Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T14:38:48.053Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Attitudes of stakeholders to animal welfare during slaughter and transport in SE and E Asia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

M Sinclair ,
S Zito ,
Z Idrus ,
W Yan ,
D van Nhiem ,
P Na Lampang  and
CJC Phillips
M Sinclair*
Affiliation:
Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics, School of Veterinary Sciences, The University of Queensland, Gatton, Queensland 4343, Australia
S Zito
Affiliation:
Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics, School of Veterinary Sciences, The University of Queensland, Gatton, Queensland 4343, Australia
Z Idrus
Affiliation:
Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
W Yan
Affiliation:
Guangzhou University, 230 Daxuecheng Outer Ring West Road, Panyu, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
D van Nhiem
Affiliation:
Vietnam National University of Agriculture, Gialam, Hanoi, Vietnam
P Na Lampang
Affiliation:
Suranaree University of Technology, 111 University Avenue, Muang District, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
CJC Phillips
Affiliation:
Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics, School of Veterinary Sciences, The University of Queensland, Gatton, Queensland 4343, Australia
*
* Contact for correspondence, requests for reprints and a copy of the questionnaire: m.sinclair6@uq.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Understanding cross-cultural differences in attitudes to animal welfare issues is important in maintaining good international relations, including economic and trade relations. This study aimed to investigate the attitudes of stakeholders towards improving the welfare of animals during slaughter and transport in four key SE and E Asian countries: China, Thailand, Vietnam and Malaysia. Logistic regression analysis of the associations between demographic factors and attitudes identified nationality as the most significant factor influencing attitude. Motivating factors for improving welfare were ranked according to their importance: religion, knowledge levels, monetary gain, availability of tools and resources, community issues, approval of supervisor and peers. Strong beliefs in the influence of animal welfare laws, the power of the workplace and the importance of personal knowledge were shared by all countries. In addition, religion and peer consideration were significantly associated with attitudes in Malaysia and Thailand, respectively. The findings of this research will assist in the development of international animal welfare initiatives.

Keywords

animal welfareAsiaattitudescultureslaughtertransport
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 26 , Issue 4 , November 2017 , pp. 417 - 425
Copyright
© 2017 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ajzen, I 1991 The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50: 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-TCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, RM, Anderson, J and Blaney, RJ 2002 Moral intensi-ty and willingness to pay concerning farm animal welfare issues and the implications for agricultural policy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15(2): 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015036617385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Church, AT 1987 Personality research in a non-Western culture: The Philippines. Psychological Bulletin 102: 272–292. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.102.2.272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crabtree, S 2010 Religiosity highest in world's poorest nations. Gallup report. http://www.gallup.com/poll/142727/religiosity-high-est-world-poorest-nations.aspxGoogle Scholar
Culpepper, RA, Zhao, L and Lowery, C 2002 Survey response bias among Chinese managers. Academy of Management Journal 1: J1–J6. https://doi.org/10.5465/APBPP.2002.7516876Google Scholar
Dolins, FL 1999 Attitudes to Animals: Views in Animal Welfare. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511608476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Food and Agriculture Organisation 2016 FAOSTAT. http://faostat.fao.orgGoogle Scholar
Grimm, P 2010 Social desirability bias. In: Sheth, JN and Malhotra, N (eds) Encyclopedia of Marketing. Wiley International: New Jersey, USA. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444316568.wiem02057Google Scholar
Halal Food Authority 2016 Losing our religion? Two thirds of peo-ple still claim to be religious. http://halalfoodauthority.com/definition-of-halal/Google Scholar
Harzing, AW 2006 Response styles in cross-national survey research: A 26-country study. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 6: 243–266. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470595806066332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemsworth, PH 2003 Human-animal interactions in livestock production. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 81(3): 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00280-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G 2011 Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede Model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture. http://scholar-works.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&context=orpcCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapiz, SMD, Miranda, MEG, Garcia, RG, Daguro, LI, Paman, MD, Madrinan, FP and Briggs, DJ 2012 Implementation of an intersectoral program to eliminate human and canine rabies: the Bohol Rabies Prevention and Elimination Project. PLoS 6(12): e1891. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0001891Google ScholarPubMed
Ling, RZ, Zulkifli, I, Lampang, PN, Nhiem, DV, Wang, Y and Phillips, CJC 2016 Attitudes of students from southeast and east Asian countries to slaughter and transport of livestock. Animal Welfare 25: 377–387. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.25.3.377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, ACT and Corkindale, DR 1998 Differences in ‘cultural values’ and their effects on responses to marketing stimuli: A cross-cultural study between Australians and Chinese from the People's Republic of China. European Journal of Marketing 32: 843–867. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569810232291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marciano, P 2010 Carrots and Sticks Don't Work: Build a Culture of Employee Engagement with the Principles of Respect. McGraw Hill Professional: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Mellor, DJ 2016 Updating animal welfare thinking: moving beyond the ‘Five Freedoms’ towards ‘A Life Worth Living’. Animals 6: 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6030021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkov, M and Hofstede, G 2012 Is national culture a meaning-ful concept? Cultural values delineate homogenous national clus-ters of in-country regions. Cross-Cultural Research 46: 133–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397111427262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Napolitano, F, Pacelli, C, Girolami, A and Braghieri, A 2008 Effect of information about animal welfare on consumer willing-ness to pay for yoghurt. Journal of Dairy Science 91(3): 910–917. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nocella, G, Hubbard, L and Scarpa, R 2010 Farm animal welfare, consumer willingness to pay, and trust: Results of a cross-national survey. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 32(2): 275–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Office International des Epizooties (OIE) 2011 Terrestrial Animal Health Code, 20th Edition. OIE: Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
PEW Research Centre 2016 Muslim population. http://www.pew-forum.org/interactives/muslim-population-graphic/#/MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
Phillips, CJC, Izmirli, S, Aldavood, SJ, Alonso, M, Choe, BI, Hanlon, A, Handziska, A, Illmann, G, Keeling, L, Kennedy, M and Lee, GH 2012 Students’ attitudes to animal welfare and rights in Europe and Asia. Animal Welfare 21: 87–100. https://doi.org/10.7120/096272812799129466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rollin, BE 1995 Farm Animal Welfare: Social, Bioethical, and Research Issues. Wiley International: New Jersey, USAGoogle Scholar
Rynes, SL, Gerhart, B and Minette, KA 2004 The importance of pay in employee motivation: Discrepancies between what peo-ple say and what they do. Human Resources Management 43: 381–394. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartzkopf-Genswein, KS, Faucitano, L, Dadgar, S, Shand, P, González, LA and Crowe, TG 2012 Road transport of cattle, swine and poultry in North America and its impact on animal welfare, carcass and meat quality: A review. Meat Science 92: 227–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.010CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Serpell, JA 2004 Factors influencing human attitudes to animals and their welfare. Animal Welfare 13: 145–151Google Scholar
Sinclair, M, Zito, S and Phillips, CJ 2017 The impact of stake-holders’ roles within the livestock industry on their attitudes to livestock welfare in south east and east Asia. Animals 7(2): 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani7020006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiplady, C, Walsh, DB and Phillips, CJC 2012 Cruelty to Australian cattle in Indonesian abattoirs: How the public respond-ed to media coverage. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26: 869–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-012-9412-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, W, Pérez-Cueto, FJ, de Barcellos, MD, Krystallis, A and Grunert, KG 2010 European citizen and consumer atti-tudes and preferences regarding beef and pork. Meat Science 28:284–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.05.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UN Human Development Index (UNHDI) 2015 Human Development Data. http://hdr.undp.org/en/dataGoogle Scholar
Veissier, I, Butterworth, A, Bock, B and Roe, E 2008 European approaches to ensure good animal welfare. Applied Animal Behavior Science 113: 279–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2008.01.008Google Scholar
Verrinder, J 2016 Identifying and developing capacity for veterinari-ans to address animal ethics issues. PhD Thesis, Faculty of Science, University of Queensland, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
Wildlife, SOS 2009 Dancing bears in India – final curtain. 2009. http://wildlifesos.org/dancing-bears-in-india-final-curtain/Google Scholar
Win-Gallup 2012 Global index of religiosity and atheism. http://www.wingia.com/web/files/news/14/file/14.pdfGoogle Scholar
World Animal Protection 2016 World animal protection index. http://api.worldanimalprotection.org/#Google Scholar
World Bank 2016 Agriculture and rural development. http://data.worldbank.org/topic/agriculture-and-rural-developmentGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Sinclair et al. supplementary material
Download undefined(File)
File 451 KB