Simple Summary The production of food from animals poses many ethical challenges. This review explores what we know about different levels of concern for animal welfare in food production by such stakeholders as veterinarians, farmers, and the general public. Despite the general public’s level of concern for animal welfare in food production being high, their understanding and knowledge is poor. Thus, it is suggested that through widespread consciousness raising we can encourage the public to accurately translate their concerns into market drivers, in turn improving the welfare of billions of animals.Abstract Population growth and rising consumption of meat, dairy, eggs and fish are forcing the world to face the intersecting challenges of how to sustainably feed a population expected to exceed 9 billion by 2050, while also controlling the impact of food production on the planet, on people and on animals. This review acknowledges the absence of a globally accepted definition of animal welfare and then explores the literature regarding different levels of concern for animal welfare in food production by such stakeholders as veterinarians, farmers, and the general public. It focuses on the evidence that the general public’s level of concern for animal welfare is linked to various demographic and personal characteristics, such as age, gender, religion, location, meat eating, and knowledge of animal welfare. Certain animals have characteristics that influence concern for their welfare, with those species that are considered more intelligent being afforded more concern. There is compelling evidence that the general public’s understanding of animal welfare in food production is poor. Acknowledging that public concern can be a driving force to change current production methods, the authors suggest widespread consciousness raising to redefine socially acceptable methods of food production from animals and to ensure that it remains in step with societal concerns.

Simple SummaryThe emotional lives of animals is often doubted and questioned. Due to the subjective nature of animal emotions, many think that they are out of the reach of scientific measurement. In this systematic review, of over two decades of scientific literature, we found that this was not actually the case. By using a list of keywords, formed of both positive and negative emotions, and terminology relating to animal sentience, we reviewed the scientific literature. We found that the subjective lives of animals are not only a vital part of human medical research but are regularly measured and studied with scientific rigor. AbstractKnowledge of animal sentience is fundamental to many disciplines and imperative to the animal welfare movement. In this review, we examined what is being explored and discussed, regarding animal sentience, within the scientific literature. Rather than attempting to extract meaning from the many complex and abstract definitions of animal sentience, we searched over two decades of scientific literature using a peer-reviewed list of 174 keywords. The list consisted of human emotions, terminology associated with animal sentience, and traits often thought to be indicative of subjective states. We discovered that very little was actually being explored, and instead there was already much agreement about what animals can feel. Why then is there so much scepticism surrounding the science of animal sentience? Sentience refers to the subjective states of animals, and so is often thought to be impossible to measure objectively. However, when we consider that much of the research found to accept and utilise animal sentience is performed for the development of human drugs and treatment, it appears that measuring sentience is, after all, not quite as impossible as was previously thought. In this paper, we explored what has been published on animal sentience in the scientific literature and where the gaps in research lie. We drew conclusions on the implications for animal welfare science and argued for the importance of addressing these gaps in our knowledge. We found that there is a need for more research on positive emotional states in animals, and that there is still much to learn about taxa such as invertebrates. Such information will not only be useful in supporting and initiating legislative amendments but will help to increase understanding, and potentially positive actions and attitudes towards animals.

No abstract

Historically, the veterinary profession has understood animal welfare primarily in terms of animal health and productivity, with less recognition of animals' feelings and mental state. Veterinary students' career preferences and attitudes to animal welfare have been the focus of several international studies. As part of a survey in Australia and New Zealand, this study reports on whether veterinary students prioritize animal welfare topics or professional conduct on the first day of practice and examines links between students' career preferences and their institution, gender, and year of study. The questionnaire was designed to explore the importance that students assign to topics in animal welfare and ethics. Of the 3,320 students invited to participate in the online survey, a total of 851 students participated, representing a response rate of 25.5%. Students' preferences increased for companion-animal practice and decreased for production-animal practice as they progressed through their studies. Females ranked the importance of animal welfare topics higher than males, but the perceived importance declined for both genders in their senior years. In line with previous studies, this report highlighted two concerns: (1) the importance assigned to animal welfare declined as students progressed through their studies, and (2) males placed less importance overall on animal welfare than females. Given that veterinarians have a strong social influence on animal issues, there is an opportunity, through enhanced education in animal welfare, to improve student concern for animal welfare and in turn improve animal care and policy making by future veterinarians.

Simple SummaryAttitudes towards the welfare of non-human animals are related to beliefs about animals’ capabilities, particularly regarding experiences of pain and suffering. The current study explores the attitudes to animals among people who attended an animal welfare symposium at the University of Sydney. This population represents a unique sample of people who work, study or have a strong interest in animal care and welfare. The pilot study used a validated questionnaire that assessed attitudes to animals; specifically exploring participants’ (n = 41) beliefs about the sentience of animals and their emotional empathy with animals. The results found significant associations between participants’ beliefs in animal sentience and their demographic variables (age, sex and occupation). Female attendees showed stronger belief in sentience than male attendees did. When looking at emotional empathy with animals, the participants’ responses to the statements assigned into three clusters (or distinct groups) based on their content which reflected the internal emotional lives of animals and the treatment of animals by humans (Cluster 1), human interactions with animals (Cluster 2) and the keeping of companion and zoo animals (Cluster 3).AbstractAttitudes to animals are linked to beliefs about their ability to experience pain and suffering, their cognition, and their sentience. Education and awareness-raising play a pivotal role in increasing society’s consideration of non-human animal welfare. The current pilot study explores the attitudes towards animal welfare among a unique population of people who attended an animal welfare symposium at the University of Sydney. It involved administration of a validated questionnaire that assessed attitudes to animals; specifically exploring participants’ (n = 41) beliefs about the sentience of animals and their emotional empathy with animals. The resultant data revealed significant associations between participants’ beliefs in animal sentience and their demographic variables (age, sex and occupation). Female attendees showed stronger beliefs in sentience than male attendees did. Concerning sentience in cows, pigs and cats, older attendees showed stronger beliefs than younger people in sentience relating to hunger and pain. Also, with regard to questions about sentience in dogs, older attendees showed stronger beliefs than younger people in pain-related sentience in dogs. When exploring emotional empathy with animals, the participants’ statements could be assigned to three clusters characterised by the internal emotional lives of animals and the treatment of animals by humans (Cluster 1), human interactions with animals (Cluster 2) and the keeping of companion and zoo animals (Cluster 3). To the authors’ knowledge, this pilot study is the first of its kind to investigate the attitudes towards animal welfare of an important group of people who work, study or have a special interest within the animal care and welfare domain.

Consumers are increasingly concerned about nonhuman animal welfare in food production and, as their awareness continues to rise, demand for welfare-friendly products is growing. The current study explores the Australian market for welfare-friendly food of animal origin by outlining and clarifying how consumers’ welfare concerns affect their purchasing decisions. It reports the findings of an Australian face-to-face survey of consumers’ knowledge of and attitudes to farm animal welfare and their reported purchasing of welfare-friendly animal-derived products. A novel aspect of this survey was its effort to establish consumers’ understanding of welfare-friendly labels, their motivation to purchase welfare-friendly products, and the barriers to doing so. The survey was deployed in four shopping districts in New South Wales, Australia, in 2016. Data were collected from 135 respondents, and the results are discussed below.

Over the last several decades, positive public attitudes towards animal welfare have continued to develop. Consumers’ attitudes towards farm animal welfare indicate increasing concern about animal welfare in food production. Yet, this growing interest in the lives of farm animals does not correspond with a wholesale increase in demand for higher welfare products, providing evidence of the citizen-consumer attitude-behaviour gap (herein referred to as the attitude-behaviour gap). Minimising the attitude–behaviour gap and supporting consumers to make higher animal welfare choices may help producers to enhance the lives of farm animals. However, despite increasing awareness in this area, solutions to resolve this gap often focus on knowledge transfer and do not appear to have had a significant impact. The aim of this article is to review current knowledge around the attitude-behaviour gap, and situate it within the context of the behaviour change wheel; exploring the capabilities, opportunities, and motivations driving, as well as the barriers inhibiting consumers from making higher welfare food choices. Using this framework, the review aims to identify interventions that may boost consumer demand for higher welfare products sold at a premium price and provide suggestions for future research. Further work to increase understanding in this area is then also suggested.

Veterinarians are in a strong position of social influence on animal-related issues. Hence, veterinary schools have an opportunity to raise animal health and welfare standards by improving veterinary students’ animal welfare and ethics (AWE) education, including that related to animals used for scientific purposes. A survey of 818 students in the early, mid, and senior stages of their courses at all eight veterinary schools across Australia and New Zealand was undertaken on their first day of practice (or Day One Competences) to explore how veterinary students viewed the importance of their competence in the management of welfare and ethical decision-making relating to animals kept for scientific purposes. From highest to lowest, the rankings they assigned were: Animal Ethics Committee (AEC) Procedures or Requirements; 3Rs (Replacement, Refinement and Reduction); Humane Endpoints; Euthanasia; “What Is a Research Animal?”; and Conscientious Objections. Female students rated Conscientious Objections, Humane Endpoints, and Euthanasia significantly higher than male students did across the three stages of study. The score patterns for these three variates showed a trend for the male students to be more likely to score these topics as extremely important as they advanced through the course, but female students’ scores tended to decline slightly or stay relatively stable. No gender differences emerged for the three variates: 3Rs (Replacement, Refinement and Reduction); AEC Procedures or Requirements; and “What Is a Research Animal?”. This study demonstrates that understandings of the regulatory and normative frameworks are considered most important in animal welfare and ethics competence in veterinary students. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to investigate what importance veterinary students place on their competence regarding animals kept for scientific purposes.