Willingness of Dutch broiler and pig farmers to convert to production systems with improved welfare

Abstract

The present study investigated 15 broiler and 13 fattening pig farmers' willingness-to-convert to alternative production systems with higher animal welfare standards compared to conventional production systems in The Netherlands, and explored the main barriers to the adoption of these alternative systems. Alternative production systems were categorised, according to whether farmers were required to make reversible or irreversible changes to the current farm. Two out of the four pig systems in the study were considered as reversible, whereas the other two as irreversible. One out of the four broiler systems presented was considered as reversible, whereas the other three as irreversible. Results show that to convert to a system requiring irreversible changes 83 and 85% (figures for each of the two irreversible systems) of the surveyed fattening pig farmers required a 30% or higher increase in their family income, while to convert to a system requiring reversible changes 8 and 23% of the pig farmers required a similar level of increase. Also, for each of the three irreversible systems, 62, 64 and 87% of the surveyed broiler farmers required a 30% or higher increase in their family income to a system requiring irreversible changes, while to convert to a system requiring reversible changes, 20% of the broiler farmers required a similar level of increase. Thirty-eight and 62% of the fattening pig farmers and 40% of the broiler farmers were willing to convert to the specific systems that allowed reversible changes if they knew they could earn the same income as they did in their current system. This study highlights a number of reasons for farmers' reluctance to switch to alternative systems: perceived uncertainty about price premiums, lack of space on the farm, scarcity of land nearby the farm, risk of disease spread, the existing farm setup , prohibition of tail docking, allowing for castration, and views that proposed alternatives were 'farmer-unfriendly' or impractical.

Economic feasibility of animal welfare improvements in Dutch intensive livestock production: A comparison between broiler, laying hen, and fattening pig sectors

“…Studies Table 9 β coefficients for the production systems in each sector, estimated from the multivariate stepwise regression of stochastic variables values on CDRM-1 Broiler production systems on the economic potential of organic systems similarly found that the organic price premium is a decisive factor in farmers' income for these systems (Kerselaers et al, 2007). A survey of broiler and fattening pig farmers indicated that the majority of farmers would not convert to alternative systems if the extra costs due to higher AW standards were not compensated, i.e., in the absence of a price premium (Gocsik et al, 2015). When price premiums are absent, farmers will only convert to those systems which are economically feasible.…”

The translation of animal welfare research into practice: The case of mixing aggression between pigs

“…Reluctance to implement welfare improvement strategies is associated with the perception that they are ineffective, not financially feasible, or difficult to practically manage (Fredriksen and Nafstad, 2006). Motivation is limited when farmers distrust the economic advantages of implementing strategies or when the benefits are simply unknown (Bock and van Huik, 2007;Gocsik et al, 2015). Motivation is also reduced by a perceived lack of time, skilled labour (Morgan-Davies et al, 2006), or knowledge (de Lauwere et al, 2012).…”

Exploring the economic potential of reducing broiler lameness

“…Steps to reduce lameness may require farmers to change production conditions and management practices that otherwise exacerbate the problem. In this context, the cost and benefits of adopting new practices may be of importance for farmers (Gocsik et al, 2015). Besides the extrinsic characteristics of a new practice, psychological aspects such as farmers' perception of its relative advantage play a significant role in its adoption (Rogers, 1995;Adrian et al, 2005).…”