Pritchard Joy, Upjohn Melissa, Hirson Tamsin
Brooke, London, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2018 Feb 6;13(2):e0191950. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191950. eCollection 2018.
Brooke is a non-government organisation with working equine welfare programmes across Africa, Asia and Latin America. In 2014, staff from ten country programmes were asked to identify 'no-win' situations (subsequently reframed as 'hard-wins')-where improving equine welfare is proving difficult, expensive and/or marginal-in order to inform strategic decisions on how to approach, manage and mitigate for such situations.
The Delphi-type consultation process had three phases. Round 1 posed five questions in the form of a workshop, survey and semi-structured interviews. Round 2 re-presented key themes and sense-checked initial conclusions. Round 3 reviewed the nature and prevalence of hard-win situations at an international meeting of all participants.
Reasons given for hard-win situations included: no economic or social benefit from caring for working animals; poor resource availability; lack of empathy for working equids or their owners among wider stakeholders; deep-seated social issues, such as addiction or illegal working; areas with a high animal turnover or migratory human population; lack of community cooperation or cohesion; unsafe areas where welfare interventions cannot be adequately supported. Participants estimated the prevalence of hard-win situations as 40-70% of their work. They suggested some current ways of working that may be contributing to the problem, and opportunities to tackle hard-wins more effectively.
Respondents agreed that if equine welfare improvements are to span generations of animals, interventions cannot rely on relatively simple, technical knowledge-transfer strategies and quick-wins alone. Programmes need to be more flexible and iterative and less risk-averse in their approaches to embedding good equine welfare practices in all relevant actors. Consultation recommendations informed development of Brooke's new global strategy, a revised organisational structure and redefinition of roles and responsibilities to streamline ways to approach hard-wins in the complex environments and socio-economic contexts in which working equids are found.
布鲁克是一个非政府组织,在非洲、亚洲和拉丁美洲开展了有关工作用马福利的项目。2014年,来自十个国家项目的工作人员被要求识别“无法取胜”的情况(随后重新定义为“艰难取胜”的情况)——即在改善马的福利方面被证明困难、昂贵和/或作用有限的情况,以便为如何应对、管理和缓解此类情况的战略决策提供依据。
德尔菲式咨询过程分为三个阶段。第一轮以研讨会、调查和半结构化访谈的形式提出了五个问题。第二轮重新呈现关键主题并对初步结论进行合理性检验。第三轮在所有参与者的国际会议上审查了艰难取胜情况的性质和普遍性。
造成艰难取胜情况的原因包括:照顾工作用动物没有经济或社会效益;资源匮乏;广大利益相关者对工作用马或其主人缺乏同理心;深层次的社会问题,如成瘾或非法工作;动物更替率高或人口流动的地区;缺乏社区合作或凝聚力;福利干预无法得到充分支持的不安全地区。参与者估计,艰难取胜情况在他们的工作中占比为40%-70%。他们提出了一些当前可能导致问题的工作方式,以及更有效应对艰难取胜情况的机会。
受访者一致认为,如果要让马的福利改善惠及几代马,干预措施不能仅依赖相对简单的技术知识转移策略和立竿见影的成果。项目需要更加灵活和迭代,在将良好的马福利实践融入所有相关行为体的方法上,不应过于规避风险。咨询建议为布鲁克新的全球战略、修订后的组织结构以及角色和职责的重新定义提供了依据,以简化在工作用马所处的复杂环境和社会经济背景下应对艰难取胜情况的方式。