Small-scale food animal production has been celebrated as a means of economic mobility and improved food security but the use of veterinary antibiotics among these producers may be contributing to the spread of antibiotic resistance in animals and humans. In order to improve antibiotic stewardship in this sector, it is critical to identify the drivers of producers’ antibiotic use. This study assessed the determinants of antibiotic use in small-scale food animal production through simulated client visits to veterinary supply stores and surveys with households that owned food animals (n = 117) in Ecuador. Eighty percent of households with food animals owned chickens and 78% of those with chickens owned fewer than 10 birds. Among the households with small-scale food animals, 21% reported giving antibiotics to their food animals within the last six months. Simulated client visits indicated that veterinary sales agents frequently recommended inappropriate antibiotic use, as 66% of sales agents recommended growth promoting antibiotics, and 48% of sales agents recommended an antibiotic that was an inappropriate class for disease treatment. In contrast, few sales agents (3%) were willing to sell colistin, an antibiotic banned for veterinary use in Ecuador as of January 2020, which supports the effectiveness of government regulation in antibiotic stewardship. The cumulative evidence provided by this study indicates that veterinary sales agents play an active role in promoting indiscriminate and inappropriate use of antibiotics in small-scale food animal production.

Background Antibiotics are increasingly used throughout the world in food animal production for controlling and preventing disease and for promoting growth. But this trend also has the potential for promoting antibiotic resistance, which represents a threat to human, animal, and environmental health. The use of antibiotics and the potential effects of antibiotic dependence has often been associated with large-scale food animal production. But rural households also engage in small-scale production, often operating literally in backyards. While some small-scale producers use veterinary antibiotics, many do not. This paper examines knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and agricultural practices (KAP) that represent an alternative to dependence on antibiotics. Methods Qualitative field research was based on four focus group discussions (FGDs) with non-indigenous backyard food animal producers in four communities near Quito, Ecuador and two FGDs with veterinarians. FGDs were supplemented by structured observations and key informant interviews. They were recorded with digital audio devices and transcriptions were analyzed independently by two researchers using a three-stage coding procedure. Open coding identifies underlying concepts, while axial coding develops categories and properties, and selective coding integrates the information in order to identify the key dimensions of the collective qualitative data. Results Backyard food animal producers in the Ecuadorian highlands generally do not use antibiotics while rearing small batches of animals and poultry for predominantly non-commercial household consumption. Instead, they rely on low cost traditional veterinary remedies. These practices are informed by their Andean history of agriculture and a belief system whereby physical activity is a holistic lifestyle through which people maintain their health by participating in the physical and spiritual environment. Conclusions Backyard food animal producers in the Ecuadorian highlands implement complex strategies based on both economic calculations and sociocultural underpinnings that shape perceptions, attitudes, and practices. They use traditional veterinary remedies in lieu of antibiotics in most cases because limited production of food animals in small spaces contributes to a predictable household food supply, while at the same time conforming to traditional concepts of human and environmental health.

Background: Antimicrobials are widely used throughout the world in food animal production for controlling and preventing disease and for promoting growth. But this trend also has the potential for promoting antimicrobial resistance, which represents a threat to human, animal, and environmental health. The use of antimicrobials and the potential effects of antimicrobial dependence has often been associated with large-scale food animal production. But rural households also engage in small-scale agricultural production, often operating literally in backyards. While some small-scale producers use veterinary antimicrobials, most do not. This paper examines knowledge and attitudes to understand alternative practices. Methods: Qualitative field research was based on four focus group discussions (FGDs) with backyard food animal producers in six communities near Quito, Ecuador and two FGDs with veterinarians. FGDs were supplemented by structured observations and key informant interviews. They were recorded with digital audio devices and transcriptions were analyzed independently by two researchers using a three-stage coding procedure. Open coding identifies underlying concepts, while axial coding develops categories and properties, and selective coding integrates the information in order to identify the key dimensions of the collective qualitative data.Results: The qualitative data analysis shows that first, backyard food animal producers use few purchased inputs, including antimicrobials for keeping small numbers of animals and poultry for predominantly non-commercial household consumption and they use traditional veterinary remedies at little or no cost. Second, indigenous households and other small-scale producers in the Ecuadorian highlands and other parts of the Andean region retain traditional views of human productive activity as a component of the physical and spiritual environment. Conclusions: Backyard food animal producers in the Ecuadorian highlands implement complex household survival strategies based on both economic calculations and sociocultural underpinnings that shape perceptions, attitudes, and practices. They use traditional veterinary remedies in lieu of antimicrobials in most cases because limited production of food animals in small spaces allows them to contribute to a predictable household food supply, while at the same time conforming to traditional concepts of human and environmental health.