
27. Lassen, J., Sandoe, P., & Forkman, B. (2006). Happy pigs are dirty! - conflicting perspectives on animal welfare. Livestock Science, 103(3), 221-230.
28. Marie, M. (2006). Ethics: The new challenge for animal agriculture. Livestock Science, 103(3), 203-207.
29. Miele, M., Veissier, I., Evans, A., & Botreau, R. (2011). Animal welfare: Establishing a dialogue between science and society. Animal Welfare, 20, 103-117.
30. Moon, J. A. (2004). A handbook of reflective and experiential learning theory and practice. http://search. ebscohost. com/login. aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=102749.
31. Osseweijer, P. (2006). A Short History of Talking Biotech: Fifteen years of iterative action research in institutionalising scientists' engagement in public communication. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.
32. Percy, R. (2005). The contribution of transformative learning theory to the practice of participatory research and extension: Theoretical reflections. Agriculture and Human Values, 22(2), 127-136.
33. Schön, D. A., & Rein, M. (1994). Frame Reflection: Toward the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies: Basic Books.
34. Serpell, J. (1986). In the company of animals: A study of the human-animal relationship. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University press.
35. Stassen, E. N. (2006). van bruikbaar tot dierbaar, over de relatie mens-dier. Wageningen: Wageningen University and Research Centre.
36. Swinnen, J. F. M., McCluskey, J., & Francken, N. (2005). Food safety, the media, and the information market. Agricultural Economics, 32, 175-188.
37. Te Velde, H., Aarts, N., & van Woerkum, C. (2002). Dealing with Ambivalence: Farmers' and Consumers' Perceptions of Animal Welfare in Livestock Breeding. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15(2), 203-219.
38. Termeer, C. J. A. M., Breeman, G. E., Lieshout, M., & Pot, W. D. (2010). Why more knowledge could thwart democracy: Configurations and fixations in the Dutch mega-stables debate. In Knowledge Democracy (Ed.), Consequences for Science, Politics, and Media (pp. 99-111). Heidelberg: Springer.
39. van Eijk, ONM., de Lauwere, C., van Weeghel, E., Kaal-Lansbergen, L., Miedema, H., Ursinus, A., et al. (2010). Pork Opportunities. Three design directions for economically, ecologically and socially sustainable pig production and steps towards realisation: Wageningen UR Livestock Research.
40. Vanhonacker, F., van Poucke, E., Tuyttens, F., & Verbeke, W. (2010). Citizens' Views on Farm Animal Welfare and Related Information Provision: Exploratory Insights from Flanders, Belgium. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 23(6), 551-569.
41. Vanhonacker, F., Verbeke, W., van Poucke, E., & Tuyttens, F. A. M. (2008). Do citizens and farmers interpret the concept of farm animal welfare differently? Livestock Science, 116(1-3), 126-136.
42. Veldkamp, A., Altvorst, A. C., Eweg, R., Jacobsen, E., Kleef, A., Latesteijn, H., et al. (2009). Triggering transitions towards sustainable development of the Dutch agricultural sector: TransForum's approach. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 29(1), 87-96. doi: 10. 1051/agro: 2008022.
43. Verbeke, W., & Ward, R. W. (2001). A fresh meat almost ideal demand system incorporating negative TV press and advertising impact. Agricultural Economics, 25(2-3), 359-374.
44. Witte, K. (1994). Fear control and danger control: A test of the extended parallel process model (EPPM). Communication Monographs, 61(2), 113-134.