scholarly journals Identifying use and non-use values of animal welfare: Evidence from Swedish dairy agriculture

Food Policy ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 35-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena Hansson ◽  
Carl Johan Lagerkvist
Author(s):  
Enoch Owusu-Sekyere ◽  
Helena Hansson ◽  
Evgenij Telezhenko

Abstract This paper examines how differences in motivation in terms of use and non-use values affect the choice of animal welfare improvement practices. The application is focused on Swedish dairy farmers’ preferences for different flooring systems’ attributes. Using multiple indicators and multiple causes and hybrid latent class models, the findings demonstrate that dairy farmers who favour flooring solutions that enhance farm animal welfare are motivated by a complex set of both use values relating to internal and external pressures and non-use values linked to animal freedom, ethical codes of farmers and building business-to-customer relationships. The findings imply that measures to stimulate more uptake of animal welfare improvement practices can be better targeted by using insights into motivational constructs of farmers and by adopting policy communication that captures the whole breadth of use and non-use motivational constructs held by farmers.


2011 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 484-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl Johan Lagerkvist ◽  
Helena Hansson ◽  
Sebastian Hess ◽  
Ruben Hoffman

2016 ◽  
Vol 83 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Högberg ◽  
K. Dahlborn ◽  
E. Hydbring-Sandberg ◽  
E. Hartmann ◽  
A. Andrén

Milk with a high concentration of fat and casein is required for cheese production, and these components have a major impact for both quality and yield of the curd. Recent observations have shown that suckling can elevate milk fat concentration in goats and our aim was therefore to check the hypothesis that animal welfare and cheese-processing properties of goat milk could be optimised by appropriate management of suckled/milked goats. Twelve Swedish dairy goats were kept together with one kid each in 4 different mixed management-systems (milking combined with partial suckling) in a cross-over design. Two milk accumulation intervals were tested; Short = dams and kids were together for 16 h (T16) and Long = ; dams and kids were together for 8 h (T8 h). In addition, two milking regimes were used; Suckled Before Milking = S and Milked Before Suckling = M. Milk accumulation interval referred to how long dams and kids were separated. The milk yield available for processing (milk offtake), was weighed and analysed from each milking occasion and the suckled milk yield was estimated by a weigh-suckle-weigh method (WSW) in combination with observing the suckling behaviour during the free suckling periods. Milking managements, such as ‘suckling before milking (S)’, increased milk fat concentration compared to milking before suckling (M) and ‘Short accumulation treatments (T16)’ gave higher milk fat, casein concentration and individual curd yield (%) compared to the ‘Long accumulation treatment (T8)’. The total individual curd yield (g) was the same despite treatment, but the animal welfare was most likely higher in T16 where dams and kids spent more time together.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. 753-758
Author(s):  
Silvia Woll

Innovators of in vitro meat (IVM) are convinced that this approach is the solution for problems related to current meat production and consumption, especially regarding animal welfare and environmental issues. However, the production conditions have yet to be fully clarified and there is still a lack of ethical discourses and critical debates on IVM. In consequence, discussion about the ethical justifiability and desirability of IVM remains hypothetical and we have to question those promises. This paper addresses the complex ethical aspects associated with IVM and the questions of whether, and under what conditions, the production of IVM represents an ethically justifiable solution for existing problems, especially in view of animal welfare, the environment, and society. There are particular hopes regarding the benefits that IVM could bring to animal welfare and the environment, but there are also strong doubts about their ethical benefits.


2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth J. Austin ◽  
Ian J. Deary ◽  
Gareth Edwards-Jones ◽  
Dale Arey

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document