Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPeden, Rachel S. E.
dc.contributor.authorAkaichi, Faical
dc.contributor.authorCamerlink, Irene
dc.contributor.authorBoyle, Laura
dc.contributor.authorTurner, Simon P.
dc.date.accessioned2020-08-20T15:31:00Z
dc.date.available2020-08-20T15:31:00Z
dc.date.issued2019-11-08
dc.identifier.citationPeden RSE, Akaichi F, Camerlink I, Boyle LA, Turner SP (2019) Pig farmers’ willingness to pay for management strategies to reduce aggression between pigs. PLoS ONE 14(11): e0224924. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224924en_US
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11019/2303
dc.descriptionpeer-revieweden_US
dc.description.abstractWhen deciding whether to invest in an improvement to animal welfare, farmers must trade-off the relative costs and benefits. Despite the existence of effective solutions to many animal welfare issues, farmers’ willingness to pay for them is largely unknown. This study modelled pig farmers’ decisions to improve animal welfare using a discrete choice experiment focused on alleviating aggression between growing/finishing pigs at regrouping. Eighty-two UK and Irish pig farm owners and managers were asked to choose between hypothetical aggression control strategies described in terms of four attributes; installation cost, on-going cost, impact on skin lesions from aggression and impact on growth rate. If they did not like any of the strategies they could opt to keep their current farm practice. Systematic variations in product attributes allowed farmers’ preferences and willingness to pay to be estimated and latent class modelling accounted for heterogeneity in responses. The overall willingness to pay to reduce lesions was low at £0.06 per pig place (installation cost) and £0.01 per pig produced (running cost) for each 1% reduction in lesions. Results revealed three independent classes of farmers. Farmers in Class 1 were unlikely to regroup unfamiliar growing/finishing pigs, and thus were unwilling to adopt measures to reduce aggression at regrouping. Farmers in Classes 2 and 3 were willing to adopt measures providing certain pre-conditions were met. Farmers in Class 2 were motivated mainly by business goals, whilst farmers in Class 3 were motivated by both business and animal welfare goals, and were willing to pay the most to reduce aggression; £0.11 per pig place and £0.03 per pig produced for each 1% reduction in lesions. Farmers should not be considered a homogeneous group regarding the adoption of animal welfare innovations. Instead, campaigns should be targeted at subgroups according to their independent preferences and willingness to pay.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherPublic Library of Science (PLoS)en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesPLoS ONE;14
dc.rightsAttribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/*
dc.subjectswineen_US
dc.subjectaggressionen_US
dc.subjectanimal welfareen_US
dc.subjectagricultural workersen_US
dc.subjectsurveysen_US
dc.subjectfinanceen_US
dc.subjectpsychological attitudesen_US
dc.subjectquality assuranceen_US
dc.titlePig farmers’ willingness to pay for management strategies to reduce aggression between pigsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224924
dc.contributor.sponsorScotland’s Rural Collegeen_US
dc.source.volume14
dc.source.issue11
dc.source.beginpagee0224924
refterms.dateFOA2020-08-20T15:31:00Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
e0224924.pdf
Size:
649.5Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
main article

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States