Danish Stable Schools for Experiential Common Learning in Groups of Organic Dairy Farmers

Farmers' and Experts' Knowledge Coping with Sheep Health, Control and Anthelmintic Resistance of Their Gastrointestinal Nematodes

Gastrointestinal nematodes are common in grazing sheep, but the intensity of the infection is not easily appreciated by farmers. For decades, they have relied on anthelmintic treatments to control these gastrointestinal nematodes. This has led to anthelmintic resistance and poor control of infection in most regions of the world. Using face-to-face semidirective interviews with farmers, we recorded their views on gastrointestinal nematode infection and its control. Ten organic and nine conventional meat sheep farmers from central France and 20 milk sheep farmers from the Basque region were interviewed and the data were analysed using a health model based on the importance of the disease and the barriers to implementing control. It was found that gastrointestinal nematodes were not the main health concern, and therefore farmers were not willing to invest too much time and money in their control. The conventional farmers relied on their veterinarians (the experts) to organise and select the anthelmintics, although they complained about the limited investment of their veterinarians in this matter. Organic farmers complained about their lack of knowledge about complementary and alternative medicines. Farmers rarely used faecal egg counts to build control of gastrointestinal nematodes and were unaware of the intensity of their infection. Knowledge of anthelmintic resistance was general (it exists) but farmers did not know if it existed on their farm. Resistance was often considered to have come from elsewhere, so the farmer did not feel at fault and did not take measures to prevent resistance. There is a need for all stakeholders to use faecal egg counts to assess the intensity of infection as well as the level of anthelmintic resistance to establish individual farm control programmes rather than standard blanket treatments.

Informational resources used by farmers with ruminants and monogastrics for animal health monitoring: importance of sensory indicators

Managers of health in livestock systems are asked to shift from a curative approach to a more preventive approach. This change requires sociological and technical reconfiguration and raises the issue of how changes are implemented by farmers and their technical support ecosystem (advisors, trainers, veterinarians). Here, we report work conducted in western France by an Agricultural European Innovation Partnership Operational Group bringing together animal scientists and sociologists to advance knowledge on animal health in a range of livestock sectors, i.e. dairy cattle, beef cattle, small ruminants (sheep, goats), poultry and pigs. In this study, our aim was to answer this question: what are the Informational Resources (I.R.) that farmers use to promote animal health of their herds? First, we used a survey to characterize 129 I.R. used by advisors, then, we used statistical analysis to classify these I.R. into six clusters. Second, we organized eight focus-group sessions that involved a total of 50 farmers from across all livestock sectors to find out how they mobilize the I.R. and what they see as important for animal health monitoring practice. Finally, we performed individual interviews with 42 farmers to expand the data captured in the collective focus groups. Results showed that farmers and advisors have a broad and diverse range of I.R. to help monitor animal health. We identified six clusters of I.R.: regulatory tools, periodic reports, tools for farmer-led monitoring, tools and indicators for national reference datasets, slaughterhouse and laboratory indicators, and training delivered to farmers. During focus group, livestock farmers identified some of their I.R. within these clusters but they also cited other daily routines that help them monitor animal health that were not cited by advisors. We found that farmers mainly use sensory indicators (typically smell, sight, touch) in their daily practice whereas advisors mainly use relatively sophisticated retrospective monitoring tools. Farmers also cited the importance of indicators that can rapidly objectify any change in animal condition, behavior, or health. This work finds a split in the distribution of animal health management roles, with farmers implementing daily checks whereas advisors run periodic health surveillance, thus revealing differentiated roles and needs between farmers and their advisors.

Three years of situated social learning and development of diverse cow-calf contact systems in Danish organic dairy farms

This study had 2 aims: first, to describe the intent of a learning process among farmers about cow-calf contact (CCC) systems using a so-called Stable School approach, where farmers advise farmers. The second aim was to identify the main themes that arose from the conversations held throughout the 21 meetings that focused on the topic of CCC. The meetings were hosted by 10 host farmers. In total, 32 farmers, farm managers, employees, and calf caregivers who collectively represented 16 farms participated. Characteristics of participating farms varied widely, including herd sizes, which ranged from 7 to 600 cows. At each of the 21 meetings, a written summary was recorded and uploaded to a common data storage site. Using an inductive approach, words, phrases, topics, and suggestions were coded into themes relevant to CCC systems and processes of learning and change. The longitudinal nature of this study allowed for the capturing of how farmers changed their views on how to care for the animals and the concept of keeping cows and calves together. A central theme was how they identified particular challenges associated with a CCC system, such as space requirements or pasture access, and then collectively identified potential solutions for implementing cow-calf contact on their farms, increasingly using experience from their own farms. In addition to raising questions regarding the practical aspects of implementing a CCC system, many participants also raised ethical questions, and many acknowledged their pleasure and joy in seeing the system work and the animals thriving (e.g., when calves were playing or seemed to learn very quickly from the cows). Steps that led to an increased understanding among farmers on this topic included developing a shared language, for instance, referring to the "sharing of milk with the calf" rather than the "loss of milk." Despite the diversity of farms represented by the participants, there was an overall acceptance that they were colleagues and thus were highly supportive of each other. Many participants viewed foster cow systems as a more feasible option for providing CCC than dam-rearing systems, but some also viewed the foster cow system as a stepping stone to their long-term goal of implementing a dam-rearing system. This study provided evidence that socially situated learning and communities of practice can facilitate learning by farmers interested in developing, implementing, and improving CCC systems in different dairy farming contexts.

"It's a habit. They've been doing it for decades and they feel good and safe.": A qualitative study of barriers and opportunities to changing antimicrobial use in the Indonesian poultry sector

Interventions to change antimicrobial use (AMU) practices can help mitigate the risk of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) development. However, changing AMU practices can be challenging due to the complex nature of the factors influencing AMU-related behaviours. This study used a qualitative approach to explore the factors that influenced decision-making on AMU by farmers and other actors in the Indonesian poultry sector. Thirty-five semi-structured interviews were conducted with farmers, technical services staff from the private sector, and representatives of associations, universities, and international organisations in Central Java, West Java, and East Java. Thematic analysis identified three patterns of influence on AMU: how farmers used information to make AMU-related decisions, the importance of farmers' social and advisory networks, and the motivations driving changes in AMU behaviours. Key barriers identified included a lack of shared understanding around when to use antibiotics, financial pressures in the poultry sector, and a lack of engagement with government veterinary services. Potential opportunities identified included high farmer awareness of AMU, identification of private sector actors and peer networks as the stakeholders with established relationships of trust with farmers, and the importance of farmers' conceptions of good farming practices, which could be engaged with to improve AMU practices.

Invited review: Qualitative research in dairy science-A narrative review

The use of qualitative research in dairy science has increased considerably in recent years, providing the opportunity to inform research and practice. This review aims to enhance the accessibility of qualitative research among a range of audiences and specifically: (1) provide an overview of what qualitative research is and the value it can bring to scientific inquiries in the dairy context, (2) illustrate the emergence of qualitative dairy science research in the past 15 to 20 years, (3) outline the role of the researcher and key philosophical assumptions underlying qualitative research, (4) describe qualitative research approaches and methods used in dairy science research, and (5) highlight key aspects of qualitative inquiry used to ensure research trustworthiness. Qualitative approaches in dairy science enable researchers to understand myriad topics including stakeholder relationships, decision-making, and behaviors regarding dairy cattle management, animal welfare, and disease prevention and control measures. Approaches that were used often for qualitative data collection were individual interviews and focus groups, and variations of thematic analysis were common analytical frameworks. To assess public values, attitudes, and perceptions, mixed methods questionnaires that combined quantitative data with qualitative data from open-ended questions were used regularly. Although still used infrequently, action research and participatory approaches have the potential to bridge the research-implementation gap by facilitating group-based learning and on-farm changes. Some publications described the philosophical assumptions inherent to qualitative research, and many authors included reflexivity and positionality statements. Although a comprehensive description of strategies to meet trustworthiness criteria for qualitative research was uncommon, many publications mentioned certain aspects of trustworthiness, such as member checking, researcher triangulation, and the recording of reflexive notes. Qualitative research has been used to deepen our understanding of phenomena relevant to the dairy sector and has opened the door for a broad array of new opportunities. In addition to having merit on its own, qualitative research can guide, inform, and expand on quantitative research, and an understanding of the core pillars of qualitative research can foster interdisciplinary collaborations.

“If you were a cow, what would you want?” Findings from participatory workshops with dairy farmers

When looking to improve animal welfare, it is essential to understand the viewpoints of stakeholders in the industry. Previous research has engaged stakeholders such as farmers, veterinarians, and the public to better understand future dairy industry directions. However, the use of perspective-taking as a tool to overcome farmer's focus on current barriers to the industry has not been explored. Therefore, the aims of this study were to have farmers take the perspective of the cow, to elicit: (1) farm elements that are essential to create a cow-centric dairy system, and (2) how this system can be achieved in the next 50 years. To do this, we employed participatory methods (photo elicitation, timelining) to generate discussion with 12 New Zealand dairy farmers. Pasture access is frequently cited as an integral component for promoting good welfare in dairy cows, thus, this cohort of farmers was considered a good case study as they all had experience managing cows in grazing systems. Participants were asked to create a cow-centric farm design, and a pathway to implementation. Following thematic analysis of the multiple data sources, the results are presented under the following three themes: (1) cow-centric farm designs (environmental considerations, cow handling and care), (2) timeline to achieve and sequence of implementation ("low hanging fruit" and long-term investments), and (3) assumptions and resources needed (including financial considerations, technology, farmer buy-in, regulations and enforcement and other stakeholder involvement). By better understanding how current industry practice aligns, and also differs, from what the cow would want, we can work towards future management systems that incorporate the requirements of all stakeholders, including the cow.

Dairy herd health management activities in relation to training of veterinarians in motivational interviewing

Communication has been identified as one constraint for cattle veterinarians to act as proactive health consultants. Motivational Interviewing (MI), an evidence-based client-centered communication methodology, may therefore be a useful tool in veterinary herd health management (VHHM). The aim of this exploratory study was to investigate associations between training in MI and different measures of performance in VHHM. MI skills of 36 Swedish cattle veterinarians randomly assigned to two groups - MI veterinarians (n = 18) who had received six-months training in MI and control veterinarians (n = 18) who were not trained - were assessed using the MI Treatment Integrity coding system. Skills were categorized as untrained, trained_poor, trained_near moderate and trained_moderate. Veterinarians each visited two to six cattle farms for VHHM consultations and revisited the same farms three to six months later to document implementation of recommendations. A gamma model and logistic or ordered logistic regression models were used to evaluate associations between MI training and performance measured as: a) proportion of consultations resulting in written herd health plans, b) proportion of recommended measures fully or partially implemented, c) Likert scores of different estimates of client satisfaction and d) total time during 6 months allocated to VHHM visits on cattle farms. We found no evidence of any significant effects of MI training on the eight performance variables analyzed. However, a pattern of numerically higher values (better performance) in trained veterinarians with poor or moderate MI skills than in untrained veterinarians was observed in most variables. Clients were highly satisfied with veterinarians' attitude, competence and time efficiency. Farms implemented a median of 66.7% (interquartile range: 50-100) of the measures partially or fully. Veterinarians allocated little time to VHHM visits (median: 2.2; interquartile range: 0.65-4.1 h per week of full-time work within cattle). Veterinarians with moderate skills spent 2.14 times more time on VHHM visits than untrained veterinarians, but the confidence interval was wide (0.88-5.21). The pattern of numerically higher values in trained veterinarians supported findings from other studies in the same project indicating a positive effect of MI training on VHHM. Our observations suggest a considerable potential to increase veterinarians' engagement in VHHM.

Youngstock Management as “The Key for Everything”? Perceived Value of Calves and the Role of Calf Performance Monitoring and Advice on Dairy Farms

Replacement heifers are key to the future milking herd and farm economic efficiency but are not always prioritised on dairy farms. Dairy enterprises are comprised of components which compete for limited resources; scarce information about calf performance and the associated losses and (potential) gains on farms can mean calves are prioritised less in management and investment decisions. The research reported in this paper explored the personal and contextual factors that influence calf management decisions on dairy farms. Forty in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with dairy farmers (26 interviews) and farm advisors (14 interviews) who were recruited using purposive and “snowball” sampling. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed. Six major themes were constructed from the interview data relating to: the perceived importance of youngstock management, the role and influence of calf rearers, calf performance monitoring, farmer engagement with information and advice, the quality of communication and advice, and veterinary involvement in calf rearing. Results indicated that although the wider dairy industry has promoted the importance of youngstock, calves often have not been fully integrated into the whole dairy farm system, nor culturally accepted as an integral part of the productive herd. Calves tended to be marginalised on farms, largely due to limited resources, lack of data monitoring, and their unrecognised potential, as well as social norms and scarcity of support structures impacting upon farm investment and management decisions. Many calf rearers were disappointed by the repetition and impractical nature of information in print media. Most farmers did not routinely consult their veterinarian about their calves, rather following a reactive treatment model even when a preventive herd health strategy was applied to the adult herd. Advisory structures often require a driven individual with calf-centric interest to prevent calves from being overlooked. Furthermore, advisory efforts often failed to motivate farmers to act on advice. These findings indicate the need for greater focus on how to achieve rearing targets by provision of technical and support structures to foster action toward improved calf wellbeing, and for the status of calves to be raised in line with their vital importance for the future dairy herd.

A Q study: exploring the purpose of transdisciplinary dairy advisory services in Denmark

Background

Structural changes in dairy farming increase farm complexity, thereby inducing a need to combine herd health management, technological solutions, legislation, and human relations among farmers, farm workers, and advisors. This complex situation may require ‘transdisciplinary advisory service’, i.e., a highly integrated network of both non-academic and different academic disciplines. While working in these networks, advisors need to offer specialized knowledge from their own field, interact in a dynamic relationship between different types of professions and facilitate complex processes. The objectives of this study were: (1) to identify and describe different advisor and farmer styles based on their reasons to engage in transdisciplinary advisory services at farm-level, (2) to identify any possible conflicting perspectives between advisors and farmers’ demand, and (3) to discuss these styles and conflicts in the context and future of advisory services for dairy herd health and production management.

Results

Using Q methodology, we explored the purpose of transdisciplinary advisory service on dairy farms. The results were derived from correlations between 40 statements for 25 advisors and 33 statements for nine farmers. We identified three similar styles among advisors and farmers, characterized as: (1) the teamwork and knowledge-focused style, (2) the production and economy-focused style, and (3) the economy and strategy-focused style. These styles included reflections on financial aspects, production, knowledge-exchange and the teamwork process itself. In addition, different emphasis on animal welfare, farm strategy and follow-up procedures between the styles became evident.

Conclusions

This Q-study suggests three comparable styles between advisors and farmers. The main differences between the styles related to the teamwork process and purpose, follow-up process, financial aspects, farm strategy, and operational production objectives. Therefore, styles and expectations should be explored and discussed to create a mutual understanding within a farmer-advisor(s)-team, and to clarify the farmer’s needs and demands, and how the advisors can best meet these expectations. This study illustrates the importance of exploring different advisor and farmer styles to get a mutual understanding of the purpose of the transdisciplinary collaboration.

Dairy farmers' perspectives on providing cow-calf contact in the pasture-based systems of New Zealand

Separation of the cow and calf shortly after birth is a common practice on commercial dairy farms around the world, but there are emerging concerns about this practice among citizens and other stakeholders. Continuous improvement of on-farm management practices in collaboration with dairy sector stakeholders increases the likelihood that farming systems evolve in a way that is consistent with societal expectations. Few commercial dairy farms provide extended cow-calf contact, and there is little understanding of how dairy farmers view this practice. This study examined the views of New Zealand dairy farmers toward providing cow-calf contact, particularly the barriers to adopting such a system in a seasonal-calving pasture-based dairy system. Standard farm practice in New Zealand is to remove the calf from the cow around 24 h (but could be up to 48 h) after birth. These conventional farmers (n = 63) were randomly selected from the database of all dairy farmers in New Zealand and telephone-interviewed using a semistructured interview format. Their responses to questions about providing cow-calf contact (defined as contact beyond the standard practice of 48 h) were analyzed using thematic analysis. Three major themes of concern were identified by these farmers about providing cow-calf contact as follows: (1) poor animal welfare, especially the risk of mastitis in the dam, inadequate colostrum for the calf, increased stress from delayed separation, and lack of shelter for calves while outdoors with the cow; (2) increased labor and stress on staff; and (3) system-level changes required, including infrastructure and herd management. Many of these concerns stemmed from challenges related to the nature of large-scale seasonal-calving pasture-based dairy systems, where a large number of calves are born in a short period of time and may be exposed to inclement weather in late winter in some areas. Several small-scale farmers (n = 4) providing cow-calf contact for longer than standard practice of 48 h were also interviewed; all permitted contact for at least 4 wk. These farmers also felt that animal welfare and health were important, and that this was promoted in their cow-calf contact systems. Concerns about colostrum and mastitis, for example, were not raised by these farmers, but they did agree that additional infrastructure and shelter were important considerations for cow-calf contact systems. Some conventional farmers expressed cognitive dissonance in that they theoretically preferred cow-calf contact but could not see it being realistic or practical to implement. Farmers currently providing longer cow-calf contact may be a useful resource for better understanding of how practical and economical cow-calf contact systems could be adopted on commercial pastoral dairy farms.

The antimicrobial landscape as outlined by Danish dairy farmers

Limiting antimicrobial use (AMU) in dairy farming is an important step toward reducing antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Therefore, it is relevant to understand dairy farmers' choices and the potential for change in relation to AMU, even in countries with low usage. Furthermore, there is an increasing recognition of the need to focus on both the individual farmer's behavior as well as the context surrounding and influencing the farmer's decisions in relation to AMU if the goal is further reduction. To date, no studies have taken into account both the individual farmer and their context in both conventional and organic dairy farms under Danish conditions. For this study, 15 Danish dairy farmers were interviewed using qualitative semi-structured research interviews, and the notion of landscape was used to describe the context of their AMU. We found that AMR was considered a distant element of the farmers' antimicrobial landscape. Daily challenges such as acutely diseased animals and poor housing conditions seemed more urgent and overruled the threat of AMR. We also found that interviewed farmers had differing opinions on farm management, partly shaped by changes in legislation and ways of farming over time. At one end of the scale, some organic farmers had rethought the current way of farming; keeping robust animals in a natural setting was expected to prevent disease. They were positive about legislation, and the numerous restrictions on AMU over time were thought to contribute to ensuring quality for consumers. At the other end of the scale, some conventional farmers perceived disease as something that should be controlled through treatment, and the currently eased legislation and intensification of farming have legitimatized AMU for this purpose, leading to an expectation among these farmers of certain rights to handle medicines themselves. These contrasting views might lead to inspiration and competition in terms of reducing AMU, as the farmers appeared to value the opinions of other farmers, and they were found to continuously assess each other. Through such ongoing assessment, pioneers of AMU reduction-whether organic or conventional-might motivate their colleagues to change their AMU. Future research should address the potential of experience- and attitude-sharing among farmers as motivation to reduce AMU.

Alternative Medicines on the Farm: A Study of Dairy Farmers' Experiences in France

Despite being of debatable efficacy, alternative medicines are in regular use on both organic and conventional dairy farms as part of a strategy for limiting the on-farm use of antibiotics. The study presented here examined French dairy farmers' understanding of and experiences with these medicines, focusing on homeopathy, aromatherapy and phytotherapy. Adopting an interdisciplinary approach combining animal science and sociology, we considered how dairy farmers' use of alternative medicines fits into a holistic approach to herd health management, on the one hand, and into farmers' networks of professional relationships, on the other. Our findings show that farmers are interested in alternative medicines for reasons that are at once technical, ethical, and economic. In the absence of local veterinarians specializing in homeopathy and aromatherapy, farmers enroll in short-term training courses to learn how to use these medicines. Alternative medicines are not a substitute for conventional medicine for these farmers; rather, they constitute one part of a holistic approach to herd health that combines preventive measures with a variety of curative treatments, and which is grounded in close attention to the animals' state of health. Farmers make use of guidelines for observing livestock that are central to the veterinary alternative medicine approach. Interestingly, women farmers appear to play an important role in introducing these practices into the management of the farm operation. Finally, farmers' interest in alternative medicines is indicative of their broader expectations for advice and support in moving toward the integrated management of livestock health, a key element of the agroecological transition. Recognizing these expectations offers useful insights for rethinking the role of veterinarians in dairy farming.

Veterinary Herd Health Consultancy and Antimicrobial Use in Dairy Herds

The globally increasing level of antimicrobial resistance affects both human and animal health, why it is necessary to identify ways to change our current use of antimicrobials. The veterinary herd health collaboration between veterinarians and dairy farmers provides a useful setting for changing antimicrobial use in livestock. However, farmers and veterinarians work in a complex agricultural setting influenced by socio-economic factors, which complicates their choices regarding antimicrobial usage. It is therefore necessary to be aware of the range of potential influencing factors and to integrate this knowledge in the relevant local settings. This manuscript presents a literature review of relevant factors relating to antimicrobial use within the veterinary herd health consultancy setting, including knowledge gaps of relevance for changing the use of antimicrobials. An enriched version of the framework of the Theory of Planned Behaviour was used to organise the literature review. We identified diverging attitudes on correct treatment practices and perceptions of antimicrobial resistance among veterinarians and farmers, influenced by individual risk perception as well as social norms. Furthermore, disagreements in terms of goal setting and in the frequency of herd visits in relation to herd health consultancy can negatively influence the collaboration and the intention to change antimicrobial use. Farmers and veterinarians emphasise the importance of legislation and the role of the dairy industry in changing antimicrobial use, but the relevance of specific factors depends on the country-specific context. Overall, farmers and veterinarians must communicate better to understand each other's perspectives and establish common goals within the collaboration if they are to work efficiently to reduce antimicrobial use. Farmers and veterinarians both requested changes in individual behaviour; however, they also called for national and structural solutions in terms of balanced legislation and the availability of better diagnostics to facilitate a change in antimicrobial use practices. These various paths to achieving the desired changes in antimicrobial use illustrate the need to bridge methodological research approaches of veterinary science and social sciences for a better understanding of our potential to change antimicrobial use within the dairy farm animal sector.

Welfare Issues on Israeli Dairy Farms: Attitudes and Awareness of Farm Workers and Veterinary Practitioners

Simple Summary

Animal welfare science embraces all factors that might affect the physical and emotional state of the animal, its ability to cope, and its overall quality of life. In recent years, awareness of farm animal welfare has increased among veterinary practitioners—a major professional figure influencing a farm’s routine, farm workers, consumers, and the general public. In particular, the farm worker’s knowledge of animal welfare is an essential component of the rearing system. The aim of this study was to examine attitudes toward and awareness of select animal welfare issues among farm workers and practitioners. A survey was performed based on anonymous questionnaires filled out by dairy farm workers and veterinary practitioners. The results demonstrated that farm workers’ enjoyment of their work is of great importance, as is their cows’ welfare. The survey showed the farm workers’ awareness of their influence on the cow during milking, the effects of stress on milk production, and the possible effect of human behavior on heifers and cows. The main areas where animal welfare might be improved were farmers’ awareness of learning, memory, and pain masking in cattle, and knowledge transfer from veterinary practitioners to the farm workers. The survey answers further emphasized the crucial importance of communication and understanding between farm workers and their practitioners.

Abstract

Attitudes toward practical dairy cow welfare issues were evaluated based on a questionnaire answered by 500 dairy farm workers and 27 veterinary practitioners. Primarily, the effect of demographic characteristics on attitudes toward cattle welfare was tested. Professionally, five themes were identified: effect of welfare awareness on productivity, knowledge of cattle’s senses and social structure, effects of man–animal interactions on milk yield, pain perception and prevention, and knowledge transfer from veterinary practitioners to farm workers. Farms with a higher welfare awareness score also had higher annual milk yield, with an annual mean difference of 1000 L of milk per cow between farms with higher and lower awareness scores. Veterinary practitioners showed high awareness of cows’ social structure, senses, and pain perception. Farm workers were aware of the influence of man–animal interactions during milking and stress effects on milk yield, and the possible effect of man’s behavior on heifers and cows. Practitioners and farm workers had different views regarding pain perception, mostly involving mutilation procedures. All veterinary practitioners advocated the use of pain alleviation in painful procedures, but only some of them instructed the farm workers to administer it. The survey results emphasize the variation in welfare knowledge and practical applications across farms, and the interest of both the animals and their managers to improve applied knowledge of best practice.

Human Behaviour Change Interventions in Animal Care and Interactive Settings: A Review and Framework for Design and Evaluation

Simple Summary

In many cases, to improve animal welfare, we must change the behaviour of the people who manage them, care for them, and interact with them. This can be achieved through behaviour change interventions. In this review, we aimed to explore the current state of the behaviour change literature in animal care and interactive settings. We identified significant deficiencies in the design, evaluation, and reporting of these interventions. It was often unclear what behaviours were targeted, how the intervention was designed to work, what was in it, and how it was delivered. Without this information, interventions cannot be rigorously evaluated, built upon by others, or implemented in other settings. Transparent reporting and a structured approach to the design and evaluation of interventions is now required to help the field move forward in a more consistent and robust way. We present such a framework, the “Ten-Task” guide, based on the intervention mapping framework, and demonstrate how its adoption would help progress this field substantially.

Abstract

Behaviour change interventions may be one of the most promising avenues to improve animal welfare. Yet there has been limited systematic research involving them in animal-related settings. We searched three major databases for studies involving an intervention to change interactive or care-related behaviours in any animal-related setting. Forty-seven papers were included in the review and each paper was coded for specific design and evaluation elements. We found a series of limitations in the quality and consistency of intervention design, evaluation, and reporting. Hence, we present a framework, the “Ten-Task” guide, based on the intervention mapping framework, to guide future work in this field. Adopting this structured approach will improve the quality and efficacy of behaviour change interventions for animal welfare and allow for the field to progress in a harmonious way.

A participatory, farmer-led approach to changing practices around antimicrobial use on UK farms

Farmer-led, participatory approaches are being increasingly employed in agricultural research, with promising results. This study aimed to understand how a participatory approach based on the Danish stable schools could help to achieve practical, farmer-led changes that reduced reliance on antimicrobials in the UK. Five facilitated farmer action groups comprising 30 dairy farms across South West England met on farm at regular intervals between 2016 and 2018, and worked collaboratively within their groups to discuss how to reduce antimicrobial use. Qualitative data from group discussions and individual semi-structured interviews were collected and analyzed using thematic analysis to explore how the approach helped farmers address and deal with changes to their on-farm practices. Facilitator-guided reviews of antimicrobial use and benchmarking were carried out on each farm to assess any change in usage and help farmers review their practices. The pattern of antimicrobial use changed over the 2 yr of the study, with 21 participating farms reducing their use of highest-priority critically important antibiotics (6 farms were not using any of these critical medicines from the outset). Thirty practical action plans were co-developed by the groups with an average implementation rate of 54.3% within a year. All assessed farms implemented 1 recommendation, and many were still ongoing at the end of the study. Farmers particularly valued the peer-to-peer learning during farm walks. Farmers reported how facilitated discussions and action planning as a peer group had empowered them to change practices. Participants identified knowledge gaps during the project, particularly on highest-priority critically important antibiotics, where they were not getting information from their veterinarians. The study demonstrated that facilitation has a valuable role to play in participatory approaches beyond moderating discussion; facilitators encouraged knowledge mobilization within the groups and were participants in the research as well. Facilitated, farmer-led, participatory approaches that mobilize different forms of knowledge and encourage peer learning are a promising way of helping farmers to adapt and develop responsible practices.

Transition Pathways Toward the Prudent Use of Antimicrobials: The Case of Free-Range Broiler Farmers in France

Reducing antimicrobial use (AMU) on farms is key for controlling the rise of resistant bacteria that have the potential capacity to infect humans via direct animal contact or via the food chain or the environment. To reduce AMU, antimicrobials must be used in a prudent and rational manner. Extensive efforts have been made recently to identify the cognitive and behavioral barriers to the appropriate use of antimicrobials by various livestock sector stakeholders. However, most studies carried out thus far have only partly captured the dynamic and systemic dimension of the processes involved in changes of practices related to AMU on farms. To shed light on the transition pathways implemented to reduce AMU, a qualitative study was conducted in France based on 28 semi-structured interviews with farmers, technicians and veterinarians from the free-range broiler production sector. Based on the thematic analysis of verbatims, we identified technical improvements which are key contributors to reduced AMU. We also highlighted some gaps in knowledge regarding AMU and antimicrobial resistance. We found that, rather than individual motivations alone, the extent to which farmers are embedded in collective organizations is decisive for changes in practices, and downstream operators (distributors and slaughterers) play a key role in the beginning of AMU transition pathways. As a result, we show that change in AMU requires a global rethinking of the overall socio-technical system rather than modifications of a single element in a farming system. Our results also highlight that transition pathways toward reduced AMU cannot just rely on trigger events, but also involves medium or long-term processes, with actors' experiences and practices being modified on an incremental basis over time. Our study sheds light on the need for multi and trans-disciplinary research involving the social sciences to analyze interactions between stakeholders and the collective actions implemented to tackle the challenge of AMU reduction.

Knowledge, attitude and practices of Swiss dairy farmers towards intramammary antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance: A latent class analysis

Understanding farmers' mindsets is important to improve antimicrobial stewardship in the dairy industry. This cross-sectional study aimed to determine farmers' knowledge, attitude, and practices with respect to lactational intramammary antimicrobial use (AMU) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Swiss dairy herds. Based on their approach towards subclinical mastitis (SCM) and non-severe cases of clinical mastitis (CM), subgroups of farmers were identified and compared regarding their knowledge, attitude and practices towards AMU and AMR. After conducting qualitative interviews to develop a questionnaire, an online survey was sent to 1296 randomly selected Swiss dairy farmers. Information was gathered on demographic data and farmers' knowledge, attitude, and practices towards AMU and AMR. A latent class analysis was performed to identify subgroups of farmers based on management of SCM and non-severe CM cases. Based on the results of 542 completed questionnaires, poor knowledge with respect to AMU and AMR was identified, as well as discrepancies between farmers' perceptions and their actual practices. Farmers approached cows with SCM and non-severe CM similarly, indicating they perceived both mastitis states as the same disease. Intramammary antimicrobial products containing cefquinome, which is a highest priority critically important antimicrobial, were among the 3 most commonly applied intramammary antimicrobials. Five latent classes of farmers were identified based on their management towards SCM and non-severe CM. One group of farmers (18.5% of respondents) indicated that they did not treat those mastitis cases, one group only treated SCM cases (13.8% of respondents), one group only treated non-severe CM cases (28.6% of respondents) and the largest group treated both mastitis states (39.1% of respondents). The latter group was subdivided into a latent class of farmers following guidelines for AMU/AMR (25.5% of respondents) and a group of farmers that were not strictly following these guidelines (13.7% of respondents). Regional differences between farmers, according to altitude and language region, explained some of the variation in latent class membership. Latent class membership was associated with farmers' attitude to use antimicrobials as little as possible and with using antimicrobials only after performing bacteriological and susceptibility testing. This study gave detailed insight into Swiss farmers' knowledge, attitude, and practices regarding AMU and AMR and provides opportunities to improve antimicrobial stewardship in Swiss dairy herds. The identified groups of farmers, based on their management practices regarding SCM and non-severe CM, may help to design tailored intervention strategies for improving prudent AMU in the heterogeneous population of dairy farmers in Switzerland.

Case-control study on factors associated with a decreased milk yield and a depressed health status of dairy herds in northern Germany

BACKGROUND

In the past years, it became apparent that health status and performance differ considerably within dairy farms in Northern Germany. In order to obtain clues with respect to possible causes of these differences, a case-control study was performed. Case farms, which showed signs of health and performance problems, and control farms, which had none of these signs, were compared. Risk factors from different areas such as health management, housing, hygiene and nutrition were investigated as these are known to be highly influential. The aim of this study was to identify major factors within these areas that have the strongest association with health and performance problems of dairy herds in Northern Germany.

RESULTS

In the final model, a lower energy density in the roughage fraction of the diet, more pens with dirty lying areas and a low ratio of cows per watering spaces were associated with a higher risk for herd health problems. Moreover, case farms were affected by infections with intestinal parasites, lungworms, liver flukes and Johne's Disease numerically more often than control farms. Case farms more often had pens with raised cubicles compared to the deep bedded stalls or straw yards found in control farms. In general, the hygiene of the floors and beddings was worse in case farms. Concerning nutrition, the microbiological and sensory quality of the provided silages was often insufficient, even in control farms. Less roughage was provided to early lactating cows and the feed was pushed to the feeding fence less frequently in case farms than in control farms.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that milk yield and health status were associated with various factors from different areas stressing the importance of all aspects of management for good animal health and performance. Moreover, this study confirmed well-known risk factors for health problems and performance losses. These should better be taken heed of in herd health management.

A survey of free-range egg farmers in the United Kingdom: Knowledge, attitudes and practices surrounding antimicrobial use and resistance

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a significant global challenge affecting human health and attention has been drawn to practices of all stakeholders involved in antimicrobial prescription and administration, including in the livestock sector. This survey of free-range egg farmers (n = 117) was conducted to investigate knowledge, attitudes and practices surrounding antimicrobial use, and identify farmer-led solutions towards responsible antimicrobial use. Most participants proved knowledgeable of AMR and selected treatments based on principles of responsible medicine use. 'Worms' and 'infectious diseases' were the most common reasons for medicine use. Farms with a higher number of poultry houses, younger flock ages at depopulation and farms visited by a vet less than once a year or 3-4 times a year (compared to annually or twice a year) were more likely to select 'ANTIBIOTICS ONLY', as opposed to 'BOTH ANTIBIOTICS AND ANTIPARASITICS' or 'ANTIPARASITICS ONLY' as their most frequently used medicines. Participants from farms with a younger flock age at depopulation, from company-owned farms, and participants purchasing medicines from agricultural merchants instead of veterinary practices were less likely to be taking measures to reduce or replace antimicrobial use. Participants from larger farms and those that had less contact with their vet were less likely to think that they could reduce or replace the amount of antibiotics used. Survey results provided evidence for the important role of veterinarians in guiding antimicrobial stewardship through engagement, collaboration and education. Discussion groups in which farmers share best practices could assist the free-range egg industry in further promoting responsible antimicrobial use.

Trust, feasibility, and priorities influence Swedish dairy farmers' adherence and nonadherence to veterinary advice

The problem of nonadherence to advice is recognized in several professional relationships, including the veterinarian-client relationship. A better understanding of farmer perspectives may help to improve efficiency in veterinary herd health management. This study aimed to qualitatively and quantitatively describe farmers' reasons for adherence and nonadherence with veterinary recommendations regarding preventive herd health measures. We carried out structured telephone interviews about implementation of preventive measures with owners or staff of 163 dairy farms and 6 beef farms. The farms had received an advisory visit by their veterinarian (n = 36), who had documented the preventive measures they had recommended. The interviewer noted verbatim responses to reasons for implementing preventive measures fully, partially, or not at all, and we analyzed these responses thematically. We also conducted a quantitative analysis, in which we calculated descriptive statistics of the proportions of different categories of reasons stated by the farmers. Altogether, 726 preventive measures (range per farm 1 to 17; median 3; interquartile range 2 to 6) were documented. We identified 3 organizing themes related to adherence or nonadherence with veterinary advice: trust, feasibility, and priorities. Overall, the most commonly stated reasons related to trust (in the veterinarian, in the advisory process, or in individual preventive measures). The most common reasons not to follow the recommended advice were related to feasibility. Based on the results, we recommend that, to improve adherence to their advice, veterinarians pay increased attention to farmers' needs, priorities, goals, and motives, as well as to farmers' perceptions of the effectiveness of individual preventive measures. We also recommend that veterinarians need to increase their focus on recommending preventive measures that are practically feasible to implement on farms.

To change or not to change? Veterinarian and farmer perceptions of relational factors influencing the enactment of veterinary advice on dairy farms in the United Kingdom

Achieving herd health and welfare improvement increasingly relies on cattle veterinarians to train and advise farmers, placing veterinary interactions at the heart of knowledge exchange. Cattle veterinarians recognize their influence and the need to be proactive advisors but struggle with acting upon this awareness in daily practice, reporting a need to enhance their advisory approach to inspire farmer behavior change. Understanding how veterinarian-farmer interactions positively or negatively influence the enactment of change on farm is therefore essential to support the cattle veterinary profession. This paper adopts a qualitative approach to conceptualize how and under what circumstances veterinary advice has the potential to support and inspire farmer engagement with behavior change on the UK dairy farm. Fourteen UK dairy farms were recruited to take part in a qualitative study involving research observation of a typical advisory consultation between veterinarian and farmer (n = 14) followed by separate, in-depth interviews with the farmer(s) and their respective veterinarian. Interview data were organized using a template coding method and analyzed thematically. While accuracy of veterinary advisory content was valued, it was a relational context of trust, shared veterinarian-farmer understanding, and meaningful interpretation of advice at a local (farmer) level that was most likely to enact change. Critically, these relational factors were reported to work together synergistically; a trusting relationship was an essential, but not necessarily sufficient, component to create a culture of change. Findings suggest that cattle veterinarians may benefit from tailoring advisory services to the farmer's specific world view, facilitated by a shared understanding of the farmer's immediate and long-term motivational drivers. In consequence, cattle veterinarians seeking to positively engage farmers in advisory interactions could consider a focus on farmer priorities, motivations, and goals as paramount to frame and inform advisory messages. This explicit collaborative communication encourages the selection of appropriate and timely veterinary expertise, leading to better integration and adoption of advice on farm given enhanced advisory relevance for farmers' unique circumstances. This farmer-centered approach, involving active co-creation of plans between individuals, is critical for engagement and commitment when tackling complex problems.

[Einfluss eines komplementärmedizinischen telefonischen Beratungssystems auf den Antibiotikaeinsatz bei Nutztieren in der Schweiz]

Hintergrund: Der Antibiotikaeinsatz bei Nutztieren fördert die Entwicklung antibiotikaresistenter Bakterien. Die Komplementärmedizin könnte einen Beitrag zur Reduktion von Antibiotika leisten, wird bisher jedoch nicht flächendeckend angeboten. Das Beratungsprogramm "Kometian" unter-stützt teilnehmende Landwirte darin, ihre Tiere komplementärmedizinisch zu behandeln. Methoden und Resultate: 128 von 223 teilnehmenden Betrieben nutzten in den ersten 3 Projektjahren die telefonische Beratung von Kometian. Die Mehrheit der Landwirte hielt Milchkühe. Frühestens 1 Woche nach der Kometianberatung wurde eine telefonische Nachfrage beim Tierbesitzer hinsichtlich des Gesundheitszustandes des Tieres durchgeführt. Es konnten so 661 Beratungsfälle recherchiert werden. In 486 Fällen erfolgte keine weitere schulmedizinische Behandlung, in 373 Fällen gab der Landwirt einen Behandlungserfolg an. Von 188 angefragten und seit mindestens einem Jahr an Kometian teilnehmenden Betrieben stellten 46 ihre Behandlungsjournale zur Verfügung. Die betriebliche antibiotische Behandlungsinzidenz sank signifikant (p < 0,001) von 27 vor Beitritt auf 18 Behandlungen pro 100 Tiere im ersten Jahr. Schlussfolgerung: Es scheint, dass Kometian einen Beitrag dazu leisten konnte, den Antibiotikaeinsatz auf Betriebsebene zu reduzieren.

BACKGROUND

A regular use of antibiotics in farm animals is assumed to induce antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) may contribute to a reduction of antibiotic use but it is not extensively offered by Swiss veterinarians. The advisory program “Kometian” supports farmers in treating their animals with CAM.

METHODS AND RESULTS

128 out of 223 participating farmers used the telephone consultations of Kometian in the first 3 years of the project. The majority of the farmers kept dairy cattle. No sooner than 1 week after such a consultation, the famer was questioned by phone about the health progress of the animal. Thus, the development of health could be verified in 661 cases (of 714). 486 cases were not treated further by conventional medicine; in 373 cases the farmer reported a positive treatment effect. Of 188 examined farms, which had participated in the advisory program for at least 1 year, 46 made their treatment records available. The incidence of antibiotic treatment decreased significantly (p < 0.001) from 27 before entering the program to 18 treatments per 100 animals in the first year.

CONCLUSION

It seems that the advisory program Kometian could contribute to reduce the use of antibiotics on the farm level.

Invited review: Determinants of farmers' adoption of management-based strategies for infectious disease prevention and control

The prevention and control of endemic pathogens within and between farms often depends on the adoption of best management practices. However, farmers regularly do not adopt recommended measures or do not enroll in voluntary disease control programs. This indicates that a more comprehensive understanding of the influences and extension tools that affect farmers' management decisions is necessary. Based on a review of relevant published literature, we developed recommendations to support policy-makers, industry representatives, researchers, veterinarians, and other stakeholders when motivating farmers to adopt best management practices, and to facilitate the development and implementation of voluntary prevention and control programs for livestock diseases. Farmers will make management decisions based on their unique circumstances, agricultural contexts, beliefs, and goals. Providing them with rational but universal arguments might not always be sufficient to motivate on-farm change. Implementation of recommended management practices is more likely if farmers acknowledge the existence of a problem and their responsibility to take action. The perceived feasibility and effectiveness of the recommended management strategy and sufficient technical knowledge further increase the likelihood of adequate adoption. Farmers will also weigh the expected advantages of a proposed change against the expected disadvantages, and these considerations often include internal drivers such as pride or the desire to conform with perceived standards. Extension tools and farmers' social referents (e.g., veterinarians, peers) not only provide technical information but also influence these standards. Whereas mass media have the potential to deliver information to a broad audience, more personal approaches such as participatory group learning or individual communication with farm advisors can enable the tailoring of recommendations to farmers' situations. Approaches that appeal to farmers' internal motivators or that unconsciously elicit the desired behavior will increase the success of the intervention. Collaboration among stakeholders, assisted by social scientists and communication specialists, is necessary to provide a context that facilitates on-farm change and transfers consistent messages across extension tools in the most effective way.

Decision making on helminths in cattle: diagnostics, economics and human behaviour

Helminth infections of cattle affect productivity in all classes of stock, and are amongst the most important production-limiting diseases of grazing ruminants. Over the last decade, there has been a shift in focus in the diagnosis of these infections from merely detecting presence/absence of infection towards detecting its impact on production. This has been facilitated by studies observing consistent negative correlations between helminth diagnostic test results and measures of productivity. Veterinarians are increasingly challenged to consider the economic aspects of their work, and the use of these tests should now be integrated in economic evaluation frameworks for improved decision making. In this paper, we review recent insights in the farm-specific economic impact of helminth infections on dairy cattle farms as well as in farmer attitudes and behaviour regarding helminth control. Combining better economic impact assessments of helminth infections together with a deeper understanding of the non-economic factors that drive a farmer’s animal health decisions should result in more effective control strategies and increased farmer satisfaction.

Promoting discussions and decisions about dogs' quality-of-life

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this paper is to report the formulation and preliminary testing of a participatory tool in order to encourage discussions and decisions about dogs' quality-of-life.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A tool was designed in which owners rated aspects of their dog's quality-of-life. Two randomised controlled trials were conducted: one with a veterinary surgeon who was involved in the tool design, the second with other veterinary surgeons. In each, owners either were given the tool before a veterinary consultation or underwent normal consultations. After each consultation, owners were asked to report what they had discussed and what decisions they had made.

RESULTS

The study involved a total of 170 consultations, of which 91 were randomly allocated to the tool group and 79 into the control group. In both trials, using the tool was associated with a significant increase in the frequency of discussions. In the first trial, using the tool was also associated with an increase in the number of decisions made, but this was not found in the second trial with practitioners who were not involved in the trial design.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

These data suggest that the use of a participatory tool has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of consultations, especially if the practitioner is familiar with the tool design.

The concept of animal welfare at the interface between producers and scientists: the example of organic pig farming

In organic farming animal welfare is one important aspect included in the internationally agreed organic principles of health, ecology, fairness and care (IFOAM 2006), reflecting expectation of consumers and farmers. The definition of organic animal welfare includes-besides traditional terms of animal welfare-'regeneration' and 'naturalness'. Organic animal welfare assessment needs to reflect this and use complex parameters, include natural behaviour and a systemic view. Furthermore, various parties with seemingly conflicting interests are involved, causing ethical dilemmas, such as the use of nose rings for outdoor sows (impaired animal welfare vs. destruction of humus). Solutions can only be found when foundational concepts are translated and applied to practical situations. On-farm animal welfare assessment and implementation of improvement strategies are increasingly relevant scientific areas. They combine on-farm welfare assessment, identification of key problem areas and connected risk factors. Constant communication between all parties is crucial for success. Animal health and welfare planning is one application of this approach, which was carried out on Austrian organic pig farms as well as organic dairy farms in seven European countries. The projects included welfare assessment, feedback and benchmarking as a tool for communication between farmers, advisors and scientists. Finally goals were set by the farmer and improvement strategies applicable to organic farming were implemented. This included prevention of disease by management strategies instead of routine treatment with pharmaceutical products. It appeared that next to problem structuring, multidisciplinary problem solving demands good communications skills to relate animal welfare science to value reflections.