Fundamental Moral Attitudes to Animals and Their Role in Judgment: An Empirical Model to Describe Fundamental Moral Attitudes to Animals and Their Role in Judgment on the Culling of Healthy Animals During an Animal Disease Epidemic

Cohen, Nina; Brom, F.W.A.; Stassen, E.N.

doi:10.1007/s10806-009-9157-6

Cited by 26 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Per entity, i.e., animals, humans (animal keepers and consumers) and environment, categories with aspects relevant for attitudes toward pig husbandry are presented. Sources Barnett et al 2001;Beekman et al 2002;Boogaard et al 2011a, b;Cohen et al 2009Cohen et al , 2012Driessen 2012;Fraser 1999;Frederiksen et al 2010;Harper and Henson 2001;Huber-Eicher and Spring 2008;Kanis et al 2003;Krystallis et al 2009;Lagerkvist et al 2006;Marchant-Forde 2009;McGlone 2001;Mepham 2000;Meuwissen and van der Lans 2005;Michalopoulos et al 2008;Millman 2011;Ngapo et al 2003;Petit and van der Werf 2003;Te Velde et al 2002;Tuyttens et al 2010;Vanhonacker et al 2010Vanhonacker et al , 2008Verdoes and Swinkels 2003;Von Essen and McCurdy 1998;Webster 2001 Attitudes of different stakeholders toward pig husbandry: A study to determine conflicting… 397 necessary and 5: maximal AC necessary); levels 1 and 2 became level 1, levels 3 and 4 became level 2, levels 5 and 6 became level 3, levels 7 and 8 became level 4 and levels 9 and 10 became level 5). The scale decrease was done to maximize scale variation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitudes of different stakeholders toward pig husbandry: a study to determine conflicting and matching attitudes toward animals, humans and the environment

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pig sector is struggling with negative attitudes of citizens. This may be the result of conflicting attitudes toward pig husbandry between citizens and other stakeholders. To obtain knowledge about these attitudes, the objectives of this study were (1) to determine and compare attitudes of various stakeholders toward animals, humans and the environment in the context of pig husbandry and (2) to determine and compare the acceptability of publically discussed issues related to pig husbandry of various stakeholders. A questionnaire was distributed to citizens, conventional pig farmers, organic pig farmers, pig husbandry advisors and pig veterinarians. Respondents could indicate their attitude toward aspects related to animals, humans and the environment in the context of pig husbandry and they could indicate their opinion about the acceptability of issues of pig husbandry, e.g. piglet mortality and inside pig housing. Based on measured attitudes and the acceptability of issues, the studied stakeholders could be divided into three distinctive groups. The group of citizens and organic pig farmers showed negative attitudes toward all aspects of pig husbandry, the group of conventional pig farmers and pig husbandry advisors only showed negative attitudes toward aspects related to economics and the group of pig veterinarians showed negative attitudes to specific aspects of pig husbandry. This indicates that stakeholders have different interests and different perspectives with regard to pig husbandry. The pig sector should learn to understand citizens' perspectives and take these into account in their line of work, the implementation of animal welfare measures and in their communication.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitudes of different stakeholders toward pig husbandry: a study to determine conflicting and matching attitudes toward animals, humans and the environment

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Probably, this different valuation results in different attitudes toward sow husbandry. Moral values are being weighed against other personal values and interest with regard to a context (Cohen et al 2009), in this case sow husbandry, when forming attitudes. In the context of sow husbandry, pig farmers have different interests than citizens.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For attitudes, aspects per entity, i.e., animals, humans and the environment, are shown toward which attitudes are directed with regard to pig husbandry elements were considered relevant for sow husbandry based on literature (Mepham 2000;Michalopoulos et al 2008;Cohen et al 2009). Both Mepham (2000) and Cohen et al (2009) included the value of animals in their ethical model for animal production. Cohen et al (2009) also included human-animal hierarchy, doing good to animals and the rights of animals.…”

Section: Moral Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both Mepham (2000) and Cohen et al (2009) included the value of animals in their ethical model for animal production. Cohen et al (2009) also included human-animal hierarchy, doing good to animals and the rights of animals. The rights of animals indicated the right to life of animals when it concerned the killing of healthy animals in an epidemic outbreak.…”

Section: Moral Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sentience is important in animal evaluation as animal welfare is mainly about feelings and animal experiences (Cohen 2010a, b, Duncan 2006 Living being When an animal is seen as a living being it has value. Animal value is proven to be important in animal evaluation (Cohen et al 2009)…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Moral Values and Attitudes Toward Dutch Sow Husbandry

Bergstra

Gremmen

Stassen

2015

J Agric Environ Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attitudes toward sow husbandry differ between citizens and conventional pig farmers. Research showed that moral values could only predict the judgment of people in case of culling healthy animals in the course of a disease epidemic to a certain extent. Therefore, we hypothesized that attitudes of citizens and pig farmers cannot be predicted one-on-one by moral values. Furthermore, we were interested in getting insight in whether moral values can be useful in bridging the gap between attitudes toward sow husbandry of citizens and pig farmers. Based on a questionnaire, it was found that pig farmers and citizens, when considered as one group, shared the valuation of most moral values. However, when studying the four clusters of citizens with different attitudes toward sow husbandry, determined in a previous study, a variation in valuation of the moral values between the clusters of citizens and farmers came to the fore. This means that moral values are interpreted differently by groups of people when forming attitudes toward sow husbandry. The results of our study give an indication of which moral values are weighed differently between clusters of citizens and pig farmers. This information can be useful in future research on attitudes toward animal husbandry in order to understand why attitudes differ between groups of people. Besides, our results can Ethics (2015) 28:375-401 DOI 10.1007 be useful for the pig sector and citizens to learn to understand each other's attitudes. With this understanding it is possible to invest in a husbandry system that can build on societal support.

show abstract

Farmers Engaged in Deliberative Practices; An Ethnographic Exploration of the Mosaic of Concerns in Livestock Agriculture

Driessen

2010

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A plethora of ethical issues in livestock agriculture has emerged to public attention in recent decades, of which environmental and animal welfare concerns are but two, albeit prominent, themes. For livestock agriculture to be considered sustainable, somehow these interconnected themes need to be addressed. Ethical debate on these issues has been extensive, but mostly started from and focused on single issues. The views of farmers in these debates have been largely absent, or merely figured as interests, instead of being considered morally worthwhile themselves. In this paper the relevance for ethical debates of the ways farmers discuss and engage with moral concerns is explored. The variety of norms that figure in contemporary farming practices is sketched in its multifarious complexity, illustrated by ethnographic fieldwork, and systematized in terms of ''orders of worth.'' Reviewing the practical arguments and commitments of farmers within this framework reveals that farming practices are subject to mixed motives, in which an amalgam of types of concerns play a role. Recognition of the peculiarly entangled nature of the ethics of farming practices could counter the tendency in policy making, technological innovation, and ethical thought to compartmentalize our moral landscape. Understanding farming practice as the integration of a mosaic of concerns in the light of a variety of moral experiences would foster public appreciation of positions of farmers in debates on improving the sustainability and societal acceptability of livestock agriculture.

show abstract

Fundamental Moral Attitudes to Animals and Their Role in Judgment: An Empirical Model to Describe Fundamental Moral Attitudes to Animals and Their Role in Judgment on the Culling of Healthy Animals During an Animal Disease Epidemic

Cited by 26 publications

References 26 publications

Attitudes of different stakeholders toward pig husbandry: a study to determine conflicting and matching attitudes toward animals, humans and the environment

Attitudes of different stakeholders toward pig husbandry: a study to determine conflicting and matching attitudes toward animals, humans and the environment

Moral Values and Attitudes Toward Dutch Sow Husbandry

Farmers Engaged in Deliberative Practices; An Ethnographic Exploration of the Mosaic of Concerns in Livestock Agriculture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About