Maurer Lorenz, Schenkenfelder Josef, Winckler Christoph
Division of Livestock Sciences, Department of Sustainable Agricultural Systems, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria.
Front Vet Sci. 2021 Jan 12;7:607925. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.607925. eCollection 2020.
One keystone to successful welfare improvement endeavors is a respected cooperation between farmer and advisor (e.g., veterinarian), which requires a thorough understanding of what motivates farmer behavior. In this respect, Q methodology offers a promising approach in investigating individual motivational patterns and to discriminate between and describe typologies of farmers. In our study we explored, based on a sample of 34 Austrian dairy farmers, how 39 potentially motivating statements regarding the improvement of dairy cow health and welfare were assessed. We were able to identify and describe four different viewpoints, explaining 47% of total study variance. All four viewpoints have in common that pride in a healthy herd is motivating to work toward improved animal health and welfare to a certain extent, but meeting legal requirements is rather not. Viewpoint 1 acknowledges welfare for economic performance, ease of work and short working hours but does not make allowance for outside interference. Participants loading on Viewpoint 2 also show a focus on economic aspects but, keep close track of the animal welfare debate recognizing its potential to improve the public image of dairy farming. Even though they cautiously criticize an exploitative application of dairy farming, they do not want to be understood as role models. With regards to animal welfare, farmers sharing Viewpoint 3 perceive themselves as superior to and show little reluctance of comparison with mainstream farming. For them, the animal as sentient being itself owns some intrinsic value and it is necessary to strike a balance between economic and other, ethical considerations. Viewpoint 4 perceives cows as equal collaborators who deserve to be treated with respect and appreciation and is willing to accept certain economic losses in order to maintain high standards regarding animal health and welfare. Using Q methodology, we have been able to draw high resolution images of different farmer typologies, enabling advisors to tailor intervention strategies specifically addressing leverage points with a high chance of farmer compliance.
成功改善福利的关键之一是农民与顾问（如兽医）之间建立起受尊重的合作关系，这需要深入了解激发农民行为的因素。在这方面，Q 方法为研究个体动机模式以及区分和描述农民类型提供了一种很有前景的方法。在我们的研究中，基于 34 位奥地利奶农的样本，我们探究了关于改善奶牛健康和福利的 39 条潜在激励性陈述是如何被评估的。我们能够识别并描述四种不同的观点，这些观点解释了研究总方差的 47%。所有这四种观点的共同之处在于，对健康畜群的自豪感在一定程度上会激发人们朝着改善动物健康和福利的方向努力，但满足法律要求并非如此。观点 1 认可福利对经济表现、工作便利性和短工作时间的影响，但不考虑外部干扰。归入观点 2 的参与者也关注经济方面，但密切关注动物福利辩论，认识到其改善奶牛养殖公众形象的潜力。尽管他们谨慎地批评奶牛养殖的剥削性应用，但他们并不希望被视为榜样。在动物福利方面，持有观点 3 的农民认为自己优于主流养殖，并且很少不愿意与主流养殖进行比较。对他们来说，动物作为有感知能力的生物本身具有一些内在价值，有必要在经济和其他伦理考量之间取得平衡。观点 4 将奶牛视为平等的合作伙伴，值得尊重和赞赏，并且愿意接受一定的经济损失以维持动物健康和福利的高标准。使用 Q 方法，我们能够绘制出不同农民类型的高分辨率图像，使顾问能够制定专门针对具有高农民依从性可能性的杠杆点的干预策略。
