Determinants of Animal Welfare Disclosure Practices: Evidence from China

Understanding the consumer-citizen gap in Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare

Individuals of the general public can perform both consumer and citizen roles in farm animal welfare, and attitudes toward farm animal welfare may differ between these roles. However, scant research is available regarding this distinction, especially in developing countries such as China. The present study aimed to explore consumer-citizen gaps in Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare across three dimensions and across demographic characteristics. A 36-item scale was designed, and completed by 5284 Chinese participants in a large-scale cross-sectional survey. Consumer-citizen gaps in attitudes toward farm animal welfare across three dimensions and demographic characteristics were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and effects of demographic characteristics on attitudes were further explored by linear regression analysis. A significant consumer-citizen gap was found in overall attitudes, although the consumer role was only slightly more positive than the citizen role. The consumer-citizen gap is driven by differences in both cognitive attitudes and behavioral attitudes. The gap is most pronounced in cognitive attitudes, where the consumer role is significantly more positive, and smaller in behavioral attitudes, where the citizen role is significantly more positive. The consumer-citizen gap varies significantly among different demographic groups, including gender, age, education, monthly household income, area of residence, and occupation. Additionally, education, monthly household income, and area of residence have significant effects on attitudes in the dual role, whereas gender only affect consumer-role attitudes significantly. The findings provide evidence that consumer-citizen gaps in Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare exist, and this distinction is mainly determined by demographic characteristics.

Farm Animal Welfare Is a Field of Interest in China: A Bibliometric Analysis Based on CiteSpace

Farm animal welfare research conducted in China is not commonly accessed or known outside of China, which may lead to the assumption that farm animal welfare receives relatively little attention in China. Therefore, a bibliometric analysis was conducted on the existing Chinese farm animal welfare literature to provide robust evidence to refute this assumption. A total of 1312 peer-reviewed Chinese studies on farm animal welfare published between March 1992 and June 2023 were retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS) and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database. CiteSpace software was used to analyze and visualize the number, species, authors, institutions, journals, and keywords of the papers. In China, farm animal welfare research has gone through the processes of an early stage (1992-2001), rapid-growth stage (2002-2007), and mature stage (2008-present), and the scale of research continues to grow. Notably, swine and chickens have received priority attention in this area. A Matthew effect was observed for authors and institutions, with relatively little collaboration among authors and institutions. Most of the papers were published in a small number of journals, with an apparent agglomeration characteristic. The research hotspots, summarized as "feed and diet", "environmental impacts and control", "integrated rearing management", "injury and disease", "behavior and technologies for behavior monitoring", "genetic analysis", "welfare during transport and slaughter", "welfare-friendly animal product consumption", "attitudes toward farm animal welfare", and "healthy breeding". The keywords "computer vision", "recognition", "temperature", "precision livestock farming", "laying hen", and "behavior", represent the major research frontiers in the field, which could indicate potential areas of significant future research. The findings of the present bibliometric analysis confirm the fact that farm animal welfare is a field of interest in China. Farm animal welfare research in China tends to be pragmatic, with a strong emphasis on enhancing growth and production performance, as well as product quality, rather than solely concentrating on improving farm animal welfare. This paper provides insightful references that researchers can use to identify and understand the current status and future direction of the farm animal welfare field in China.

Factors influencing Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare

A comprehensive understanding of current Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare and the relevant influencing factors is essential for improving farm animal welfare and promoting further development of animal husbandry. The attitudes of 3,726 respondents in China were investigated using paper and online questionnaires. Three components (affective, cognitive, and behavioral) of attitudes toward farm animal welfare were assessed using 18 items designed based on the literature review. Influential factors of attitudes toward farm animal welfare were explored via tobit regression. The results revealed that the Chinese public not only considers farm animals to be emotional and sentient but are also sympathetic toward farm animals that suffer inhumane treatment. Although they have limited knowledge about farm animal welfare, the public believes improving farm animal welfare is beneficial, especially for food safety and human health. The Chinese public prefers regulation policies to incentive policies for improving farm animal welfare. The main factors influencing attitudes toward farm animal welfare included gender, age, education, monthly household income, area of residence, farm animal raising experience, and attention to farm animal welfare events. The effect of these influencing factors on attitudes varied. These findings provide a basis for improving Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare. The implications of formulating and implementing effective policies to improve the Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare were discussed.

Is One Health a Viable Strategy in Animal Health Litigation: Evidence from Civil Lawsuits in China

Simple Summary

Strategic litigation launched to protect animal welfare worldwide branches out with several tactical themes: environmental protection, child abuse, veterinarian malpractice, product liability and quasi-family member. Currently, the litigation strategy themed in One Health has been observed in legal practice in Chinese mainland. Using 1520 zoonosis related civil lawsuit judgments, this study aimed to assess the effectiveness of this litigation strategy in animal health cases from Chinese mainland. It has been confirmed that using the litigation strategy themed in One Health results in more successful outcomes and larger damage awards, so there might be a practical value in using this strategy in animal welfare lawsuits.

Abstract

Several litigation strategies are used to gain support from courts in order to protect animals. While the emerging litigation strategy themed in One Health stimulates judicial protection in the animal health sector, little is known about whether and how such strategies are supported by courts. In this article, we investigate how animal welfare litigation strategies influence judge’s choices within their discretion. We argue that litigators equipped with the litigation strategy themed in One Health are placed in an advantageous position in animal health cases, but that this tendency varies markedly across zoonoses. Specifically, we suggest that litigators utilizing One Health’s litigation strategy are associated with higher probabilities to win, whereas normal litigators are not. Further, we propose that litigators equipped with the One Health litigation strategy are awarded more damages from judges. We test and find support for our predictions using a cross sectional dataset of civil lawsuit cases centering on the animal health industry in Chinese mainland. Our findings indicate that courts indeed were persuaded by the One Health litigation strategy, even when bound by the discretion rules. At the same time, we suggest that for advocates who would like to litigate for animal welfare in the animal health sector, the litigation strategy themed in One Health might have potentially positive implications.

Tail-Biting in Pigs: A Scoping Review

Tail-biting is globally recognized as a welfare concern for commercial swine production. Substantial research has been undertaken to identify risk factors and intervention methods to decrease and understand this vice. Tail-biting appears to be multifactorial and has proven difficult to predict and control. The primary objective of the scoping review was to identify and chart all available literature on the risk factors and interventions associated with tail-biting in pigs. A secondary objective was to identify gaps in the literature and identify the relevance for a systematic review. An online literature search of four databases, encompassing English, peer-reviewed and grey literature published from 1 January 1970 to 31 May 2019, was conducted. Relevance screening and charting of included articles were performed by two independent reviewers. A total of 465 citations were returned from the search strategy. Full-text screening was conducted on 118 articles, with 18 being excluded in the final stage. Interventions, possible risk factors, as well as successful and unsuccessful outcomes were important components of the scoping review. The risk factors and interventions pertaining to tail-biting were inconsistent, demonstrating the difficulty of inducing tail-biting in an experimental environment and the need for standardizing terms related to the behavior.