Understanding public preferences for different dairy farming systems using a mixed-methods approach

Abstract

Global production of milk has doubled over the past 50 yr, yet dairy farming in high-income countries faces scrutiny over practices perceived to affect animal welfare. One such practice is housing dairy cows yearround without access to pasture, which is the norm across North America and increasing within Europe, despite evidence of significant public support for grazing. Diverging opinion between the farming community and the public about what animal welfare means could be a key factor; however, lack of insight into the understanding and motivations underpinning public preferences for grazing could also hamper resolution. On the basis that more information could increase engagement between parties, 60 members of the public across the United Kingdom were interviewed to understand their perspectives of 3 dairy farming scenarios incorporating different amounts of grazing or housing. Their responses were analyzed using a mixed-methods approach combining reflexive thematic analysis with linguistic analysis. The integrated results indicated participants had a dual vision of the cow, seeing her as both domestic and wild. A scenario with housing in winter and grazing in summer therefore suited her, providing both protection and naturalness, and was most associated with analytic thinking. Interviewees also confessed ignorance about the cow's needs, either deferring to others' judgmentincluding the cow herself-or using familiarity and anthropomorphism to assess the scenarios. This again resulted in most optimism, confidence, and positivity for housing in winter and grazing in summer, and most negativity for housing cows year-round. Grazing was aspirational, but keeping cows outside in winter was confusing and concerning. These findings offer opportunities for the dairy industry to adapt communication or systems to better meet societal views; for example, incorporating access to pasture or increasing cow choice.

Natural Behaviour Is Not Enough: Farm Animal Welfare Needs Modern Answers to Tinbergen’s Four Questions

“…Being able to perform natural behaviour has also become, for some, what good welfare means, an expression of animal’s essence or telos and the way it was evolved to be in its natural environment [ 15 , 22 , 23 ]. This view is also reflected in surveys of public opinion, which consistently sees natural behaviour as an essential part of animal welfare [ 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ].…”

Quantification of play behaviour in calves using automated ultra-wideband location data and its association with age, weaning and health status

“…In livestock species it is now widely understood that good welfare is not only beneficial for animal health but also for optimal production 1 . Members of the public value good animal welfare 2 , 3 and animal welfare is a priority for veterinarians 4 but they have expressed a need for research to develop better animal welfare assessment 5 . Typically, assessment of animal welfare has focused on the absence of negative experiences and emotions; however, there is increasing focus on the presence of positive emotions and experiences 6 .…”