RESUMO
Improving farm animal welfare requires modifications to the behavior of many stakeholders. Investments in more animal-friendly barns to improve animal welfare have already been made by some farmers. However, more farmers must be persuaded to modernize their barns. The marketing of animal-friendly products is the responsibility of retailers, and consumers have to purchase these products. Currently, little is known about what (and how) underlying psychological factors influence a farmer's intention to construct pig housing to improve farm animal welfare. Pig farmers in Germany were questioned via an online questionnaire in May 2020 (n = 424). Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), partial least squares path modeling was used. The constructs: attitude, subjective norm, direct and indirect experience associated with the construction of pig housing substantially influenced the farmers' behaviors. As expected, the impact of perceived behavioral control on intention was negative but was also very low and only slightly significant. Contrary to expectations, the perceived behavioral control had no significant influence on farmers' behaviors. Pig farmers who have already rebuilt their pigs' housing should be motivated to share their experiences to influence their colleagues' intentions to construct. Our results will encourage policy makers to consider the important role of the different psychological and intrinsic factors influencing pig farmers. Thus, the sustainability of pig farming can be improved by giving politicians a better understanding of farmers´ behaviors.
RESUMO
Pictures of farm animals and their husbandry systems are frequently presented in the media and are mostly connected to discussions surrounding farm animal welfare. How such pictures are perceived by the broader public is not fully understood thus far. It is presumable that the animals' expressions and body languages as well as their depicted environment or husbandry systems affect public perception. Therefore, the aim of this study is to test how the evaluation of a picture showing a farmed pig is influenced by portrayed attributes, as well as participants' perceptions of pigs' abilities in general, and if connection to agriculture has an influence. In an online survey, 1,019 German residents were shown four modified pictures of a pig in a pen. The pictures varied with regards to facial expression and body language of the pig ('happy' versus 'unhappy' pig) and the barn setting (straw versus slatted floor pen). Respondents were asked to evaluate both the pen and the welfare of the pig. Two Linear Mixed Models were calculated to analyze effects on pig and pen evaluation. For the pictures, the pen had the largest influence on both pig and pen evaluation, followed by the pig's appearance and participants' beliefs in pigs' mental and emotional abilities, as well as their connection to agriculture. The welfare of both the 'happy' and the 'unhappy' pig was assessed to be higher in the straw setting compared to the slatted floor setting in our study, and even the 'unhappy pig' on straw was perceived more positively than the 'happy pig' on slatted floor. The straw pen was evaluated as being better than the slatted floor pen on the pictures we presented but the pens also differed in level of dirt on the walls (more dirt in the slatted floor pen), which might have influenced the results. Nevertheless, the results suggest that enduring aspects of pictures such as the husbandry system influence perceptions more than a momentary body expression of the pig, at least in the settings tested herein.
