Residents’ and farmers’ perspectives on risks and benefits of intensive livestock farming

  • Eijrond V
  • Claassen L
  • Timmermans D
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Currently, there is a societal debate in the Netherlands about the future of intensive livestock farming and the current risks for human health and the environment. These risks could be described as systemic risks, which call for a deliberative approach to risk governance, including risk communication. However, stakeholders often have different perspectives towards intensive livestock farming and related risks which pose a challenge for communication. To support two-way communication, it is essential to identify the perspectives of residents and farmers who are directly affected by livestock farming. Using the mental models approach, we explored the current perspectives of the risks and benefits towards intensive livestock farming, in particular, on human health. Interviews were held with in total 44 farmers, residents and other stakeholders. We found that residents tend to view intensive livestock farming from the perspective of the quality of the living environment, which may clarify their overall focus on the risks to their well-being, whereas farmers tend to view intensive livestock farming from the perspective of their livelihood, which explains their focus on the (economic) benefits of intensive livestock farming. For experts as well as policy-makers, it is important to acknowledge the differences in risk perception when giving information about epidemiological health risks and communicating about policy measures. PU - TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD PI - ABINGDON PA - 2-4 PARK SQUARE, MILTON PARK, ABINGDON OR14 4RN, OXON, ENGLAND

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Eijrond, V., Claassen, L., & Timmermans, D. (2022). Residents’ and farmers’ perspectives on risks and benefits of intensive livestock farming. NJAS: Impact in Agricultural and Life Sciences, 94(1), 24–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/27685241.2022.2089601

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free