Public attitudes predict community behaviours relevant to the pork industry
G. J. Coleman A D , V. Rohlf A , S. R. Toukhsati B and D. Blache CA Animal Welfare Science Centre, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic. 3011, Australia.
B Department of Cardiology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Vic. 3084, Australia.
C School of Animal Biology, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA 6009, Australia.
D Corresponding author. Email: Grahame.Coleman@unimelb.edu.au
Animal Production Science 58(3) 416-423 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN16776
Submitted: 28 November 2016 Accepted: 1 June 2017 Published: 28 July 2017
Abstract
Concerns about livestock animal welfare are well documented worldwide. Public attitudes are often studied as indicators of risk for the livestock industries, but are less often studied in relation to behaviours that may affect the livestock industries. The present paper examines the relationships between public attitudes, opinion leadership and self-reported pork consumption and community behaviours that may have a negative impact on livestock industries by promulgating views that farming engages in unacceptable practices. To the extent that these attitudes and behaviours are based on a lack of knowledge or a lack of understanding about the actual relationship between current practices and animal welfare and farm productivity, care needs to be exercised to determine what industry practice change should occur or what should be done to inform the public. The results showed that in regard to consumption, being male and holding positive attitudes towards eating meat and livestock welfare explained 11% of the variance in pork consumption. Notably, however, information seeking and trust in information, attitudes related to animal welfare and the livestock industries, and membership to an animal-welfare group, accounted for 44% of the variance in community behaviours that express dissatisfaction with the livestock industries. Opinion leaders, that is, people in the community who indicate that they are used by others as a source of information about livestock animal welfare, tended to eat less pork and engaged in many more community behaviours, such as calling talkback radio or writing to politicians. Together, these results suggest that more needs to be done to identify the population segment of opinion leaders and to engage them in dialogue about pork production.
Additional keywords: community attitudes, livestock, opinion leader.
References
Animals Australia (2016) ‘SaveBabe campaign.’ Available at https://secure.animalsaustralia.org/appeal/save_babe/ [Verified October 2016]Arbuckle J (2014) ‘Amos. Version 23.0.’ (IBM SPSS: Chicago, IL)
Arnot C (2009) Protecting our freedom to operate: earning and maintaining public trust and our social licence. In ‘Proceedings of the 24th annual southwest nutrition and management conference’, 26–27 February 2009, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) (2013) Education and Work, Australia, May 2013. Cat. no. 6227.0. (ABS: Canberra)
Australian Population and Migration Research Centre, A (2014) ‘ARIA (accessibility/remoteness index of Australia).’ Available at http://www.adelaide.edu.au/apmrc/research/projects/category/about_aria.html [Verified 30 January 2014]
Berkman H, Gilson C (1986) ‘Consumer behavior: concepts and strategies.’ (Kent Publishing Company: Ithaca, NY)
Brambell R (1965) Report of the Technical Committee to Enquire into the Welfare of Animals Kept Under Intensive Livestock Husbandry Systems. (H.M. Stationery Office: London)
Childers T (1986) Assessment of the psychometric properties of an opinion leadership scale. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research 23, 184–188.
| Assessment of the psychometric properties of an opinion leadership scale.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Coleman GJ (2010) Educating the public: information or persuasion? Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 37, 74–82.
| Educating the public: information or persuasion?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Coleman G, Toukhsati S (2006) Consumer attitudes and behaviour relevant to the red meat industry. North Sydney NSW: Meat and Livestock Australia Limited.
Coleman G, Hay M, Toukhsati S (2005) Effects of consumer attitudes and behaviour on the egg and pork industries. Report to Australian Pork Ltd and Australian Egg Corporation Ltd. (Monash University: Melbourne)
Coleman G, Rohlf V, Toukhsati S, Blache D (2015) Public attitudes relevant to livestock animal welfare policy. Farm Policy Journal 12, 45–57.
Coles (2016) ‘Responsible sourcing.’ Available at https://www.coles.com.au/corporate-responsibility/responsible-sourcing/responsible-sourcing [Verified October 2016]
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (2011) ‘Attitudes and behaviours around sustainable food purchasing.’ (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: London)
DeVellis RF (2003) ‘Scale development: theory and applications.’ 2nd edn. (Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA)
European Commission (2007) ‘Attitudes of EU citizens towards animal welfare. Special Eurobarometer Vol. 270/Wave 66.1. (Directorate-General Communication: Brussels)
Four Corners (2011) ‘A bloody business.’ Available at http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2011/s3228880.htm [Verified February 2017]
Gracia A (2013) The determinants of the intention to purchase animal welfare-friendly meat products in Spain. Animal Welfare (South Mimms, England) 22, 255–265.
| The determinants of the intention to purchase animal welfare-friendly meat products in Spain.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXnt1aju74%3D&md5=cf110f08ff6d3b61cc9977488cec860bCAS |
Gunningham N, Kagan R, Thornton D (2004) Social licence and environmental protection: why businesses go beyond compliance. Law & Social Inquiry 29, 307–341.
| Social licence and environmental protection: why businesses go beyond compliance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
IBM (2013) ‘IBM SPSS statistics for Windows, version 23.’ (IBM Corporation: Armonk, NY)
Katz E, Lazarsfeld PF (1955) ‘Personal influence: the part played by people in the flow of mass communications.’ (The Free Press: New York)
Martin P, Shepheard M (2011) What is meant by the social licence? In ‘Defending the social licence of farming: issues, challenges and new directions for agriculture’. (Eds J Williams, P Martin) pp. 3–12. (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne)
McCarthy M, O’Reilly S, Cotter L, de Boer M (2004) Factors influencing consumption of pork and poultry in the Irish market. Appetite 43, 19–28.
| Factors influencing consumption of pork and poultry in the Irish market.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2czlslKlsg%3D%3D&md5=9ef89398fe84e29b93360a3921bf0ff2CAS |
Parbery P, Wilkinson R (2012) ‘Victorians’ attitudes to farming.’ (Department of Environment and Primary Industries: Melbourne)
Tabachnick B, Fidell L (2013) ‘Using multivariate statistics.’ 6th edn. (Pearson Education: Boston)
Theall KP, Fleckman J, Jacobs M (2015) Impact of a community popular opinion leader intervention among African American adults in a south-eastern United States community. AIDS Education and Prevention 27, 275–287.
| Impact of a community popular opinion leader intervention among African American adults in a south-eastern United States community.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tong B, Tung-lung SC (2014) Finding disseminators via electronic word of mouth message for effective marketing communications. Decision Support Systems 67, 21–29.
| Finding disseminators via electronic word of mouth message for effective marketing communications.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wagstaff J (2016) Effects of Australian live export cattle ban to Indonesia still felt by beef producers. The Weekly Times 7 June. Available at http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/agribusiness/cattle/effects-of-australian-live-export-cattle-ban-to-indonesia-still-felt-by-beef-producers/news-story/86016c75dc8d4c3fdd0b071459b30fb1 [Verified 12 June 2016]
Williams P, Gill A, Ponsford I (2007) Corporate social responsibility at tourism destinations: toward a social licence to operate. Tourism Review International 11, 133–144.
| Corporate social responsibility at tourism destinations: toward a social licence to operate.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
