Closer to Nature? A Critical Discussion of the Marketing of “Ethical” Animal Products

Borkfelt, Sune; Kondrup, Sara Vincentzen; Röcklinsberg, Helena; Bjørkdahl, Kristian; Gjerris, Mickey

doi:10.1007/s10806-015-9577-4

Cited by 42 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In many developed and developing countries, familiarity and knowledge about farm animal production systems has decreased among the general public due in part to the growing distance between locations where agriculture practices take place and where the majority of consumers live [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. In addition to urbanization, some also argue that media and advertisements [ 4 ] that reinforce the historical romantic view of agriculture [ 1 ] also contribute to the growing lack of knowledge of modern agricultural production practices. This disconnect may explain why the lay public, when confronted with the realities of the intensive animal industries, frequently express negative attitudes towards them [ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brazilian Citizens’ Opinions and Attitudes about Farm Animal Production Systems

Yunes

Keyserlingk

Hötzel

2017

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryThe inclusion of societal input is needed for food animal production industries to retain their “social license to operate”. Little is known about the knowledge and attitudes of Brazilian citizens regarding food animal production systems. The aim of this study was to explore the beliefs and attitudes of Brazilians not associated with livestock production towards farm animal production systems. Overall, our participants expressed a preference for free-range, cage-free, and more “natural” production systems. They also expressed concerns with livestock production systems that limited the movement or expression of natural behaviours, particularly those that they associated with animal suffering or distress. They recognized farm animals as deserving respect and dignity beyond the provision of basic needs. Our findings indicate that Brazil’s current farm animal housing practices that are associated with restriction of movement may not align with societal expectations.AbstractThe inclusion of societal input is needed for food animal production industries to retain their “social license to operate”; failure to engage with the public on this topic risks the long-term sustainability of these industries. The primary aim of this study was to explore the beliefs and attitudes of Brazilians citizens not associated with livestock production towards farm animal production. A related secondary aim was to identify the specific beliefs and attitudes towards systems that are associated with restriction of movement. Each participant was shown pictures representing two of five possible major food animal industries (laying hens, beef cattle, pregnant sows, lactating sows, and poultry meat). Participants were presented a six pages survey that included demographic questions plus two sets of two pictures and a series of questions pertaining to the pictures. Each set of pictures represented a particular industry where one picture represented a housing type that is associated with behavioural restrictions and the other picture represented a system that allowed for a greater degree of movement. Participants were asked their perceptions on the prevalence of each system in Brazil, then their preference of one picture vs. the other, and the reasons justifying their preference. Immediately following, the participant repeated the same exercise with the second set of two pictures representing another industry followed by the same series of questions as described above. Quantitative data were analysed with mixed effects logistic regression, and qualitative responses were coded into themes. The proportion of participants that believed animals are reared in confinement varied by animal production type: 23% (beef cattle), 82% (poultry), 81% (laying hens), and 60% (swine). A large majority (79%) stated that farm animals are not well-treated in Brazil. Overall, participants preferred systems that were not associated with behavioural restriction. The preference for free-range or cage-free systems was justified based on the following reasons...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brazilian Citizens’ Opinions and Attitudes about Farm Animal Production Systems

Yunes

Keyserlingk

Hötzel

2017

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The claim here is thus by no means that all that needs to be done is just to shift to such systems. It is worth noting, however, that this points to a deep-rooted debate about what animal paradigm that should be applied when assessing animal welfare and how value is placed on respectively avoiding pain and allowing speciesspecific behaviour (Borkfelt et al 2015). The authors of this paper lean towards the latter paradigm, but do wish to stress that we do not see this as the optimal solution in any way.…”

Section: Case 2: Castration Of Pigsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Seeing the Animal: On the Ethical Implications of De-animalization in Intensive Animal Production Systems

Harfeld

Cornou

Kornum

et al. 2016

J Agric Environ Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses the notion that the invisibility of the animalness of the animal constitutes a fundamental obstacle to change within current production systems. It is discussed whether housing animals in environments that resemble natural habitats could lead to a re-animalization of the animals, a higher appreciation of their moral significance, and thereby higher standards of animal welfare. The basic claim is that experiencing the animals in their evolutionary and environmental context would make it harder to objectify animals as mere bioreactors and production systems. It is argued that the historic objectification of animals within intensive animal production can only be reversed if animals are given the chance to express themselves as they are and not as we see them through the tunnel visions of economy and quantifiable welfare assessment parameters.

show abstract

“…Undue profit by wrongly presenting the products as 'natural' should be avoided in order not to mislead consumers and risk losing valuable confidence among citizens (Borkfelt et al, 2015). The ongoing intensification of milk production does not appear to address this issue sufficiently.…”

Section: Assessment and Communication Of Animal Welfarementioning

confidence: 99%

Key issues in the welfare of dairy cattle

Hultgren¹

2017

Burleigh Dodds Series in Agricultural Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Closer to Nature? A Critical Discussion of the Marketing of “Ethical” Animal Products

Cited by 42 publications

References 20 publications

Brazilian Citizens’ Opinions and Attitudes about Farm Animal Production Systems

Brazilian Citizens’ Opinions and Attitudes about Farm Animal Production Systems

Seeing the Animal: On the Ethical Implications of De-animalization in Intensive Animal Production Systems

Key issues in the welfare of dairy cattle

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About