Knowledge Centre for Agriculture, Cattle, Agro Food Park 15, DK-8200 Aarhus N, Denmark.
Prev Vet Med. 2011 May 1;99(2-4):122-9. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2011.01.010. Epub 2011 Feb 22.
To implement biosecurity measures at farm-level is a motivational challenge to dairy farmers as emerging diseases and their consequences largely are unpredictable. One of the reasons for this challenge is that outcomes are more likely to benefit society than the individual farmer. From the individual farmer's point of view the impacts of zoonotic risk, international trade and welfare concerns appear less obvious than the direct costs at farm-level. Consequently, a social dilemma may arise where collective interests are at odds with private interests. To improve biosecurity at farm-level farmers must be motivated to change behavior in the 'right' direction which could provide selfish farmers with unintended possibilities to exploit the level of biosecurity provided by other dairy farmers' collective actions. Farmers' perception of risk of disease introduction into a dairy herd was explored by means of Q-methodology. Participating farmers owned very large dairy herds and were selected for this study because Danish legislation since 2008 has required that larger farms develop and implement a farm specific biosecurity plan. However, a year from introduction of this requirement, none of the participating farmers had developed a biosecurity plan. Farmers' perception of biosecurity could meaningfully be described by four families of perspectives, labeled: cooperatives; confused; defectors, and introvert. Interestingly, all families of perspectives agreed that sourcing of animals from established dealers represented the highest risk to biosecurity at farm-level. Farmers and policy-makers are faced with important questions about biosecurity at farm-level related to the sanctioning system within the contextual framework of social dilemmas. To solve these challenges we propose the development of a market-mediated system to (1) reduce the risk of free-riders, and (2) provide farmers with incentives to improve biosecurity at farm-level.
在农场层面实施生物安保措施对奶农来说是一个挑战,因为新出现的疾病及其后果在很大程度上是不可预测的。造成这一挑战的原因之一是,其结果更有可能使社会受益,而不是单个农民受益。从单个农民的角度来看,动物传染病风险、国际贸易和福利问题的影响似乎不如农场层面的直接成本明显。因此,可能会出现集体利益与个人利益冲突的社会困境。为了提高农场层面的生物安保水平,农民必须有动力朝着“正确”的方向改变行为,这可能会为自私的农民提供机会,利用其他奶农集体行动提供的生物安保水平来获取利益。本研究采用 Q 方法探讨了农民对疾病引入奶牛群风险的感知。参与研究的农民拥有非常大的奶牛群,之所以选择他们是因为自 2008 年以来,丹麦法律要求较大的农场制定并实施特定于农场的生物安保计划。然而,在引入这一要求的一年后,没有一个参与的农民制定了生物安保计划。农民对生物安保的感知可以用四种观点群体来有意义地描述,分别是:合作、困惑、叛逃和内向。有趣的是,所有观点群体都一致认为,从已建立的经销商处采购动物对农场层面的生物安保构成了最高风险。农民和政策制定者面临着与社会困境背景下的制裁制度相关的农场层面生物安保的重要问题。为了解决这些挑战,我们建议开发一种市场中介系统,以降低搭便车者的风险,并为农民提高农场层面的生物安保提供激励。