The Role of Non-Use Values in Dairy Farmers’ Willingness to Accept a Farm Animal Welfare Programme

2016 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 553-578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia A. Schreiner ◽  
Sebastian Hess
2011 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 484-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl Johan Lagerkvist ◽  
Helena Hansson ◽  
Sebastian Hess ◽  
Ruben Hoffman

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-58
Author(s):  
Josie McLaren ◽  
Tony Appleyard

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate accountability for farm animal welfare (FAW) in food companies. FAW is an important social issue, yet it is difficult to define and measure, meaning that it is difficult for companies to demonstrate accountability. The authors investigate a proposed solution, the Business Benchmark on Farm Animal Welfare (BBFAW), and how it has disrupted the informal rules or culture of the market. The research questions centre on the process of response to BBFAW and the necessary characteristics for BBFAW to play a performative role in the market. Design/methodology/approach This paper employs an analysis of published BBFAW reports (2012–2017) and case study interviews in five BBFAW firms, in order to address the research questions. Findings The authors present evidence of a dynamic, repetitive process, starting with recognition of the importance of FAW and BBFAW, followed by internal discussions and the commitment of resources, and changes in communication to external stakeholders. Three necessary characteristics for performativity are proposed: common language, building networks and expanding markets. Originality/value This paper reflects a socially important issue that is under-represented in the accounting literature. The results provide an insight into the use of external accounts to drive collaboratively the social change agenda. The performativity process and identified characteristics contribute to expanding this literature in the accounting domain.


2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
pp. 1121-1136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heinke Heise ◽  
Ludwig Theuvsen

Farm animal welfare (FAW) is at the center of a controversial public debate, and the demand for higher farm animal welfare standards is growing. Nevertheless, there are hardly any dairy products from pure animal welfare programs (AWPs) on the market. Although dairy farmers are a very important stakeholder group for the successful implementation of AWPs, very little is known about their attitudes toward the introduction of such programs. For this study, 258 conventional dairy farmers in Germany were questioned about FAW and AWPs via an online survey. We identified five clusters (farmer groups) that significantly differ with regard to their attitudes toward AWPs, FAW, and their own willingness to improve the level of animal welfare or take part in specialized AWPs. Cluster A consists of farmers who strongly oppose AWPs; farmers in this cluster will probably not take part in AWPs, especially because they do not consider it profitable to do so. Farmers in cluster B also view AWPs and the associated market effects with some skepticism; however, they are willing to improve their level of animal welfare and, therefore, may someday become willing to participate in AWPs. Cluster C farmers have diverse attitudes toward AWPs; since they are slightly willing to improve the level of animal welfare on their farms and as they are comparatively most optimistic concerning the market effects of higher animal welfare standards, these farmers could also become AWP participants in the future. Farmers in cluster D have positive attitudes toward AWPs and show the highest willingness among the five clusters to improve animal welfare on their farms. However, when it comes to the market effects of higher national animal welfare standards and the market potential for more animal-friendly products, these farmers are the most skeptical; if the economic security of AWPs were guaranteed, Cluster D farmers would probably constitute an important target group. Farmers in cluster E have positive attitudes toward AWPs, show a high willingness to improve the own FAW, and tend to be less skeptical about the market effects of higher animal welfare standards; these farmers constitute the most important potential target group for AWPs. Our results can provide a starting point for the design of tailor-made AWPs that fulfill the requirements of both dairy farmers and the broader public.


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.


2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp von Gall ◽  
Mickey Gjerris

While animal welfare is commonly invoked in legal debates regarding non-human animals kept for food purposes, the concept of animal joy is rarely mentioned in such contexts. This paper analyzes the relationship between welfare and joy in the German animal protection law (gapl) and in the eu directive 98/58/ec. Based on a review of scientific and philosophical approaches towards animal welfare, joy is argued to be a part of welfare. Nevertheless, joy is ignored in the German and eu legal provisions. While there may be economic disadvantages of legally protecting animal joy, it is argued that overlooking elements of joy cannot be justified from any ethical perspective that claims to take animal welfare into consideration. In order to clarify the aims of the legal provisions, decision-makers need to define the role joy ought to play in welfare legislation.


Author(s):  
Erica Fudge

This afterword turns from the early modern material to think about the role of nostalgia in discussions of agricultural animal welfare that are taking place today. It explores how animals are understood in Qualitative Behavioral Assessment methodology that is being used to evaluate farm animal welfare today, and compares that to the understanding of animals that is evidence in early modern ideas. It argues that QBA offers a kind of return to a way of living alongside and understanding animals that Cartesian and behaviorist thinking has left behind.


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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document