Environmental Enrichment in pig husbandry: Consumer comparative assessment of different housing elements based on a pictorial survey

Aurelia Schütz, Winnie Isabel Sonntag and Achim Spiller

No 1903, DARE Discussion Papers from Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE)

Abstract: In recent years livestock production became a special focal point in public debate, with animal welfare particularly turning out to be a major concern. Since pig husbandry systems are characterised by intensive production systems, where animals are often kept on slatted floor in an extremely barren environment, consumers' distinctive concern about pigs' welfare is not surprising. Previous researches revealed a clear public demand for a more species-appropriate pig husbandry and in this context identified various enriching housing elements to be important for ensuring animal welfare. However, to our knowledge, research addressing specific and comparative assessment of individual enriching housing elements by consumers, has been lacking so far. For our study we selected 14 housing elements which are commonly known to potentially enrich the pigs' environment, including outdoor runs, straw as bedding and enrichment substrate, different enrichment objects (toys) as well as cooling facilities. In order to give participants an idea of each element and therefore facilitate rating, we used a pictorial-based survey design. Thus German consumers were asked to rate elements regarding their benefit for animal welfare, to indicate their desire for availability in a pigsty and furthermore to evaluate respective costs and practicability. With regard to benefit for animal welfare, wallows seemed to be appreciated most, closely followed by straw as bedding and distraction material in a separate rooting area, but showers, tubs and straw as distraction material in containers were rated positive as well. In contrast, the slatted outdoor run and all four enriching objects performed relatively poor, even though rating was only slightly not positive. Overall, costs associated with the installation/usage of the respective housing elements were evaluated rather low and practicability issues were more or less neglected. Furthermore our cluster analysis revealed several rating-influencing factors such as attitude towards or perception of animal protection and sociodemographic characteristics. We consider our results to be relevant in the context of future production systems, as for justifying animal husbandry and increasing its acceptance in the public, the integration of social demands, like desire for a more animal friendly production including specific enriching housing elements, is indispensable.

Keywords: animal welfare; pig husbandry; environmental enrichment; consumer acceptance; public concern (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-env
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/193689/1/1049482042.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:zbw:daredp:1903

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in DARE Discussion Papers from Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics ().