On-farm biosecurity in livestock production: farmer behaviour, cultural identities and practices of care

Abstract

Definitions of biosecurity typically include generalised statements about how biosecurity risks on farms should be managed and contained. However, in reality, on-farm biosecurity practices are uneven and transfer differently between social groups, geographical scales and agricultural commodity chains. This paper reviews social science studies that examine on-farm biosecurity for animal health. We first review behavioural and psychosocial models of individual farmer behaviour/decisions. Behavioural approaches are prominent in biosecurity policy but have limitations because of a focus on individual farmer behaviour and intentions. We then review geographical and rural sociological work that emphasises social and cultural structures, contexts and norms that guide disease behaviour. Socio-cultural approaches have the capacity to extend the more commonly applied behavioural approaches and contribute to the better formulation of biosecurity policy and on-farm practice. This includes strengthening our understanding of ‘good farming' identity, tacit knowledge, farmer influence networks, and reformulating biosecurity as localised practices of care. Recognising on-farm biosecurity as practices of biosecure farming care offers a new way of engaging, motivating and encouraging farmers to manage and contain diseases on farm. This is critical given government intentions to devolve biosecurity governance to the farming industry.

Determinants of farmers' biosecurity mindset: A social-ecological model using systems thinking

“…Gates et al (68) demonstrated that farmers' underreporting behaviours may be due to negative attitudes towards control measures or distrust in government authorities. Our findings align with existing literature which illustrates the importance of disease reporting by neighbouring farms for disease management and biosecurity (64,67). Additionally, we discovered the determinant of neighbours' attitudes towards farm hygiene and their acceptance of the existing farms which accords with the findings of Alabi et al (69) that neighbours' complaints against chicken farms as residential houses are located close to chicken houses.…”

“…Social structures associated with farming communities and responsibility for disease outbreaks is a mature area of knowledge in the literature ( 22 , 64 – 67 ). Gates et al ( 68 ) demonstrated that farmers' underreporting behaviours may be due to negative attitudes towards control measures or distrust in government authorities.…”

Factors influencing the performance of voluntary farmer disease reporting in passive surveillance systems: A scoping review

“…Another common theme across the literature was the importance of incorporating farmer experience and local practices of care when developing formal cases definitions for situations that authorities would like farmers to report, making inferences about whether the levels of farmer disease reporting are appropriate, and determining what measures should be implemented in response to potential outbreak situations. Not only is this likely to increase trust in animal health authorities, but it may also encourage farmers to take more personal responsibility for biosecurity which is becoming even more critical as governments move towards partnership approaches with farmers and industry bodies for biosecurity (Maye & Chan, 2020). One possible approach is to develop on-farm biosecurity programmes that help farmers identify ways in which they are already contributing to national biosecurity by, for example, observing their cattle during milking for signs of clinical disease and calling a veterinarian if they have concerns about animal health.…”

Sleeping with the enemy: Maintaining ASF-free farms in affected areas

“…The use of graphical displays for risk communication (e.g., Figure 1 ), as well as the frequent and continuous reviewing and reporting of risk threats, both part of the proposed approach, have been suggested to increase biosecurity compliance in livestock facilities ( 20 ). In addition, “recognizing on-farm biosecurity as practices of bio-secure farming care offers a new way of engaging, motivating and encouraging producers to manage and contain diseases on farm” ( 21 ). This is critical when governments increasingly devolve biosecurity governance such as ASF control options, to the farming industry, such as such as compartmentalization efforts in South Africa ( 22 ) and Canada ( 23 ), and the Secure Pork Supply initiative in the US ( 7 ).…”