Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T03:47:51.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Attitudes of veterinary students in Croatia toward farm animal welfare

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

M Ostović ,
Ž Mesić ,
T Mikuš ,
K Matković  and
Ž Pavičić
M Ostović*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Hygiene, Behaviour and Welfare, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zagreb, Heinzelova 55, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
Ž Mesić
Affiliation:
Department of Marketing in Agriculture, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
T Mikuš
Affiliation:
Animal Welfare Office, Croatian Veterinary Institute, Zagreb, Croatia
K Matković
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Hygiene, Behaviour and Welfare, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zagreb, Heinzelova 55, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
Ž Pavičić
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Hygiene, Behaviour and Welfare, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zagreb, Heinzelova 55, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This survey was undertaken to assess the attitudes of Croatian veterinary students regarding farm animal welfare issues. The study included students of all undergraduate years at the only Faculty of Veterinary Medicine in Croatia. First-year students were surveyed twice, ie before and after attending the course on animal welfare, using a written questionnaire containing statements with a five-point Likert scale for choice of answers. Students consider good animal welfare necessary for sustainability of farming systems and food quality and safety, ranking particular issues in the following order, biological functioning > natural living > emotional states. Students also believe that cattle and pigs have greater cognitive abilities and that their welfare is less compromised in comparison with poultry, whereas standard management procedures performed in pig production are perceived as more humane than beak-trimming in poultry. In addtion, students tend to consider pain in farm animals caused by management procedures only when these procedures involved the affliction of significant pain. There were no differences between attitude scores on most of the statements from first-year students before and after the course. Furthermore, for the majority of statements, the mean responses were lower in final-year students, suggesting a lower level of empathy toward farm animals. Although similar results have also been recorded elsewhere in the world, these results raise concerns as to the ability of these future veterinarians to promote good farm animal welfare in the country and abroad. The results also suggest a need to modify veterinary student education in Croatia in the field of farm animal welfare.

Keywords

animal welfareattitudesCroatiafarm animalssurveyveterinary students
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , February 2016 , pp. 21 - 28
Copyright
© 2016 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Anonymous 1999 Council Directive 1999/74/EC of 19 July 1999 laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens. Official Journal of the European Communities L 203/53. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:1999:203:0053:0057:EN:PDFGoogle Scholar
Anonymous 2008 Council Directive 2008/120/EC of 18 December 2008 laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs (codified version). Official Journal of the European Union L 47/5. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do ?uri=OJ:L:2009:047:0005:0013:EN:PDFGoogle Scholar
Antunović, B, Poljak, V, Baban, M, Mijić, P, Ronta, A, Pavičić, Ž, Ostović, M, Mačkić, S and Ahmetović, N 2014 Cloning of farm animals – a scientific challenge under the question mark of ethics and welfare. In: Baban, M and Đurđević, B (eds) 7th International Scientific/Professional Conference, Agriculture in Nature and Environment Protection pp 27–36. 28-30 May, Vukovar, Croatia. Glas Slavonije dd: Osijek, CroatiaGoogle Scholar
Awuor, E and Karugu, CT 2014 Assessment of establishment and management of organic fish farming in Kenya: a case study of Kiambu District. European Journal of Business and Management 6: 194–205Google Scholar
Blaha, T and Köfer, J 2009 The growing role of animal hygiene for sustainable husbandry systems. In: Aland, A and Madec, F (eds) Sustainable Animal Production: The Challenges and Potential Developments for Professional Farming pp 23–32. Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Blokhuis, HJ, Keeling, LJ, Gavinelli, A and Serratosa, J 2008 Animal welfare's impact on the food chain. Trends in Food Science & Technology 19: S79–S87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2008.09.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM, Galindo, FA and Murgueitio, E 2013 Sustainable, efficient livestock production with high biodiversity and good wel-fare for animals. Proceedings of the Royal Society B280: 2013–2025. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2025Google Scholar
Cáceres, SB 2012 The roles of veterinarians in meeting the chal-lenges of health and welfare of livestock and global food security. Veterinary Research Forum 3: 155–157Google Scholar
Cerjak M, Karolyi D and Mesić Ž 2011 Consumers’ attitudes towards farm animal welfare and their influence on meat con-sumption. Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus 76: 283–286Google Scholar
Croatian Bureau of Statistics (CBS) 2012 Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Croatia. CBS: Zagreb, CroatiaGoogle Scholar
Davis, SL and Cheeke, PR 1998 Do domestic animals have minds and the ability to think? A provisional sample of opinions on the question. Journal of Animal Science 76: 2072–2079CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edwards, JD and Schneider, HP 2005 The world veterinary association and animal welfare. Revue Scientifique et Techniques de l’Office International des Epizooties 24: 639–646Google ScholarPubMed
European Commission (EC) 2007a 50 years of food safety in the European Union pp 1–42. EC: Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
European Commission (EC) 2007b Attitudes of EU citizens towards animal welfare. Special Eurobarometer 270th Report pp 1–51. EC: Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
European Commission (EC) 2007c Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed animals Wave 2. Special Eurobarometer 229th (2) Report pp 1–26. EC: Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) 1993 Second report on priorities for research and development in farm animal welfare. DEFRA: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D 2008 Understanding animal welfare. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 50 (S1): 1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1751-0147-50-S1-S1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, NG 2007 Animal Welfare and Meat Production, 2nd Edition. NG Gregory, Cromwell: Trowbridge, UK. http://dx.d oi.org/10.1079/9781845932152.0000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazel, SJ, Signal, TD and Taylor, N 2011 Can teaching veteri-nary and animal-science students about animal welfare affect their attitude toward animals and human-related empathy? Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 38: 74–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/jvme.38.1.74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Held, S, Mendl, M, Laughlin, K and Byrne, RW 2002 Cognition studies with pigs: livestock cognition and its implication for pro-duction. Journal of Animal Science 80: E10–E17Google Scholar
Heleski, CR, Mertig, AG and Zanella, AJ 2005 Results of a nation-al survey of US veterinary college faculty regarding attitudes toward farm animal welfare. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 226: 1538–1546. http://dx.doi.org/10.2460/javma.2005.226.1538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irvine, L and Vermilya, JR 2010 Gender work in a feminized pro-fession: the case of veterinary medicine. Gender & Society 24: 56–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Izmirli, S and Phillips, CJ 2012 Attitudes of Australian and Turkish veterinary faculty toward animal welfare. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 39: 200–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/jvme.1010.130R3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jago, J, Fisher, A and Le Neindre, P 2000 Animal welfare and prod-uct quality. In: Balázs, E, Galante, E, Lynch, JM, Schepers, JS, Toutant, J-P, Werner, D and Werry, PA (eds) Biological Resource Management: Connecting Science and Policy pp 163–171. Springer-Verlag: Berlin, Germany. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-04033-1_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeling, LJ 2005 Healthy and happy: animal welfare as an integral part of sustainable agriculture. Ambio 34: 316–319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1579/0044-7447-34.4.316CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levine, ED, Mills, DS and Houpt, KA 2005 Attitudes of veteri-nary students at one US college toward factors relating to farm animal welfare. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 32: 481–490. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/jvme.32.4.481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lofstedt, J 2003 Gender and veterinary medicine. The Canadian Veterinary Journal 44: 533–535Google ScholarPubMed
Lord, LK, Walker, JB, Croney, CC and Golab, GC 2010 A comparison of veterinary students enrolled and not enrolled in an animal-welfare course. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 37:40–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/jvme.37.1.40CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Main, DC 2010 Evolution of animal-welfare education for veteri-nary students. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 37: 30–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/jvme.37.1.30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meehan, H, Cowan, C and McIntyre, B 2002 Food choice and consumer concerns about animal welfare in Ireland. The National Food Centre Research Report No 53 pp 1–19. Teagasc: Dublin, IrelandGoogle Scholar
Mendl, M and Nicol, CJ 2014 Učenje i spoznaja. In: Pavičić, Ž and Matković, K (eds) Ponašanje domaćih životinja, prema 2. engleskom izdanju: uvodni tekst pp 57–72. Veterinarski fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu: Zagreb, Croatia. [Title translation: The ethology of domestic animals, second edition: an introductory text]Google Scholar
National Research Council (NRC) 2009 Recognition and alle-viation of pain in laboratory animals. The National Academies Press: Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
OIE 2012 OIE recommendations on the competencies of graduating veterinarians (‘Day 1 graduates’) to assure National Veterinary Services of Quality. World Organization for Animal Health: Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
Paul, ES and Podberscek, AI 2000 Veterinary education and students’ attitudes towards animal welfare. Veterinary Record 146:269–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.146.10.269CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pavičić, Ž and Ostović, M 2013 Dobrobit farmskih životinja. Hrvatski Veterinarski Vjesnik 21: 55–59. [Title translation: Farm animal welfare]Google Scholar
Pollard-Williams, S, Doyle, RE and Freire, R 2014 The influ-ence of workplace learning on attitudes toward animal welfare in veterinary students. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 41: 253–257. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/jvme.0114-006R1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabuncuoglu, N and Coban, O 2008 Attitudes of Turkish vet-erinarians towards animal welfare. Animal Welfare 17: 27–33Google Scholar
Serpell, JA 2005 Factors influencing veterinary students’ career choices and attitudes to animals. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 32: 491–496. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/jvme.32.4.491CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stafford, KJ and Mellor, DJ 2010 Painful husbandry procedures in livestock and poultry. In: Grandin, T (ed) Improving Animal Welfare: A Practical Approach pp 88–114. CAB International, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
Špinka, M 2012 AWARE project: background, objectives and expected outcomes. EAAP Scientific Committee Book of Abstracts of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science p 205. 27-31 August 2012, Bratislava, Slovakia. Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, W 2005 Agriculture and the food industry in the infor-mation age. European Review of Agricultural Economics 32: 347–368. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurrag/jbi017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viegas, I, Vieira, A, Stilwell, G, Santos, LJ and Fontes, MA 2011 Is there a link between beef quality and animal welfare in tra-ditional beef systems? New Medit 10: 17–25Google Scholar
Viñuela-Fernández, I, Weary, DM and Flecknell, P 2011 Pain. In: Appleby, MC, Mench, JA, Olsson, IAS and Hughes, BO (eds) Animal Welfare, 2nd Edition pp 64–77. CAB International, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vučinić, M 2006 Ponašanje, dobrobit i zaštita životinja. Fakultet Veterinarske Medicine, Univerzitet u Beogradu: Belgrade, Serbia.[Title translation: Animal behaviour, welfare and protection]Google Scholar
Wall, P 2014 One Health and the food chain: maintaining safety in a globalised industry. Veterinary Record 174: 189–192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.g1512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, J 1994 Animal Welfare: A Cool Eye Towards Eden. Blackwell Publications: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar