Application of multiple behaviour change models to identify determinants of farmers’ biosecurity attitudes and behaviours

Abstract

It has been recognised that few cattle farmers undertake biosecurity practices on their farms. Approaches that take into consideration individuals' preparedness for change, alongside beliefs thought to motivate the enactment of certain behaviours, may provide a framework for actuating tangible change. The aim of this study was to use a combination of behaviour change models to link beliefs with behaviour and identify possible key interventions to improve the uptake of biosecurity measures by dairy cattle farmers in Great Britain (GB). This is the first study to explore farmers' practices and attitudes in relation to the prevention of direct (animal to animal contact); indirect (via fomites); and other biosecurity measures using a multitheory approach. A cross-sectional study was carried out, with postal questionnaires sent to 2505 dairy cattle farmers. Questions were asked about the extent to which a host of biosecurity measures were used, the influence of various stakeholders (e.g. veterinarians, industry bodies) in informing biosecurity choices, and the perceived control farmers felt they had over biosecurity on their farms. Farmer attitudes towards biosecurity were also explored. Two behaviour change models, the Transtheoretical Model, and the Theory of Planned Behaviour, were utilised. A variety of analysis methods were used to interrogate the data, including multivariable logistic regression. A total of 908/2505 (36.2%) farmers responded, with 757 responses (30.2%) deemed eligible for inclusion. Farmers generally fell into one of two categories: those that reported not applying biosecurity measures with no intention of doing so in the future, and those that reported undertaking biosecurity measures for some time. Farmers felt that biosecurity improved cattle health and welfare, but also felt that disease was inevitable. More farmers agreed with statements relating to their ability to control, rather than prevent disease. Analysis suggested a difference between influencing beliefs and whether specific types of measure were more likely to be undertaken. For example, farmers' beliefs about other stakeholders appeared to play a role in influencing the utilisation of measures preventing direct contact (e.g. nose to nose contact), rather than indirect contact (e.g. fomite transmission). The use of a combination of behaviour change models has identified key variables to use for interventional approaches targeted towards the different type of biosecurity measure (preventing direct or indirect transmission) to improve the uptake of biosecurity on dairy cattle farms in GB. Other industry stakeholders should be aware of these variables when working with farmers to achieve optimal cattle herd health.

Farmer and Veterinary Practices and Opinions Related to Fertility Testing and Pregnancy Diagnosis of UK Dairy Cows

“…Response rates in our survey were slightly below those typically obtained with this type of surveys [10-15%; www.surveygyzmo.com; (12)]. Higher response rates have been reported for postal or interview-based dairy farmer surveys (13,14), however, online surveys such as ours have distinct advantages, in that they allow distribution of questionnaires to wide target population(s) as well as facilitate reliable processing and analyses of response data, they provide anonymity to participants, and they avoid interviewer bias, among other benefits. Another factor to consider is that our questionnaires were completed by self-selected participants (within our pre-selected list of farmer and veterinarian contacts).…”

Negotiated Management Strategies for Bovine Tuberculosis: Enhancing Risk Mitigation in Michigan and the UK

“…Whilst the principle of enhanced responsibility is a common theme between the Michigan and UK policy landscapes, the mechanisms to achieve change are different. As Enticott et al (27) report, the UK model of promoting biosecurity has developed within a political context based upon an ideological reluctance to regulate and has increasingly relied upon theories of behaviour change designed to “nudge” farmers towards taking action via the use of social norms and provision of information to guide choices [see also (72, 73)]. Examples include the introduction of ibTB—a publically available web-based interactive map showing the locations of bTB breakdowns and breakdowns resolved in the last 5 years, in England [see (74)]—and the promotion of the principles of risk-based trading to encourage farmers to make “informed” cattle purchasing decisions and reduce the risk of introducing disease via trade (75–77).…”

Understanding the Motivation of Western Java Smallholder Broiler Farmers to Uptake Measures Against Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI)

“…The TPB has been applied in several studies to gain insight into the psychological factors that influence intentions to take up measures related to animal disease control. Examples include the uptake of rabies vaccination by Indonesian dog owners (15), the uptake of biosecurity measures by dairy cattle farmers in Great Britain (16), and mastitis control by Ethiopian dairy farmers (17). However, no study has used the TPB to evaluate risk mitigation for HPAI.…”