Citizens' views on the practices of zero-grazing and cow-calf separation in the dairy industry: Does providing information increase acceptability?

Journal of Dairy Science

Volumn 100, Issue 5, 2017, Pages 4150-4160

  Hötzel, Maria J ^a   Cardoso, Clarissa S ^a   Roslindo, Angélica ^a   von Keyserlingk, Marina A G ^b  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF SANTA CATARINA   (Brazil)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

animal welfare; public attitude; public perception; survey

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ANIMAL WELFARE; BOVINE; BRAZIL; DAIRYING; FEMALE;

ANIMAL WELFARE; ANIMALS; BRAZIL; CATTLE; DAIRYING; FEMALE;

EID: 85014112449     PISSN: 00220302     EISSN: 15253198     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3168/jds.2016-11933     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Asheim, L.J., Johnsen, J.F., Havrevoll, Ø., Mejdell, C.M., Grøndahl, A.M., The economic effects of suckling and milk feeding to calves in dual purpose dairy and beef farming. Rev. Agric. Food Environ. Stud. 97 (2016), 225–236 10.1007/s41130-016-0023-4.
2. Balcão, L.F., Longo, C., Costa, J.H.C., Uller-Gómez, C., Machado Filho, L.C.P., Hötzel, M.J., Characterization of smallholding dairy farms in southern Brazil. Anim. Prod. Sci., 2017 10.1071/AN15133.
3. Benard, M., de Cock Buning, T., Exploring the potential of Dutch pig farmers and urban-citizens to learn through frame reflection. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 26 (2013), 1015–1036.
4. Bennett, R.M., Jones, P.J., Nicol, C.J., Tranter, R.B., Weeks, C.A., Consumer attitudes to injurious pecking in free-range egg production. Anim. Welf. 25 (2016), 91–100.
5. Boogaard, B.K., Bock, B.B., Oosting, S.J., Wiskerke, J.S.C., van der Zijpp, A.J., Social acceptance of dairy farming: The ambivalence between the two faces of modernity. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 24 (2011), 259–282.
6. Boogaard, B.K., Oosting, S.J., Bock, B.B., Defining sustainability as a socio-cultural concept: Citizen panels visiting dairy farms in the Netherlands. Livest. Sci. 117 (2008), 24–33.
7. Brom, F.W.A., Food, consumer Ccncerns, and trust: Food ethics for a globalizing market. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 12 (2000), 127–139.
8. Capper, J.L., Replacing rose-tinted spectacles with a high-powered microscope: The historical versus modern carbon footprint of animal agriculture. Anim. Front. 1 (2011), 26–32.
9. Cardoso, C.S., Hötzel, M.J., Weary, D.M., Robbins, J.A., von Keyserlingk, M.A.G., Imagining the ideal dairy farm. J. Dairy Sci. 99 (2016), 1663–1671 26709190.
10. Clark, B., Stewart, G.B., Panzone, L.A., Kyriazakis, I., Frewer, L.J., A systematic review of public attitudes, perceptions and behaviours towards production diseases associated with farm animal welfare. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 29 (2016), 455–478.
11. Costa, J.H.C., Hötzel, M.J., Longo, C., Balcão, L.F., A survey of management practices that influence production and welfare of dairy cattle on family farms in southern Brazil. J. Dairy Sci. 96 (2013), 307–317 23102960.
12. Cozzi, G., Gottardo, F., Brscic, M., Contiero, B., Irrgang, N., Knierim, U., Pentelescu, O., Windig, J.J., Mirabito, L., Eveillard, F.K., Dockes, A.C., Veissier, I., Velarde, A., Fuentes, C., Dalmau, A., Winckler, C., Dehorning of cattle in the EU Member States: A quantitative survey of the current practices. Livest. Sci. 179 (2015), 4–11.
13. Croney, C.C., Apley, M., Capper, J.L., Mench, J.A., Priest, S., Bioethics symposium: The ethical food movement: What does it mean for the role of science and scientists in current debates about animal agriculture?. J. Anim. Sci. 90 (2012), 1570–1582 22573840.
14. Cuite, C.L., Aquino, H.L., Hallman, W.K., An empirical investigation of the role of knowledge in public opinion about GM food. Int. J. Biotechnol. 7 (2005), 178–194.
15. dos Santos, G., Bittar, C.M.M., A survey of dairy calf management practices in some producing regions in Brazil. Rev. Bras. Zootec. 44 (2016), 361–370.
16. Ellis, K.A., Billington, K., McNeil, B., McKeegan, D.E.F., Public opinion on UK milk marketing and dairy cow welfare. Anim. Welf. 18 (2009), 267–282.
17. Foley, J.A., Ramankutty, N., Brauman, K.A., Cassidy, E.S., Gerber, J.S., Johnston, M., Mueller, N.D., O'Connell, C., Ray, D.K., West, P.C., Balzer, C., Bennett, E.M., Carpenter, S.R., Hill, J., Monfreda, C., Polasky, S., Rockstrom, J., Sheehan, J., Siebert, S., Tilman, D., Zaks, D.P.M., Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 478 (2011), 337–342 21993620.
18. Fraser, D., The “New Perception” of animal agriculture: Legless cows, featherless chickens, and a need for genuine analysis. J. Anim. Sci. 79 (2001), 634–641 11263823.
19. Fraser, D., Weary, D.M., Pajor, E.A., Milligan, B.N., A scientific conception of animal welfare that reflects ethical concerns. Anim. Welf. 6 (1997), 187–205.
20. Frewer, L.J., Coles, D., Houdebine, L.-M., Kleter, G.A., Attitudes towards genetically modified animals in food production. Br. Food J. 116 (2014), 1291–1313.
21. Fulwider, W.K., Grandin, T., Rollin, B.E., Engle, T.E., Dalsted, N.L., Lamm, W.D., Survey of dairy management practices on one hundred thirteen north central and northeastern United States dairies. J. Dairy Sci. 91 (2008), 1686–1692 18349262.
22. Godfray, H.C.J., Crute, I.R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J.F., Nisbett, N., Pretty, J., Robinson, S., Toulmin, C., Whiteley, R., The future of the global food system. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 365 (2010), 2769–2777 20713383.
23. Gremmen, B., Blok, V., The lesser of two evils? The killing of day-old male chicks in the Dutch egg sector. Olsson, I.A.S., Araújo, S.M., Vieira, M.F., (eds.) Food Futures, 2016, Wageningen Publishers, Wageningen, the Netherlands, 72–75.
24. Hansen, J., Holm, L., Frewer, L., Robinson, P., Sandøe, P., Beyond the knowledge deficit: recent research into lay and expert attitudes to food risks. Appetite 41 (2003), 111–121 14550309.
25. Harvey, D., Hubbard, C., Reconsidering the political economy of farm animal welfare: An anatomy of market failure. Food Policy 38 (2013), 105–114.
26. Heerwegh, D., Mode differences between face-to-face and web surveys: an experimental investigation of data quality and social desirability effects. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 21 (2009), 111–121.
27. Hötzel, M.J., Letter to the editor: Engaging (but not “educating”) the public in technology developments may contribute to a socially sustainable dairy industry. J. Dairy Sci. 99 (2016), 6853–6854.
28. Hötzel, M.J., Longo, C., Balcão, L.F., Cardoso, C.S., Costa, J.H.C., A survey of management practices that influence performance and welfare of dairy calves reared in southern Brazil. PLoS One, 9, 2014, e114995 25506692.
29. Huberman, A.M., Miles, M.B., Data management and analysis methods. Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S., (eds.) Handbook of qualitative research, 1994, SAGE, Thousand Oaks, CA, 643.
30. IBGE, Censo Demográfico 2010. http://www.sidra.ibge.gov.br/cd/cd2010agsub.asp, 2010 Accessed May 8, 2014.
31. Jardim, A.N.O., Caldas, E.D., Brazilian monitoring programs for pesticide residues in food – Results from 2001 to 2010. Food Contr. 25 (2012), 607–616.
32. Lassen, J., Sandøe, P., Forkman, B., Happy pigs are dirty! conflicting perspectives on animal welfare. Livest. Sci. 103 (2006), 221–230.
33. Lu, Y., Consumer preference for eggs from enhanced animal welfare production system: a stated choice analysis. Food, Agricultural and Resource Economics. Master's thesis, 2013, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, 139.
34. Lusk, J.L., Norwood, F.B., Direct versus indirect questioning: an application to the well-being of farm animals. Soc. Indic. Res. 96 (2010), 551–565.
35. Macnaghten, P., Animals in their nature: A case study on public attitudes to animals, genetic modification and ‘Nature’. Sociology 38 (2004), 533–551.
36. Mee, J.F., Newborn dairy calf management. Vet. Clin. North Am. Food Anim. Pract. 24 (2008), 1–17 18299029.
37. Miele, M., Report concerning consumer perceptions and attitudes towards farm animal welfare. Official Experts Report EAWP (task 1.3), 2010, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
38. Minayo, M.C.S., O Desafio do Conhecimento, 2008, Hucitec, São Paulo, Brazil.
39. Movimentos Sociais e Redes, Campanha permanente contra os agrotóxicos e pela vida. http://www.contraosagrotoxicos.org/index.php/campanha, 2016 Accessed Jul. 22, 2016.
40. Nuffield Council on Bioethics, Ideas about naturalness in public and political debates about science, technology and medicine – Analysis paper, 2015, Nuffield Council on Bioethics, London, UK.
41. Oliveira, E., Bonfanti, C., Antibiótico, e não hormônio, é o maior risco em carnes e frangos (Antibiotics, not hormones, are the greatest risk in beef and poultry). O Globo. Infoglobo Comunicação e Participações S.A., Brasília, Brazil. http://oglobo.globo.com/economia/defesa-do-consumidor/antibiotico-nao-hormonio-o-maior-risco-em-carnes-frangos-13551827#ixzz4NKyofnft, 2014 Accessed Feb. 14, 2017.
42. Pettersson, I.C., Weeks, C.A., Wilson, L.R.M., Nicol, C.J., Consumer perceptions of free-range laying hen welfare. Br. Food J. 118 (2016), 1999–2013.
43. Pieper, L., Doherr, M.G., Heuwieser, W., Consumers' attitudes about milk quality and fertilization methods in dairy cows in Germany. J. Dairy Sci. 99 (2016), 3162–3170 26874425.
44. Prickett, R.W., Norwood, F.B., Lusk, J.L., Consumer preferences for farm animal welfare: results from a telephone survey of US households. Anim. Welf. 19 (2010), 335–347.
45. Ribeiro, T.G., Barone, B., Behrens, J.H., Genetically modified foods and their social representation. Food Res. Int. 84 (2016), 120–127.
46. Richards, T., Allender, W., Fang, D., Media advertising and ballot initiatives: the case of animal welfare regulation. Contemp. Econ. Policy 31 (2013), 145–162.
47. Robbins, J.A., Franks, B., Weary, D.M., von Keyserlingk, M.A.G., Awareness of ag-gag laws erodes trust in farmers and increases support for animal welfare regulations. Food Policy 61 (2016), 121–125.
48. Robbins, J.A., Weary, D.M., Schuppli, C.A., von Keyserlingk, M.A.G., Stakeholder views on treating pain due to dehorning dairy calves. Anim. Welf. 24 (2015), 399–406.
49. Robson, C., Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers, 1993, Blackwell, Oxford, UK.
50. Rodrigues, A., Um milhão de litros do leite adulterado foram colocados à venda, diz Ministério Público (One million liters of adulterated were offered for sale according to Public Ministry). Empresa Brasil de Comunicação S/A – EBC, Brasília, Brazil. http://www.ebc.com.br/noticias/brasil/2014/05/cerca-de-1-milhao-de-litros-de-leite-adulterado-foram-colocados-a-venda-diz, 2014 Accessed Feb. 14, 2017.
51. Ryan, E.B., Fraser, D., Weary, D.M., Public attitudes to housing systems for pregnant pigs. PLoS One, 10, 2015, e0141878 26559417.
52. Schuppli, C.A., von Keyserlingk, M.A.G., Weary, D.M., Access to pasture for dairy cows: Responses from an online engagement. J. Anim. Sci. 92 (2014), 5185–5192 25261215.
53. Spers, R.G., Wright, J.T.C., Amedomar, A.A., Scenarios for the milk production chain in Brazil in 2020. Rev. Adm. (São Paulo) 48 (2013), 254–267.
54. Stafford, K.J., Mellor, D.J., Addressing the pain associated with disbudding and dehorning in cattle. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 135 (2011), 226–231.
55. Tonsor, G.T., Wolf, C.A., Drivers of resident support for animal care oriented ballot initiatives. J Agric. Appl. Econ. 42 (2010), 419–428.
56. van Asselt, M., Ekkel, E.D., Kemp, B., Stassen, E.N., Role of moral values in the trade-off between animal welfare and food safety risks in broiler husbandry. Olsson, I.A.S., Araújo, S.M., Vieira, M.F., (eds.) Food Futures, 2016, Wageningen Publishers, Wagneingen, the Netherlands, 273–278.
57. Vanhonacker, F., Verbeke, W., Van Poucke, E., Tuyttens, F.A.M., Do citizens and farmers interpret the concept of farm animal welfare differently?. Livest. Sci. 116 (2008), 126–136.
58. Vasseur, E., Borderas, F., Cue, R.I., Lefebvre, D., Pellerin, D., Rushen, J., Wade, K.M., de Passille, A.M., A survey of dairy calf management practices in Canada that affect animal welfare. J. Dairy Sci. 93 (2010), 1307–1315 20172250.
59. Ventura, B.A., Von Keyserlingk, M.A.G., Schuppli, C.A., Weary, D.M., Views on contentious practices in dairy farming: The case of early cow-calf separation. J. Dairy Sci. 96 (2013), 6105–6116 23791487.
60. Ventura, B.A., von Keyserlingk, M.A.G., Wittman, H., Weary, D.M., What difference does a visit make? Changes in animal welfare perceptions after interested citizens tour a dairy farm. PLoS One, 11, 2016, e0154733 27243965.
61. Verhoog, H., Matze, M., van Bueren, E.L., Baars, T., Role of the concept of the natural (naturalness) in organic farming. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 16 (2003), 29–49.
62. von Keyserlingk, M.A.G., Hötzel, M.J., The ticking clock: Addressing farm animal welfare in emerging countries. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 28 (2015), 179–195.
63. von Keyserlingk, M.A.G., Martin, N.P., Kebreab, E., Knowlton, K.F., Grant, R.J., Stephenson, M. II, Sniffen, C.J., Harner, J.R. III, Wright, A.D., Smith, S.I., Invited review: Sustainability of the US dairy industry. J. Dairy Sci. 96 (2013), 5405–5425 23831089.
64. Weary, D.M., Niel, L., Flower, F.C., Fraser, D., Identifying and preventing pain in animals. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 100 (2006), 64–76.
65. Weary, D.M., Ventura, B.A., von Keyserlingk, M.A.G., Societal views and animal welfare science: Understanding why the modified cage may fail and other stories. Animal 10 (2016), 309–317 26206166.
66. Winder, C.B., LeBlanc, S.J., Haley, D.B., Lissemore, K.D., Godkin, M.A., Duffield, T.F., Practices for the disbudding and dehorning of dairy calves by veterinarians and dairy producers in Ontario, Canada. J. Dairy Sci. 99 (2016), 10161–10173 10.3168/jds.2016-11270 27665137.
67. Wolf, C.A., Tonsor, G.T., McKendree, M.G.S., Thomson, D.U., Swanson, J.C., Public and farmer perceptions of dairy cattle welfare in the United States. J. Dairy Sci. 99 (2016), 5892–5903 27179876.
68. You, X., Li, Y., Zhang, M., Yan, H., Zhao, R., A survey of Chinese citizens' perceptions on farm animal welfare. PLoS One, 9, 2014, e109177 25314159.