Статті в журналах з теми "Animal behaviour and welfare"
Щоб переглянути інші типи публікацій з цієї теми, перейдіть за посиланням: Animal behaviour and welfare.
Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями
Ознайомтеся з топ-50 статей у журналах для дослідження на тему "Animal behaviour and welfare".
Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.
Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.
Переглядайте статті в журналах для різних дисциплін та оформлюйте правильно вашу бібліографію.
1
Lindberg, Cecilia. "Animal behaviour and animal welfare." Journal of Biological Education 29, no. 1 (March 1995): 16–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.1995.9655413.
Повний текст джерела
2
Hemsworth, P. H. "Human-animal interactions in agriculture and their impact on animal welfare and performance." BSAP Occasional Publication 20 (1997): 27–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0263967x00043342.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractHuman-animal interactions are a common feature of modern intensive farming systems and these interactions may have marked consequences on animal productivity and welfare. Research in agriculture has shown interrelationships between the stockperson’s attitudes and behaviour and the behaviour, productivity and welfare of farm animals and the following model of human-animal interactions in agriculture has been proposed. Because a stockperson’s behaviour towards animals is largely under volitional control, this behaviour is strongly influenced by the attitudes that the stockperson holds about the animals. These attitudes and consequent behaviours predominantly affect the animal’s fear of humans which, in turn, affects the animal’s performance and welfare. The mechanism whereby fear affects performance and welfare appears to be through a chronic stress response. The risk to welfare also arises if the stockperson’s attitude and behaviour towards the animals are negative because the stockperson’s commitment to the surveillance of, and the attendance to, welfare issues is likely to be highly questionable.Recent research in the pig industry has shown that a training programme targeting the key attitudes and behaviour of stockpersons produced improvements in stockperson attitudes and behaviour and animal behaviour and productivity. These results indicate the potential to improve animal productivity and welfare by targeting the stockperson’s attitudes and behaviour for improvement. Techniques which may be useful in this regard include staff selection and training procedures addressing these important human attributes.
3
Kokocińska, Agata, and Tadeusz Kaleta. "The role of ethology in animal welfare." Roczniki Naukowe Polskiego Towarzystwa Zootechnicznego 12, no. 1 (March 31, 2016): 49–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0013.6981.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Knowledge of the behaviour of a species makes it possible to ensure the well-being of animals raised in farm conditions, because when we know the behavioural standard we can guarantee that at least the animals’ minimum needs will be met. Observation of animal behaviour is the first element in assessing their physical and psychological comfort. The main objective is to maximize production while at the same time maintaining animal welfare. However, this is often difficult and economic considerations come into conflict with the comfort and needs of the animals. The elements of knowledge of behaviour, in addition to ethology, i.e. the science dealing with animal behaviour, also include zoosemiotics and cognitive science, which explain of the occurrence of specific behaviours in terms of biology and physiology.
4
Veasey, J. S., N. K. Waran, and R. J. Young. "On Comparing the Behaviour of Zoo Housed Animals with Wild Conspecifics as a Welfare Indicator." Animal Welfare 5, no. 1 (February 1996): 13–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600018297.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractIt is commonly assumed that animals suffer if they cannot perform behaviours seen in wild conspecifics. Although comparisons with the behaviour of wild conspecifics are a popular method of assessing the welfare of captive animals, their validity has not been fully assessed. Homeostatic models of motivation suggest that many behaviours are stimulus driven rather than internally generated. Thus, it is possible that the non-performance of some wild-type behaviours does not necessarily compromise animal welfare, unless welfare is defined as being compromised by such non-performance. The flexibility of wild animal behaviour and the fact that animals free to perform the complete range of wild behaviours can suffer, must also put into the question the validity of such comparisons. Technical criticisms also arise when one considers the difficulty of constructing accurate and unbiased time budgets for wild animals. It is possible that the expressions of wild-type behaviours correlate with enhanced welfare, rather than cause enhanced welfare. Thus, if the consequences of behaviour are more important than the expression of behaviour itself, environmental enrichment does not necessarily need to rely upon the performance of wild-type behaviours for the improvement of animal welfare. Therefore, although behavioural comparisons with wild animals can be considered as potentially useful indicators of behavioural differences, they cannot always be relied upon to give an objective assessment of animal welfare. To make an assessment of welfare, behavioural comparisons with wild animals should be used in conjunction with other techniques to demonstrate that the consequences of non-performance of wild behaviours results in impoverished welfare.
5
Vigors, Belinda, David A. Ewing, and Alistair B. Lawrence. "Happy or healthy? How members of the public prioritise farm animal health and natural behaviours." PLOS ONE 16, no. 3 (March 3, 2021): e0247788. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247788.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The importance given to minimising health issues and promoting natural behaviours is a polarising issue within farm animal welfare. It is predominantly thought that members of the public prioritise animals being able to behave naturally over other aspects of farm animal welfare, such as addressing health issues. However, public perspectives may be more multi-dimensional than is generally thought, with the importance given to these different elements of welfare dependent on the situation and state of the animals in question. To examine this, a factorial survey using vignettes, which experimentally manipulated the different levels of health (high health vs. low health) and natural behaviour provision (high behaviour vs. low behaviour), was completed by a sample (n = 810) representative of the UK population (on age, gender, ethnicity). Contrary to the predominant view, this study found animal health had the greatest effect on participants’ judgements, explaining more of the variance in their assessments of animal welfare than any other factor. However, findings also indicated that participants considered animal welfare to be most positive when both health issues are minimised and natural behaviours are promoted. Attitudes to natural behaviours also varied more between participants, with females, individuals who do not (regularly) eat meat and those with a greater belief in animal mind giving greater priority to natural behaviours. In the context of public and private welfare standards seeking to meet public expectations, this study provides important insights into how public perspectives of animal welfare are more nuanced than previously thought, influenced by the context of the animal, the aspect of welfare in question and personal characteristics.
6
Webster, A. J. F. "Farm Animal Behaviour and Welfare." British Veterinary Journal 146, no. 6 (November 1990): 584. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0007-1935(90)90067-d.
Повний текст джерела
7
Hemsworth, P. H., J. L. Barnett, and G. J. Coleman. "The Human-Animal Relationship in Agriculture and Its Consequences for the Animal." Animal Welfare 2, no. 1 (February 1993): 33–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s096272860001544x.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractAlthough human factors are recognized as influential factors affecting the welfare and productivity of farm animals, only limited research has been conducted to identify these important human characteristics and to quantify their effects. During the last 13 years we have studied two apparently important human factors: the attitude and the behaviour of stockpersons towards farm animals.We have proposed that in intensive animal production systems there are some important sequential relationships between the attitude and behaviour of the stockperson towards farm animals and the behaviour, performance and welfare of farm animals. Basically we have suggested that because a stockperson's behaviour towards animals is largely under volitional control it is strongly influenced by the attitudes and beliefs that the stockperson holds about the animals. Furthermore, the stockperson's behaviour towards animals affects the animals’ fear of humans which, in turn, affects the animals’ productivity and welfare. It is the occurrence of a stress response by animals which are highly fearful of humans which places their productivity and welfare at risk We have published data which strongly support these interrelationships between human attitude and behaviour and animal behaviour, productivity and welfare. This paper reviews this and other research on this subject. The results of research in the pig industry and to a lesser extent, the poultry industries indicate the excellent opportunity which exists to improve animal productivity and welfare by training and selecting stockpersons to have desirable attitudinal and behavioural profiles towards farm animals.
8
Appleby, M. C. "The science of animal welfare." Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production (1972) 1990 (March 1990): 6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0308229600017906.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Current scientific progress in the understanding of animal welfere is resulting in the possibility of realistic assessments of welfare and the application of such assessments. Understanding has been advanced by the recognition that welfare is not a unitary variable but has different aspects, which may be compromised independently. Some problems which arise, such as injury and disease, also reduce production and may be covered by veterinary and production science. Others, though, such as behavioural restriction and stress, do not affect production so clearly. There is increasing input to these areas from behavioural science and physiology. Ethology has contributed theoretical insights into the control of behaviour, basic knowledge of the behaviour of farm animals and comparisons between different environments (e.g. intensive, extensive and feral). It has also highlighted occurrence of abnormal behaviour, such as stereotypies and cannibalism, in some circumstances. To investigate causes of abnormal behaviour, though, observation must be complemented by experimentation, and by behavioural physiology and neurophysiology. These are now producing notable advances in our understanding of stress. Experimental work is also progressing on motivation for normal behaviour, such as feeding,and for different features in the environment. With increased understanding of different aspects of welfare comes a move away from unrealistic expectations of unitary welfare meesurements or indices, and towards an acceptance that there are scientific grounds for abroader assessment. Further, there is increasing recognition that assessment of welfare has a valid, scientific role in the design end management of housing and husbandry systems for our farm animals.
9
Dawkins, MS. "Using behaviour to assess animal welfare." Animal Welfare 13, S1 (February 2004): S3—S7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600014317.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractRather than construct lists of many different welfare indicators and give each of them the same weight, I argue that the assessment of animal welfare should be directed at answering two key questions: I) Are the animals healthy? 2) Do they have what they want? Behaviour has a major role in answering both. Behaviour is currently used to help answer the first question through its use in the clinical and pre-clinical assessment of pain, injury and disease, and potentially could have an even greater role, particularly if used in conjunction with new technology. Behaviour is also of crucial importance in gauging what animals want, most obviously in the use of choice and preference tests, but also through other methods that are particularly suitable for on-farm welfare assessment. These include quantitative observations of the spatial distribution of animals and of behavioural ‘indicators’ of what animals want, such as vocalisations.
10
Mendl, M., O. Burman, K. Laughlin, and E. Paul. "Animal Memory and Animal Welfare." Animal Welfare 10, S1 (February 2001): S141—S159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600023587.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractRetrieved memories of emotionally laden events are likely to influence the ongoing emotional state and behaviour of animals. If animals consciously experience memories and/or associated emotions, then recall of aversive or pleasurable events will affect their welfare. Even if they do not, retrieval of these (non-conscious/implicit) memories may result in behaviour, such as attempts to escape, that could lead to injury and damage. There is growing evidence that emotionally laden events are more readily stored in memory than neutral ones, and that the neurophysiological basis of this, involving acute elevations of the classic stress hormones and the action of the amygdala, is similar in humans and other vertebrate species. Thus, in humans and animals, emotional memories are likely to be stored as priority information and may readily be retrieved in the presence of relevant cues. If so, an important practical goal is to minimize the chances of negative emotional memories being cued inappropriately, especially for animals in captivity. Disruption of memory formation and retrieval is also important in an animal welfare context. Chronic or very high elevations of stress hormones appear to have both short- and long-term effects on brain structure and function that can interfere with efficient storage of information. Environmental disturbances, including common husbandry procedures, can also disrupt memory formation through retroactive interference effects. Elevated stress levels may both increase the chances of retrieval of negative information while hampering the retrieval of positive or neutral information. These effects may lead to poor learning abilities, selective or disrupted memory retrieval, and consequent inappropriate behaviour with adverse welfare consequences. If we understand them, we may be able to recommend housing or husbandry procedures that minimize the likelihood of their occurrence.
11
Boivin, X., J. Lensink, C. Tallet, and I. Veissier. "Stockmanship and Farm Animal Welfare." Animal Welfare 12, no. 4 (November 2003): 479–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600026075.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractHuman factors (attitudes, personality traits, self-esteem, job satisfaction) strongly determine our behaviour towards animals, animal production and animal welfare. Recent studies have emphasised positive human contacts as indicators of a stockperson's positive attitude towards animals and towards animal welfare in general. Stockmanship can be improved by careful selection of people and/or by training. However, little is known of the biological basis of the effect of stock handling procedures on the welfare of animals. The animal's perception of the stockperson (based both on emotional responses and cognitive aspects such as anticipation, recognition and categorisation), and the existence of sensitive periods in an animal's life, need to be explored in more depth, especially under farm conditions. We need to consider the complexity of human behaviour (eg husbandry practices, balance between positive and negative interactions, predictability, controllability) and its effect on animal welfare from the animal's point of view throughout its whole life. This paper identifies the importance of positive human contacts for both animals and stockpeople, and highlights the challenge to maintain such positive contacts despite the trend in modern agriculture to increase the number of animals per stockperson. This requires better knowledge of animal genetics, socialisation to humans during sensitive periods, and management of the social group. We emphasise the ethical importance of the human-animal relationship in the context of farm animal welfare and productivity.
12
Shoesmith, Emily, Luciana Santos de Assis, Lion Shahab, Elena Ratschen, Paul Toner, Dimitra Kale, Catherine Reeve, and Daniel S. Mills. "The Perceived Impact of The First UK COVID-19 Lockdown on Companion Animal Welfare and Behaviour: A Mixed-Method Study of Associations with Owner Mental Health." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 11 (June 7, 2021): 6171. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18116171.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Background: Companion animals may be a positive presence for their owners during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the welfare of a companion animal is strongly influenced by the behaviour of their owners, as well as their physical and social environment. We aimed to investigate the reported changes in companion animal welfare and behaviour and to examine the association between these changes and companion animal owners’ mental health. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey of UK residents over 18 years of age was conducted between April and June 2020 (n = 5926). The questionnaire included validated, bespoke items measuring outcomes related to mental health, human-animal bonds and reported changes in animal welfare and behaviour. The final item of the survey invited open-ended free-text responses, allowing participants to describe experiences associated with human-animal relationships during the first UK lockdown phase. Results: Animal owners made up 89.8% of the sample (n = 5323), of whom 67.3% reported changes in their animal’s welfare and behaviour during the first lockdown phase (n = 3583). These reported changes were reduced to a positive (0–7) and negative (0–5) welfare scale, following principal component analysis (PCA) of 17 items. Participants reported more positive changes for cats, whereas more negative changes were reported for dogs. Thematic analysis identified three main themes relating to the positive and negative impact on companion animals of the COVID-19 pandemic. Generalised linear models indicated that companion animal owners with poorer mental health scores pre-lockdown reported fewer negative changes in animal welfare and behaviour. However, companion animal owners with poorer mental health scores since lockdown reported more changes, both positive and negative, in animal welfare and behaviour. Conclusion: Our findings extend previous insights into perceived welfare and behaviour changes on a very limited range of species to a wider range of companion animals. Owner mental health status has a clear, albeit small, effect on companion animal welfare and behaviour.
13
Veissier, Isabelle, and Mara Miele. "Animal welfare: towards transdisciplinarity – the European experience." Animal Production Science 54, no. 9 (2014): 1119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/an14330.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The premises of animal welfare science can be found in the debate about the moral status of animals in philosophy, the introduction of the concept of stress in physiology, and the description of the behaviour of animals by ethologists. In the 1970s animal welfare became an object of study for applied research with the aim of improving the life of domesticated animals. It was first studied within disciplines, e.g. applied ethologists compared the behaviour of domesticated animals to that of their wild counterparts and identified behavioural needs. Then it became clear that stress is more a psychological concept than a physiological one. The links between stress and behavioural needs and preferences were also established. Similarly the links between animal welfare and health were investigated by looking at malaise behaviour and at stress-immunity relations. More recently, frameworks developed in human psychology were applied to animals to identify the emotions they can experience. This typically requires that researchers from one discipline engage with other disciplines for a cross fertilisation of concepts and frameworks. Animal welfare scientists now use many indicators, covering a wide range of possible disorders from abnormal behaviour, diseases, production failure, and poor emotional states. Animal scientists started to work with social scientists to relate their own perception of animal welfare and that of society at large. This interdisciplinary approach is illustrated by the Welfare Quality project where an overall assessment of animal welfare was built according to scientific evidence of what matters to animals as seen by animal scientists and of what society value as good care to these animals. We feel that animal welfare requires breaking frontiers between disciplines to create a holistic approach. We discuss whether we need to move from an interdisciplinary to a transdisciplinary approach, across and beyond disciplines, whereby not only scientists but also stakeholders and society at large can contribute to the definition of this particular research object: animal welfare.
14
Sneddon, Joanne, Julie Lee, Roy Ballantyne, and Jan Packer. "Animal welfare values and tourist behaviour." Annals of Tourism Research 57 (March 2016): 234–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2016.01.006.
Повний текст джерела
15
Normando, Simona, Ilaria Pollastri, Daniela Florio, Linda Ferrante, Elisabetta Macchi, Valentina Isaja, and Barbara de Mori. "Assessing Animal Welfare in Animal-Visitor Interactions in Zoos and Other Facilities. A Pilot Study Involving Giraffes." Animals 8, no. 9 (August 30, 2018): 153. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani8090153.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In recent years, awareness of the controversial aspects connected with wild animal-visitor interactions (AVIs) in zoos and other facilities has increased due to cultural changes. Therefore, the need to apply transparent procedures to evaluate AVIs programs in zoos and similar facilities has also increased. This study presents results of animal welfare’s assessment of a pilot test of a protocol based on six steps that aim to explore and assess the overall value of AVIs considering the impact both on animals and visitors. In the present paper, we discuss the multifaceted approach to animal welfare assessment during animal-visitor interactions, combining quantitative behavioural observations/analysis and a welfare risk-assessment procedure, which forms the basis of the six-step protocol. Pilot testing of said approach to animal welfare assessment involved giraffes (Giraffa camelopardalis) in an Italian zoo. No change in behaviour, suggestive of an increased welfare risk to the animals, was found. The risk analysis reported overall low risks for welfare, whereas enclosure analysis highlighted that the enclosure was suitable for allowing interactions without jeopardising animal welfare, mainly because it allowed animals to choose whether to interact or withdraw from interactions without decreasing the space available to them.
16
Wechsler, B. "Normal behaviour as a basis for animal welfare assessment." Animal Welfare 16, no. 2 (May 2007): 107–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600031110.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractIt is generally agreed that farm animal welfare is at a high level when the animals can behave naturally. Most of today's housing systems, however, differ considerably from the natural environment in which the behavioural organisation of the ancestors of our farm animal species evolved. Consequently, normal behaviour may be impaired in several ways. Frequency, duration or sequence of behavioural elements may be affected. Some normal behaviour patterns may not occur at all. The animals may also possibly behave in unnatural ways – in patterns that would never occur in nature. Furthermore, it is usual for farm animals to exhibit behaviour which is normal in form, but which is elicited by artificial structures within their housing system.In view of these possible changes in normal behaviour, it is necessary to assess, for each farm animal species and each housing system, whether animal welfare is at risk in any way if the behaviour observed differs from the behaviour that would occur in a natural environment. In some cases the question can be answered by taking a theoretical evolutionary approach. In most cases, however, detailed knowledge about the behavioural organisation of the animals is necessary. Such knowledge is built up from animal motivation studies and investigations into the effect of environmental structures on animal behaviour.A specific problem of on-farm animal welfare assessment is that there is often not enough time to collect sufficient data to make a judgement about the occurrence of normal behaviour. Resource-based assessment methods are appropriate as an alternative, provided that the resource standards used are based on evidence stemming from research into animal behaviour and motivation.
17
Neethirajan, Suresh, and Bas Kemp. "Social Network Analysis in Farm Animals: Sensor-Based Approaches." Animals 11, no. 2 (February 8, 2021): 434. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani11020434.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Natural social systems within animal groups are an essential aspect of agricultural optimization and livestock management strategy. Assessing elements of animal behaviour under domesticated conditions in comparison to natural behaviours found in wild settings has the potential to address issues of animal welfare effectively, such as focusing on reproduction and production success. This review discusses and evaluates to what extent social network analysis (SNA) can be incorporated with sensor-based data collection methods, and what impact the results may have concerning welfare assessment and future farm management processes. The effectiveness and critical features of automated sensor-based technologies deployed in farms include tools for measuring animal social group interactions and the monitoring and recording of farm animal behaviour using SNA. Comparative analyses between the quality of sensor-collected data and traditional observational methods provide an enhanced understanding of the behavioural dynamics of farm animals. The effectiveness of sensor-based approaches in data collection for farm animal behaviour measurement offers unique opportunities for social network research. Sensor-enabled data in livestock SNA addresses the biological aspects of animal behaviour via remote real-time data collection, and the results both directly and indirectly influence welfare assessments, and farm management processes. Finally, we conclude with potential implications of SNA on modern animal farming for improvement of animal welfare.
18
Napolitano, Fabio, Andrea Bragaglio, Emilio Sabia, Francesco Serrapica, Ada Braghieri, and Giuseppe De Rosa. "The human−animal relationship in dairy animals." Journal of Dairy Research 87, S1 (July 30, 2020): 47–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0022029920000606.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractThe present study aims to identify margins for the improvement of dairy animal welfare and production based on the quality of the human−animal relationship (HAR). The main tool proposed to improve the quality of HAR in dairy animals is training of stock-people by targeting their attitude and behaviour. Given that a good quality HAR may benefit the welfare of dairy animals and productivity, new technologies, by monitoring the handling routine on farm, may be more effective in promoting good practices. In particular, the implementation of new technologies may allow identification of specific inappropriate behaviours to be targeted at stockperson level, thus increasing the efficacy of training. However, an issue related to the introduction of new technologies in the farms, particularly in those that follow traditional farming practices, is the resistance to innovation which may be encountered.
19
Oliveira, Ana Flora Sarti, André Oliveira Rossi, Luana Finocchiaro Romualdo Silva, Michele Correa Lau, and Rodrigo Egydio Barreto. "Play behaviour in nonhuman animals and the animal welfare issue." Journal of Ethology 28, no. 1 (June 10, 2009): 1–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10164-009-0167-7.
Повний текст джерела
20
D'Eath, RB, J. Conington, AB Lawrence, IAS Olsson, and P. Sand⊘e. "Breeding for behavioural change in farm animals: practical, economic and ethical considerations." Animal Welfare 19, S1 (May 2010): 17–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600002207.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractIn farm animal breeding, behavioural traits are rarely included in selection programmes despite their potential to improve animal production and welfare. Breeding goals have been broadened beyond production traits in most farm animal species to include health and functional traits, and opportunities exist to increase the inclusion of behaviour in breeding indices. On a technical level, breeding for behaviour presents a number of particular challenges compared to physical traits. It is much more difficult and time-consuming to directly measure behaviour in a consistent and reliable manner in order to evaluate the large numbers of animals necessary for a breeding programme. For this reason, the development and validation of proxy measures of key behavioural traits is often required. Despite these difficulties, behavioural traits have been introduced by certain breeders. For example, ease of handling is now included in some beef cattle breeding programmes. While breeding for behaviour is potentially beneficial, ethical concerns have been raised. Since animals are adapted to the environment rather than the other way around, there may be a loss of ‘naturalness’ and/or animal integrity. Some examples, such as breeding for good maternal behaviour, could enhance welfare, production and naturalness, although dilemmas emerge where improved welfare could result from breeding away from natural behaviour. Selection against certain behaviours may carry a risk of creating animals which are generally unreactive (‘zombies’), although such broad effects could be measured and controlled. Finally, breeding against behavioural measures of welfare could inadvertently result in resilient animals (‘stoics’) that do not show behavioural signs of low welfare yet may still be suffering. To prevent this, other measures of the underlying problem should be used, although cases where this is not possible remain troubling.
21
Cornish, Amelia, Jen Jamieson, David Raubenheimer, and Paul McGreevy. "Applying the Behavioural Change Wheel to Encourage Higher Welfare Food Choices." Animals 9, no. 8 (August 2, 2019): 524. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani9080524.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Over the last several decades, positive public attitudes towards animal welfare have continued to develop. Consumers’ attitudes towards farm animal welfare indicate increasing concern about animal welfare in food production. Yet, this growing interest in the lives of farm animals does not correspond with a wholesale increase in demand for higher welfare products, providing evidence of the citizen-consumer attitude-behaviour gap (herein referred to as the attitude-behaviour gap). Minimising the attitude–behaviour gap and supporting consumers to make higher animal welfare choices may help producers to enhance the lives of farm animals. However, despite increasing awareness in this area, solutions to resolve this gap often focus on knowledge transfer and do not appear to have had a significant impact. The aim of this article is to review current knowledge around the attitude-behaviour gap, and situate it within the context of the behaviour change wheel; exploring the capabilities, opportunities, and motivations driving, as well as the barriers inhibiting consumers from making higher welfare food choices. Using this framework, the review aims to identify interventions that may boost consumer demand for higher welfare products sold at a premium price and provide suggestions for future research. Further work to increase understanding in this area is then also suggested.
22
Acharya, Rutu Y., Paul H. Hemsworth, Grahame J. Coleman, and James E. Kinder. "The Animal-Human Interface in Farm Animal Production: Animal Fear, Stress, Reproduction and Welfare." Animals 12, no. 4 (February 16, 2022): 487. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani12040487.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
A negative human-animal relationship (HAR) from the perspective of the animal is a limiting factor affecting farm animal welfare, as well as farm animal productivity. Research in farm animals has elucidated sequential relationships between stockperson attitudes, stockperson behaviour, farm animal fear behaviour, farm animal stress physiology, and farm animal productivity. In situations where stockperson attitudes to and interactions with farm animals are sub-optimal, through animal fear and stress, both animal welfare and productivity, including reproductive performance, can be compromised. There is a growing body of evidence that farm animals often seek and enjoy interacting with humans, but our understanding of the effects of a positive HAR on stress resilience and productivity in farm animals is limited. In this review, we explore the pathways by which stress induced by human-animal interactions can negatively affect farm animal reproduction, in particular, via inhibitory effects on the secretion of gonadotrophins. We also review the current knowledge of the stockperson characteristics and the nature of stockperson interactions that affect fear and physiological stress in farm animals. The contents of this review provide an insight into the importance of the HAR on farm animal welfare and reproduction while highlighting the gap in knowledge regarding the effects of a positive HAR on farm animals.
23
Fraser, A. F. "The welfare-behaviour relationship." Applied Animal Behaviour Science 22, no. 2 (February 1989): 93–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(89)90045-2.
Повний текст джерела
24
Sneddon, Lynne U. "Fish behaviour and welfare." Applied Animal Behaviour Science 104, no. 3-4 (May 2007): 173–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.09.006.
Повний текст джерела
25
Ofner, E., T. Amon, M. Lins, and B. Amon. "Correlations Between the Results of Animal Welfare Assessments by the TGI 35 L Austrian Animal Needs Index and Health and Behavioural Parameters of Cattle." Animal Welfare 12, no. 4 (November 2003): 571–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600026208.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractSuitable systems for the assessment of animal welfare are in increasing demand. In Austria, the TGI 35 L Animal Needs Index is widely used and has been shown to be a feasible and reliable tool for animal welfare assessment on farms. Here we focus on the validity of TGI 35 L assessments, and explore the correlation between animal welfare as assessed by the TGI 35 L and animal health and behavioural parameters. From the results, it can be determined whether the criteria assessed by the TGI 35 L are preconditions for a high level of health and normal behaviour. Behaviour and health were examined in 11 cattle houses, totalling 169 animals. Behaviour was observed for two days on each farm. Data on resting behaviour, comfort behaviour, social behaviour, feed intake behaviour and eliminative behaviour were collected. Health was assessed using veterinary examinations carried out according to the General Clinical and the Orthopaedic Examination Proceedings. Significant correlations were found between the TGI scores and behaviour and health, including results for skin lesions and injuries. This indicates good validity of the TGI 35 L assessment system for cattle. A comprehensive system for the assessment of animal welfare on farms must comprise parameters of housing, climate, management and stockmanship, and animal-related parameters.
26
Wiepkema, P. R., and J. M. Koolhaas. "Stress and Animal Welfare." Animal Welfare 2, no. 3 (August 1993): 195–218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600015876.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractWhen individual vertebrates loose grip on their life conditions stress symptoms appear and their welfare becomes problematic. Present day research supports the view that stress can originate when an organism experiences a substantial reduction of predictability and/or controllability (PIC) of relevant events. Behavioural (conflict and disturbed behaviour) and physiological (neuro-endocrine and autonomic processes) aspects of a reduction of PIC are reviewed. The highly dynamic patterns of the homeostatic mechanisms activated during stress make it difficult to deduce any simple relationship between stress and welfare.A list of relevant stress symptoms has been presented, all of which indicate some stage of serious welfare problems. Their occurrence should never be typical of animals living in a farm, laboratory or zoo housing system. However, if after all this is the case, such systems have to be corrected and replaced by more appropriate ones as soon as possible.
27
Castelhano-Carlos, Magda J., Vera Baumans, and Nuno Sousa. "PhenoWorld: addressing animal welfare in a new paradigm to house and assess rat behaviour." Laboratory Animals 51, no. 1 (July 10, 2016): 36–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0023677216638642.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The use of animals is essential in biomedical research. The laboratory environment where the animals are housed has a major impact on them throughout their lives and influences the outcome of animal experiments. Therefore, there has been an increased effort in the refinement of laboratory housing conditions which is explicitly reflected in international regulations and recommendations. Since housing conditions affect behaviour and brain function as well as well-being, the validation of an animal model or paradigm to study the brain and central nervous system disorders is not complete without an evaluation of its implication on animal welfare. Here we discuss several aspects of animal welfare, comparing groups of six rats living in the PhenoWorld (PhW), a recently developed and validated paradigm for studying rodent behaviour, with standard-housed animals (in cages of six rats or pair-housed). In this study we present new data on home-cage behaviour showing that PhW animals have a clearer circadian pattern of sleep and social interaction. We conclude that, by promoting good basic health and functioning, together with the performance of natural behaviours, and maintaining animals’ control over some of their environment but still keeping some physical and social challenges, the PhW stimulates positive affective states and higher motivation in rats, which might contribute to an increased welfare for animals living in the PhW.
28
Bolt, Sarah L., and Adam J. George. "The use of environmental enrichment on farms benefits animal welfare and productivity." Livestock 24, no. 4 (July 2, 2019): 183–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.12968/live.2019.24.4.183.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Environmental enrichment is a key aspect of animal welfare and productivity. Enrichment for livestock can be cost effective and used successfully on farm. The benefits generally outweigh any costs of providing enrichment and it should be taken into account when providing housing facilities for farm animals. It also reduces abnormal behaviours commonly seen in production animals, thus decreasing issues associated with poor animal health. The aim of this review is to summarise information and research that highlights the importance of understanding farm animal behaviour and indicates how enrichment will benefit the welfare and productivity of livestock.
29
Whay, HR. "The journey to animal welfare improvement." Animal Welfare 16, no. 2 (May 2007): 117–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600031134.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractThe process of driving improvement in animal welfare has three stages: 1) assessment of animal welfare, 2) identification of the risk factors potentially leading to a compromise in animal welfare, and 3) interventions, in response to the risk factors, to bring about improvement in animal welfare. This process is applicable to animals farmed in commercial situations and for individual animals kept or worked in isolated environments. An impressive weight of knowledge has accumulated in the science of animal welfare assessment and this needs to be counterbalanced by development of mechanisms to actively improve welfare. In the case of animal welfare, interventions have to motivate the animal owner or carer to make changes to their own behaviour on behalf of a third party; the animal. This is a different situation from that described in the human health literature where interventions encourage people to take steps to improve their own well-being, thus benefiting themselves directly. The development of strategies to improve animal welfare require a multi-disciplinary approach including social scientists, psychologists and economists, however, the skills of animal welfare scientists are essential to ensure that interventions truly achieve improvements in animal welfare.
30
Schork, Ivana Gabriela, and Robert John Young. "Rapid animal welfare assessment: an archaeological approach." Biology Letters 10, no. 9 (September 2014): 20140390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2014.0390.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The welfare of an individual depends on its capacity to overcome suboptimal conditions in its environment; otherwise, its physical and psychological health becomes compromised. A situation that clearly indicates lack of control of the environment is the expression of abnormal behaviours, such as stereotypies. This study aimed to verify the well-being of police horses using a new rapid form of welfare assessment: an archaeological approach. To this end, we sampled and quantified marks found on the stables, deposited as a result of abnormal behaviour. We cross-referenced these physical marks with veterinary records of diseases, such as colic, known to be associated with stress. A total of 46 horses were sampled and the results showed a significant medium-strength, positive correlation between bite mark frequency on stable doors and the incidence of colic. A weak significant positive correlation was found between length of scratch marks (from pawing) and the incidence of lameness. We conclude that these marks reflect the accumulated expression of abnormal behaviour and can provide rapid insight into the welfare of individual animals.
31
Fraser, David. "Animal behaviour, animal welfare and the scientific study of affect." Applied Animal Behaviour Science 118, no. 3-4 (May 2009): 108–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2009.02.020.
Повний текст джерела
32
Vucinic, Marijana, and Ivana Lazic. "Animal welfare assessment." Veterinarski glasnik 62, no. 1-2 (2008): 97–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/vetgl0802097v.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The paper deals with animal welfare definitions and animal welfare assessment. Animal welfare is a prolonged mental state, resulting from how the animal experiences its environment over time. There are different methods for animal welfare assessment. The four basic criteria for animal welfare assessment are feeding, housing, health and appropriate behavior. Therefore, criteria used to assess animal welfare are not direct measures of the mental state but only parameters that need to be interpreted in terms of welfare. The immediate housing environment and feeding may influence animal welfare either positively, when most of the important requirements are respected, or negatively, when animals are exposed to various stress factors and unpleasant emotions that contribute to animal disease, injuries or inappropriate behavior. Therefore, animal welfare is a unique link between housing conditions, feeding and watering on one side, and animal health status and behavior on the other side.
33
Buller, Henry, Harry Blokhuis, Kees Lokhorst, Mathieu Silberberg, and Isabelle Veissier. "Animal Welfare Management in a Digital World." Animals 10, no. 10 (October 1, 2020): 1779. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani10101779.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Although there now exists a wide range of policies, instruments and regulations, in Europe and increasingly beyond, to improve and safeguard the welfare of farmed animals, there remain persistent and significant welfare issues in virtually all types of animal production systems ranging from high prevalence of lameness to limited possibilities to express natural behaviours. Protocols and indicators, such as those provided by Welfare Quality, mean that animal welfare can nowadays be regularly measured and surveyed at the farm level. However, the digital revolution in agriculture opens possibilities to quantify animal welfare using multiple sensors and data analytics. This allows daily monitoring of animal welfare at the group and individual animal level, for example, by measuring changes in behaviour patterns or physiological parameters. The present paper explores the potential for developing innovations in digital technologies to improve the management of animal welfare at the farm, during transport or at slaughter. We conclude that the innovations in Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) offer significant opportunities for a more holistic, evidence-based approach to the monitoring and surveillance of farmed animal welfare. To date, the emphasis in much PLF technologies has been on animal health and productivity. This paper argues that this emphasis should not come to define welfare. What is now needed is a coming together of industry, scientists, food chain actors, policy-makers and NGOs to develop and use the promise of PLF for the creative and effective improvement of farmed animal welfare.
34
Collins, Courtney Keane, Sean McKeown, and Ruth O’Riordan. "Does an Animal–Visitor Interactive Experience Drive Conservation Action?" Journal of Zoological and Botanical Gardens 2, no. 3 (September 7, 2021): 473–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jzbg2030034.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Inspiring visitors to engage in conservation-related behaviour following a zoo visit is a primary objective for most zoos. Animal–visitor interactive (AVI) experiences are often central to this goal. Yet, these interactive experiences are insufficiently evaluated from both the visitors’ and captive animals’ perspectives. The current study took place at Fota Wildlife Park and involved the construction of an environmental enrichment device during an interactive visitor experience with Sumatran tigers (Panthera tigris sumatrae). It aimed to simultaneously encourage pro-conservation behaviour in visitors and promote animal welfare. Visitors (n = 51) completed a survey, observed the tigers’ behaviour and made a pledge to help tigers in the wild after completion of the AVI. Tiger behaviour was simultaneously observed by a trained researcher using occurrence or non-occurrence sampling, which found no indication that tiger welfare was compromised during the activity and was likely enhanced by engaging with the enrichment. Additionally, visitors observed a range of tigers’ behaviours. The results indicated that some visitors (8%) had continued with their pledge six weeks after the experience, and most visitors exhibited a high level of knowledge and a positive attitude towards tigers. The use of enrichment during AVIs may be a positive link between the visitor experience and animal welfare. These results can be used to guide AVIs in zoos which aim to connect people with nature and drive pro-conservation behaviour in visitors.
35
Herlin, Anders, Emma Brunberg, Jan Hultgren, Niclas Högberg, Anna Rydberg, and Anna Skarin. "Animal Welfare Implications of Digital Tools for Monitoring and Management of Cattle and Sheep on Pasture." Animals 11, no. 3 (March 15, 2021): 829. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani11030829.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The opportunities for natural animal behaviours in pastures imply animal welfare benefits. Nevertheless, monitoring the animals can be challenging. The use of sensors, cameras, positioning equipment and unmanned aerial vehicles in large pastures has the potential to improve animal welfare surveillance. Directly or indirectly, sensors measure environmental factors together with the behaviour and physiological state of the animal, and deviations can trigger alarms for, e.g., disease, heat stress and imminent calving. Electronic positioning includes Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) for the recording of animals at fixed points. Positioning units (GPS) mounted on collars can determine animal movements over large areas, determine their habitat and, somewhat, health and welfare. In combination with other sensors, such units can give information that helps to evaluate the welfare of free-ranging animals. Drones equipped with cameras can also locate and count the animals, as well as herd them. Digitally defined virtual fences can keep animals within a predefined area without the use of physical barriers, relying on acoustic signals and weak electric shocks. Due to individual variations in learning ability, some individuals may be exposed to numerous electric shocks, which might compromise their welfare. More research and development are required, especially regarding the use of drones and virtual fences.
36
Fischer, B., M. Flint, K. Cole, and KA George. "Development of an evidence-based welfare approach for cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) under human care." Animal Welfare 30, no. 3 (August 31, 2021): 295–306. http://dx.doi.org/10.7120/09627286.30.3.006.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Societal concern for animals under human care has influenced our approaches to advance animal welfare in a variety of contexts. The Animal Programs Department at the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium sought partnership with the Center for Human-Animal Interactions Research & Education (CHAIRE) at The Ohio State University to develop a holistic welfare approach for the animals within their department using a focal species, the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus). A one-year project using the Five Domains Animal Welfare Model collected data over six 60-day periods to evaluate long-term cortisol production and behavioural observations of cheetahs under changing environmental factors. Species and individual histories were incorporated with behavioural observations and hair cortisol production, giving a holistic view of welfare. Cortisol and behavioural data were analysed using linear models to compare cheetahs at population and individual levels. Participation in a cheetah run activity, housing occupancy, and 60-day period were found to influence all behaviours within the population and stereotypic behaviour also differed within individual cheetahs. No differences in hair cortisol concentrations were found for the group, but further analysis revealed differences within individuals throughout the study. No correlation of stereotypic behaviour and cortisol levels were found. This study created a welfare assessment protocol that can be used within zoological institutes and was the first to measure cortisol concentrations in hair in cheetahs.
37
Lourenço da Silva, Marconi Italo, Ibiara Correia de Lima Almeida Paz, Gustavo Henrique Coelho Chaves, Ianê Correia de Lima Almeida, Caio Cesar dos Ouros, Silvia Regina Lucas de Souza, Elisane Lenita Milbradt, et al. "Behaviour and animal welfare indicators of broiler chickens housed in an enriched environment." PLOS ONE 16, no. 9 (September 27, 2021): e0256963. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256963.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The present study aimed to assess the influence of adding straw bales, step platforms, and laser projectors as environmental enrichment resources on the behaviour and welfare indicators of broiler chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus). A sample of 4,000 day-old male Cobb® 500 birds was used. The experimental treatments consisted of No Environmental Enrichment (NEE)—similar to a conventional environment; and Environmental Enrichment (EE)—environment enriched with straw bales, step platforms, and laser projectors, with four replicates per treatment of 500 animals. Behavioural characteristics (ethological observation through cameras, grab test, and modified touch test) and animal welfare indicators (pododermatitis and dorsal cranial myopathy) were assessed. The birds submitted to the EE treatment exhibited greater exploratory activity and expression of behaviours associated with comfort and welfare, whereas those in the NEE group were less active. Locomotion and play fighting behaviour decreased and behaviours associated with comfort increased as age advanced. The frequencies of interaction with laser spots and birds lying around straw bales were the highest in the 1st week (P<0.01). The behaviours of pecking at straw bales (P<0.0004), using the step platforms (P = 0.0001) and being on top of straw bales (P<0.0002) gradually increased. The chickens accessed the feeding troughs the most in the period of 0800 hours (P<0.0001) and expressed the highest frequencies of behaviours associated with comfort in the 1400 hours and 1700 hours periods. The birds in the EE group were calmer in face of human presence and touch and scored higher in animal welfare indicators. Adding straw bales, step platforms, and laser projectors increased locomotion, reduced expression of fear, and improved animal welfare indicators of broiler chickens.
38
Rutherford, KMD, MJ Haskell, C. Glasbey, RB Jones, and AB Lawrence. "Fractal analysis of animal behaviour as an indicator of animal welfare." Animal Welfare 13, S1 (February 2004): S99—S103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600014433.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractAnimal welfare assessment commonly involves behavioural and physiological measurements. Physiological measures have become increasingly sophisticated over the years, while behavioural measurements, for example duration or frequency, have changed little. Although these measures can undoubtedly contribute to our assessment of an animal's welfare status, a more complex analysis of behavioural sequences could potentially reveal additional and valuable information. One emerging methodology that could provide such information is fractal analysis, which calculates measures of complexity in continuous time series. Its previous application in medical physiology suggested that it could reveal ‘hidden’ information in a dataset beyond that identified by traditional analyses. Consequently, we asked if fractal analysis of behaviour might be a useful non-invasive measure of acute and chronic stress in laying hens and in pigs. Herein, we outline our work and briefly review some previous applications of fractal analysis to animal behaviour patterns. We successfully measured novel aspects of complexity in the behavioural organisation of hens and pigs and found that these were stress-sensitive in some circumstances. Although data collection is time consuming, the benefit of fractal analysis is that it can be applied to simple behavioural transitions, thereby reducing subjective interpretation to a minimum. Collectively, the work to date suggests that fractal analysis — by providing a novel measure of behavioural organisation — could have a role in animal welfare assessment. As a method for extracting extra information from behavioural data, fractal analysis should be more widely examined in animal welfare science.
39
Vigors, Belinda. "Reducing the Consumer Attitude–Behaviour Gap in Animal Welfare: The Potential Role of ‘Nudges’." Animals 8, no. 12 (December 5, 2018): 232. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani8120232.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Citizen concern for the welfare of farm animals is well documented. However, there is a notable gap between people saying they want improved farm animal welfare and how they actually behave as a consumer. This is known as the citizen–consumer attitude–behaviour gap. As improvements in farm animal welfare can be affected by market demand, the choices consumers make become important. This paper introduces the concept of ‘nudging’ and discusses how it could be applied to reduce the attitude–behaviour gap amongst consumers. By designing the choice environment to better reflect the behavioural biases known to impact human decision-making, ‘nudge’ tools function to prompt individuals to make choices that are aligned with their stated intentions. Four ‘nudge’ tools: self-nudges, choice architecture, social norms and pre-commitments are discussed. The behavioural rationales for their use are reviewed and examples of how they might be applied to animal welfare provided. Improved farm animal welfare arguably requires improved pro-welfare consumer behaviour. This paper highlights how this might be encouraged by: self-nudging the salience of an ethical self-image; altering the choice architecture to influence decision-making; articulating social norms to impact behaviour; and using pre-commitment devices to overcome self-control issues.
40
Savory, C. J., and B. O. Hughes. "Behaviour and welfare." British Poultry Science 51, sup1 (August 2010): 13–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071668.2010.506762.
Повний текст джерела
41
Carnovale, Francesca, Xiao Jin, David Arney, Kris Descovich, Wenliang Guo, Binlin Shi, and Clive J. C. Phillips. "Chinese Public Attitudes towards, and Knowledge of, Animal Welfare." Animals 11, no. 3 (March 17, 2021): 855. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani11030855.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Food-producing animals make up the majority of animals that humans manage globally, and China has been a major producer and exporter of animal products since the late 1990s. The opinions of the population in China regarding animal welfare are not as well understood as those in Europe. In China, animal welfare as a societal concern is still at an early stage of development. This survey of Chinese attitudes aimed to understand consumer knowledge of and behaviour towards animal welfare, and to determine whether harnessing consumer interests may be a potential future influence on the development of high-welfare agricultural production. Most participants were not aware of the meaning of animal welfare, but the number of those that were aware was higher than reported previously. The welfare of wild animals was rated particularly important compared to other animals. The links between welfare and the taste and/or safety of food were considered to be important, and Chinese consumers reported a willingness to pay more for food from animals produced in good welfare conditions, although the quality of the food was considered more important than the animal suffering. A large majority of the respondents reported that there should be legislation protecting animals and certification of welfare on farms, that animals on farms should be provided with enjoyable experiences and that transportation times should be minimised. Furthermore, most respondents reported that animals should be stunned before slaughter. We conclude that animal welfare is of importance to the Chinese consumer, in particular because of its connection to food quality.
42
Orihuela, A. "Animal welfare and sustainable animal production." Advances in Animal Biosciences 7, no. 2 (October 2016): 215–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2040470016000157.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This paper describes the basic principles of animal behavior and how these concepts can be applied to the management and care of farm animal species in a sustainable way. Several examples about how the behavior of animals can be used to increase production and welfare understanding animal needs while solving farm problems, are mentioned. Topics covered include: fostering of orphans, explaining how to substitute dead lambs, or how to add extra lambs to ewes with single births; the breakdown of the cow–calf relationship, covering different forms of weaning, focusing on stress reduction as reproductive efficiency and productivity increases; handling system designs, explaining the basic principles of animal handling and how to leverage this knowledge in the design of facilities for the purpose of moving cattle efficiently, reducing at the same time the risk of injury in humans and animals; the behavior of sick animals, where the physiological processes in order to regain homeostasis through changes in animal behavior are explained, in addition to how those changes in behavior can be used to predict some diseases even before clinical signs appeared, or how these changes might be applied to assess the extent of the pain suffered by a particular individual; and finally, a miscellaneous section covering various behavioral aspects of management of productive animals.
43
Gebska, Monika, Barbara Golebiewska, and Carmen Hubbard. "Polish farmer and consumer preference for product produced within standards respected animal welfare." ECONOMIA AGRO-ALIMENTARE, no. 3 (January 2020): 733–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.3280/ecag2019-003009.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In the last two decades, public concerns regarding animal welfare have increased significantly worldwide. These in turn, put pressure on policy-makers to act, by imposing stricter regulations on how animals are reared and treated. This is particularly the case in the European Union, who leads globally in the development of international conventions for the protection of animals and where animals are officially recognised as ‘sentient beings'. Research into animal welfare within the natural and social sciences has also flourished. Given the growing public concerns, more research regarding a better understanding of consumers' attitudes and behaviour regarding animal welfare friendly products is needed. This study aims to examine consumers' awareness regarding farm animal welfare. More specifically, it focuses on Polish consumers' attitudes towards animal welfare when making decisions on purchasing animal products. Respondents were divided in two major categories of consumers, i.e. farmers and non-farmers. Research conducted in Poland among farmers being consumers of animal products shows that less than 50% have encountered the concept of animal welfare. In the case of the non-farmers, the share of respondents familiar with the concept of animal welfare was lower (38%).
44
Botelho, Nadina, Madalena Vieira-Pinto, Pau Batchelli, Joaquim Pallisera, and Antoni Dalmau. "Testing an Animal Welfare Assessment Protocol for Growing-Rabbits Reared for Meat Production Based on the Welfare Quality Approach." Animals 10, no. 8 (August 13, 2020): 1415. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani10081415.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The objective of the present study is to present an animal welfare assessment protocol for growing-rabbits for discussion after its implementation in 32 farms from Spain and Portugal. The protocol comprises the principles of Good Feeding, Good Housing, Good Health and Appropriate Behaviour of the Welfare Quality protocols and includes 36 welfare parameters. Overall, the protocol showed a good capacity for discrimination between farms, with scores ranging 44 to 82 points. The protocol seems reliable for the assessment of animal welfare after proper training of auditors. However, for the criteria social behaviour and other behaviours, further research is needed to ascertain if the methodology and times of observation used are appropriate. Some farms had high mortality rates with a low prevalence of health problems, while others had low mortality rates with high prevalence of health problems due to different managements of culling. The protocol should be improved, to impede farms with high mortality rates but a low prevalence of health issues the day of the audit from obtaining better scores than the second type of farms, by limiting the compensation in key measures. The main points to be solved in the growing-rabbit farms were: to provide more space to the animals; register the number of animals culled accurately; change cervical dislocation for another killing method and provide the farmers training in animal welfare.
45
Kauppinen, T., A. Vainio, A. Valros, H. Rita, and KM Vesala. "Improving animal welfare: qualitative and quantitative methodology in the study of farmers’ attitudes." Animal Welfare 19, no. 4 (November 2010): 523–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600001998.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractThe welfare of production animals provokes wide social discussion among the public, yet, despite this, farmers’ voices and their representations of animal welfare are rarely heard, even though farmers are the ones actually able to improve animal welfare. Farmers’ perceptions of what constitutes animal welfare and how it may be improved can differ from those of consumers and other stakeholders, and therefore it is crucial to understand what farmers mean when they talk about improving animal welfare. To chart farmers’ perceptions, we conducted qualitative interviews and a questionnaire study using the theory of planned behaviour as a conceptual framework. We found that the farmers perceived the improvement of animal welfare as four specific, practical attitude objects (providing animals with a favourable environment; taking care of animal health; treating the animals humanely; and taking care of the farmer's own well-being) and two different but often overlapping general attitudinal dimensions (the instrumental and intrinsic evaluations of animal welfare). The farmers’ intentions to improve animal welfare were best explained by their attitudes towards the specific welfare-improving actions. The concept of the improvement of animal welfare examined in this study outlines measures to improve animal welfare from the farmers’ point of view and discusses their influence. Our study demonstrates that by adapting a valid conceptual framework and applying relevant qualitative and quantitative methods that support each other, we are able to elucidate the underlying meanings and values in farmers’ views on improving animal welfare.
46
Del Campo, M., J. M. Soares de Lima, X. Manteca, P. Hernandez, C. Sañudo, and F. Montossi. "Effects of intensification on animal behaviour and welfare." Meat Science 96, no. 1 (January 2014): 441–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.07.040.
Повний текст джерела
47
White, Jo, and Ruth Sims. "Improving Equine Welfare through Human Habit Formation." Animals 11, no. 8 (July 21, 2021): 2156. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani11082156.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This paper explores the potential for interventions to develop pro-animal welfare habitual behaviours (PAWHBs) in people to improve the lives of animals. Human behavioural research indicates that opportunities exist to deliver lasting change through developing positive habitual behaviours. The routine nature of many equine care and management practices lends itself to habit formation and maintenance. This proof-of-concept paper aims to evaluate a theory-based intervention of developing and maintaining a PAWHB in people caring for equines. Qualitative research methods were used. A 30 day PAWHB intervention (PAWHBInt) of providing enrichment to an equine by scratching them in a consistent context linked to an existing routine behaviour was undertaken. Participants (n = 9) then engaged in semi-structured interviews that were analysed using thematic analysis, where the participants self-reported the outcomes they observed during the intervention. The study findings suggest that the PAWHBInt had a positive impact on human behaviour and habit formation. The research helps to address the dearth of evidence regarding the application of habit theory to equine welfare interventions and emphasised linking a desired new behaviour to an existing routine behaviour when developing PAWHBs. The research also highlights the role of mutual benefit for human and equine, and emotion in providing feedback and potential reward, supporting the link to the cue-routine-reward principle of habit theory.
48
Bracke, MBM. "Animal-based parameters are no panacea for on-farm monitoring of animal welfare." Animal Welfare 16, no. 2 (May 2007): 229–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600031407.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractOn-farm monitoring of animal welfare is an important, present-day objective in animal welfare science. Scientists tend to focus exclusively on animal-based parameters, possibly because using environment-based parameters could be begging the question why welfare has been affected and because animal-based parameters would be better indicators of welfare. However, selection of even the best animal-based parameters that have conventionally been used in experiments could have unacceptable consequences. Systems that are generally considered to be poor welfare systems may generate unacceptably high welfare scores. The monitoring systems could fail to match basic intuitions in society and the scientific community. In order to avoid this problem, available knowledge, eg about animal motivation derived from consumer demand studies and knowledge about the natural behaviour of the animals, should be used explicitly in welfare assessment. This requires making welfare inferences from knowledge about the relationships between environment-based and animal-based parameters using standard operating procedures. The on-farm measurement of animal-based parameters may be regarded as the measurement of critical control points, which must be compared and reconciled with predictions based on available scientific knowledge. For this purpose the formalisation of welfare assessment should be developed further.
49
Carroll and Groarke. "The Importance of the Social Sciences in Reducing Tail Biting Prevalence in Pigs." Animals 9, no. 9 (August 21, 2019): 591. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani9090591.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Tail biting in pigs has been recognised as a welfare problem for several decades, being referred to in scientific literature as far back as the 1940s. Today, animal welfare scientists have a solid understanding of the aetiology of tail biting. Despite this, there has been a major failure in applying research findings on commercial farms. Consequently, tail biting remains a significant problem in modern intensive pig farming. Of all farming industry stakeholders, farmers have the greatest influence over the welfare of their animals. Despite this, little animal welfare research has focused on changing farmer behaviour. Understanding the reasons why farmers act or fail to act to improve animal welfare is key if research findings are to be translated into practical on-farm change. Adopting the principles of behavioural science, this review discussed theory-based methods of identifying barriers to effective tail biting management. A guide was provided for designing behaviour change interventions for farmers using The Behaviour Change Wheel, a systematic framework that links the source of behaviour to suitable interventions. It was concluded that the social sciences are of great importance to ensuring that theory is put into practice.
50
Van der Harst, JE, and BM Spruijt. "Tools to measure and improve animal welfare: reward-related behaviour." Animal Welfare 16, S1 (May 2007): 67–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600031742.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractThere is an increasing requirement for tools to assess and improve animal welfare in an objective and scientifically based manner. In our research a concept of welfare is applied which states that welfare is determined by the balance between positive and negative experiences. This concept implies that an interaction exists between stress systems and reward systems in the brain and, as a consequence: (I) negative experiences induce an increased sensitivity (ie need) for positive experiences; and (II) negative experiences can be compensated for by positive experiences. On this basis, two uses of reward-related behaviour can be hypothesised: (I) reward sensitivity may be used as a tool to assess the state of an animal in terms of welfare because it can indicate the current state of the balance that is dependent on previous (stressful) experiences; and (II) regular presentation of rewards may serve as a tool to counteract stress by shifting the balance to the positive side and, thus, to improve welfare. In order to investigate this, we used the rat as a model. Reward sensitivity was determined by the spontaneous behavioural response shown during expectation of a reward (ie anticipatory behaviour). A third (III) use of reward-related behaviour derives from the fact that anticipatory behaviour is influenced by the (rewarding) properties of the forthcoming reward (or other event) and, thus, may serve as a tool to assess the animal's perception of this reward/event. This paper presents a descriptive overview of the evidence obtained thus far for the three proposed uses of reward-related behaviour. The biological background of our concept of welfare can be generalised to all (vertebrate) species, and anticipatory behaviour can be evoked in a wide range of other species. Therefore, this tool for measuring and improving the welfare of captive animals has great potential and will contribute to a good quality of life for captive animals.