Farmer’s Response to Societal Concerns About Farm Animal Welfare: The Case of Mulesing
- 522 Downloads
The study explored the motivations behind Australian wool producers’ intentions regarding mulesing; a surgical procedure that will be voluntarily phased out after 2010, following retailer boycotts led by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Telephone interviews were conducted with 22 West Australian wool producers and consultants to elicit their behavioral, normative and control beliefs about mulesing and alternative methods of breech strike prevention. Results indicate that approximately half the interviewees intend to continue mulesing, despite attitudes toward the act of mulesing being quite negative. This indicates that attitudes alone are unlikely to be good predictors of this goal directed behavior. Most respondents believed mulesing was more effective and involved less cost, time, and effort than the currently available alternatives to prevent breech strike. Further, they felt relatively little social pressure, as they believed few consumers were concerned about mulesing. However, they noted that if consumer sentiment changed they would likely change their practices. Thus, attitudes are likely to be only one of several factors influencing intentions to change farm practices to address societal concerns about animal welfare. Further, mulesing appears to be goal-directed behavior, suggesting that other factors depicted by the Model of Goal-directed Behavior (MGB; Perugini and Bagozzi In: Br J Soc Psychol, 40: 79–98, 2001) may be worth exploring in this context. Finally, these results provide insight into how policy makers may influence farmers to change practices in response to societal pressure for improving farm animal welfare.
KeywordsMulesing Theory of planned behavior Model of goal-directed behavior Animal welfare Intentions
The authors would like to sincerely thank the producers who took the time to participate in the interviews and also those who were instrumental in gaining contacts within the Western Australian wool industry. Without their help this study would not have been possible.
- ABC Rural. (2009). PETA thinks mulesing deadline still stands. http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/content/200907/s2639894.htm. Accessed September 2009.
- Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Australian Wool Innovation. (2008). AWI Board unanimously confirms support for industry decision to phase out mulesing. http://www.wool.com/Media-Releases.htm?item=MR-2008MAR-13.htm. Accessed August 2009.
- Australian Wool Innovation. (2009). Flystrike prevention in Australian sheep. http://www.wool.com/Grow_Animal-Health_Flystrike-prevention.htm. Accessed 19 August 2009.
- Bennett, R. M. (1996). People’s willingness to pay for farm animal welfare. Animal Welfare, 5, 3–11.Google Scholar
- Hemsworth, P. H., Barnett, J. L., Coleman, G. J., & Hansen, C. (1989). A study of the relationships between the attitudinal and behavioural profiles of stockpersons and the level of fear of humans and reproductive performance of commercial pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 23, 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hemsworth, P. H., Coleman, G. J., Barnett, J. L., & Borg, S. (2000). Relationships between human-animal interactions and productivity of commercial dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science, 78, 2821–2831.Google Scholar
- James, H. S., Jr. (2005). The ethical challenges in farming: A report on conversations with Missouri corn and soybean producers. Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health, 11(2), 239–248.Google Scholar
- James, H. S. Jr. & Hendrickson, M. K. (2007). Perceived economic pressures and farmer ethics. Department of Agricultural Economics Working Paper No. AEWP 2007-07.Google Scholar
- Mattison, E. H. A., & Norris, K. (2009). Intentions of UK farmers toward biofuel crop production: Implications for policy targets and land use change. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 41, 5589–5594.Google Scholar
- People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). (2008). Save the sheep. http://www.savethesheep.com. Accessed 1 August 2009.
- Phillips, C. J. C. (2009). A review of mulesing and other methods to control flystrike (cutaneous myiasis) in sheep. Animal Welfare, 18, 113–121.Google Scholar
- Robson, C. (1993). Real world research. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
- Rollin, B. (1995). Farm animal welfare: Social. bioethical and research issues. Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
- Rollin, B. E. (2004). Annual meeting keynote address: Animal agriculture and emerging social ethics for animals. Journal of Animal Science, 82, 955–964.Google Scholar
- Sneddon, J. & Rollin, B. (2010). Mulesing and animal ethics. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s10806-009-9216-z.
- Tutkun, A. & Lehmann, B. (2006). Explaining the conversion to particularly animal-friendly stabling system of farmers of the Obwalden Canton, Switzerland—Extension of the theory of planned behaviour within a structural equation modelling approach. Presented at the Agricultural Economics Society (AES) 80th Annual Conference, 30/31 March 2006, Paris.Google Scholar
- Vandenberghe, H. (2009). AWI mulesing move cops flack. http://www.countryman.com.au/article/2587.html. Accessed November 2009.
- Western Australian Farmers Federation. (2009). Modiano on message with 2010 mulesing deadline. http://www.wafarmers.org.au/press_release/release.asp?id=316. Accessed November 2009.