Awareness of ag-gag laws erodes trust in farmers and increases support for animal welfare regulations

Robbins, Jesse; Franks, Becca; Weary, Daniel M.; Keyserlingk, M.A.G. von

doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.02.008

Cited by 44 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One study experimentally assessed the views of participants that were told about these laws (Robbins et al 2016b), and found that when people were made aware of aggag restrictions they were less likely to trust famers and more likely to support the introduction of new animal-welfare laws (Fig. 1).…”

Section: Close the Barn Doorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Inviting citizens onto farms in farmers decreased after learning about laws that restrict the flow of information coming out of farm facilities (i.e. ag-gag), demonstrating that even the intention to restrict access to information can undermine trust (redrawn from Robbins et al 2016b). Small grey dots show the responses of individual participants and the large grey dot shows the treatment mean.…”

Section: Engage With the Publicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Early cow-calf separation provides another example of this divergence between public views and industry practice (Ventura et al 2013). There is evidence that the public is often unaware of common practices on farms (Ventura et al 2016a) and failure to address these gaps may affect public trust when the public does become aware (Robbins et al 2016b).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Willingness to trust is often rooted in shared values (Robbins et al 2016b), and when it comes to animal welfare, the values of farmers can differ from those of the general public. In contrast to the public, farmers tend to express less concern over animal welfare (Vanhonacker et al 2008), and to rate different dimensions of animal welfare differently from the lay public (Te Velde et al 2002;Lassen et al 2006;Vanhonacker et al 2008;Bergstra et al 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Public concerns about dairy-cow welfare: how should the industry respond?

Weary

Keyserlingk

2017

Anim. Prod. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Common practices on dairy farms have fallen out of step with public values, such that the dairy industry has now become a target for public criticism. In the present paper, we describe some of the forces that have led to the current situation, and various potential methods to rectify the situation. One approach is to shield industry practices from public scrutiny, for example, by using 'ag-gag' legislation to stem the flow of videos exposing contentious practices. Another is to educate members of the public so that they better understand the nature of these practices and the reasons that they are used on farms. The literature we reviewed indicated that neither of these approaches is likely to be successful. Instead, we suggest that the dairy industry needs to develop methods of meaningful two-way engagement with concerned citizens, including research using social-science methods to document the values of different stakeholders and examine approaches to resolving conflicts. We also reviewed how biological research can help resolve issues, for example, by developing rearing systems that address public concerns around freedom of movement and social contact without putting animals at an increased risk of disease. We end with a discussion of how policy efforts by the dairy industry can be used to ensure compliance with commonly accepted standards, and more ambitiously, develop a common vision of dairying that positions the industry as a leader in animal welfare.

show abstract

Section: Close the Barn Doorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Engage With the Publicmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Public concerns about dairy-cow welfare: how should the industry respond?

Weary

Keyserlingk

2017

Anim. Prod. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As such, social license has recently become something that many industries have prioritized, placing SLO strategies at the forefront of how they operate and interact with society (Hall et al 2015). Hence social license has recently become an important focus for many natural resource management fields, including mining (Lacey et al 2012), energy production (Hall et al 2015), forestry (Lester 2016), and agriculture (Robbins et al 2016). There is, however, less awareness of its role in wildlife management (Kendal andFord 2017, Darimont 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Animal welfare, social license, and wildlife use industries

Hampton¹,

Teh-White²

2018

J Wildl Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many wildlife use industries are facing criticism from animal welfare groups. In some recent cases, opposition to contentious practices (e.g., kangaroo [Macropus spp.] harvesting) has achieved widespread community support and industries have lost market access or regulatory approval. The concept of social license to operate has become an important focus for many natural resource management fields, but there is ostensibly less awareness of its role in animal industries. To regard this contemporary threat to traditional wildlife management as more than inexplicable requires some delving into social sciences. We use the example of the declining harp seal (Pagophilus groenlandicus) harvest in Canada to illustrate how poorly addressed animal welfare concerns can erode social license and decimate even ecologically sustainable wildlife use enterprises. We argue that other consumptive wildlife use industries, such as North American fur harvesting and kangaroo harvesting in Australia are at risk of loss of social license if animal welfare concerns are not addressed proactively and effectively. When faced with opposition from animal advocacy groups, many wildlife use industries have traditionally been reactive and have been reluctant to engage with stakeholders who possess seemingly irreconcilable differences. Instead, industries have often resorted to secrecy or deception, or have steadfastly defended their current approaches while attacking their critics. We suggest that a more effective approach would be for industries to proactively engage with stakeholders, establish a shared vision for how their industry should operate, and support this vision by transparently monitoring animal welfare outcomes. Proactive management of community expectations surrounding animal welfare is essential for the maintenance of social license for wildlife use enterprises. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

A Sufficient Level of Repugnance

Riley

2022

Animal Welfare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Awareness of ag-gag laws erodes trust in farmers and increases support for animal welfare regulations

Cited by 44 publications

References 30 publications

Public concerns about dairy-cow welfare: how should the industry respond?

Public concerns about dairy-cow welfare: how should the industry respond?

Animal welfare, social license, and wildlife use industries

A Sufficient Level of Repugnance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About