荷兰集约化畜牧业风险的对比视角:一项调查研究

IF 2.4 4区 管理学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Journal of Risk Research Pub Date : 2023-07-13 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1080/13669877.2023.2231003
V Eijrond, L Claassen, D Timmermans
{"title":"荷兰集约化畜牧业风险的对比视角:一项调查研究","authors":"V Eijrond, L Claassen, D Timmermans","doi":"10.1080/13669877.2023.2231003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the Netherlands, intensive livestock farming is a recurrent topic of societal debate with stakeholders having quite different perspectives on the benefits and harms. In particular, stakeholders appear to have different perceptions on the risks to human and animal health. This paper reports a quantitative analysis of a survey on the perceptions of risks and benefits of intensive livestock farming conducted among the general public, including people living in livestock dense municipalities (<i>n</i> = 808), farmers (<i>n</i> = 237) and other stakeholders (<i>n</i> = 367). Results show that farmers and citizens have contrasting views about the benefits and concerns and in particular about the risks of intensive livestock farming for human health as well as animal well-being. People living in livestock dense communities held a somewhat more positive view than the general public, yet odour hinder and air quality was perceived as a serious health problem, but not by farmers. These differences in risk perceptions may well be explained from differences in interest, experience and options for control of potential hazards. Our study reflects more than just the perceived risks related to intensive livestock farming, but also reveal the global and multidimensional legitimate concerns and views on what matter to different groups of people. We argue that these differences in risk perspectives should be taken into account when communicating about human health risks, and should also be more explicitly addressed in discussions about the risks of intensive livestock farming in order to develop more inclusive policies that are supported by stakeholders.</p>","PeriodicalId":16975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10561603/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contrasting perspectives on the risks of intensive livestock farming in The Netherlands: a survey study.\",\"authors\":\"V Eijrond, L Claassen, D Timmermans\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13669877.2023.2231003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the Netherlands, intensive livestock farming is a recurrent topic of societal debate with stakeholders having quite different perspectives on the benefits and harms. In particular, stakeholders appear to have different perceptions on the risks to human and animal health. This paper reports a quantitative analysis of a survey on the perceptions of risks and benefits of intensive livestock farming conducted among the general public, including people living in livestock dense municipalities (<i>n</i> = 808), farmers (<i>n</i> = 237) and other stakeholders (<i>n</i> = 367). Results show that farmers and citizens have contrasting views about the benefits and concerns and in particular about the risks of intensive livestock farming for human health as well as animal well-being. People living in livestock dense communities held a somewhat more positive view than the general public, yet odour hinder and air quality was perceived as a serious health problem, but not by farmers. These differences in risk perceptions may well be explained from differences in interest, experience and options for control of potential hazards. Our study reflects more than just the perceived risks related to intensive livestock farming, but also reveal the global and multidimensional legitimate concerns and views on what matter to different groups of people. We argue that these differences in risk perspectives should be taken into account when communicating about human health risks, and should also be more explicitly addressed in discussions about the risks of intensive livestock farming in order to develop more inclusive policies that are supported by stakeholders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Risk Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10561603/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Risk Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2231003\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Risk Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2231003","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要在荷兰,集约化畜牧业是社会辩论中反复出现的话题,利益相关者对其益处和危害有着截然不同的看法。特别是,利益攸关方似乎对人类和动物健康的风险有不同的看法。本文报告了一项对公众(包括生活在畜牧业密集城市的人)对集约畜牧业风险和收益认知的调查的定量分析(n = 808),农民(n = 237)和其他利益相关者(n = 367)。结果表明,农民和公民对集约化畜牧业对人类健康和动物福祉的好处和担忧,特别是对风险的看法截然不同。生活在牲畜密集社区的人们比普通公众持更积极的看法,但气味阻碍和空气质量被认为是一个严重的健康问题,但农民却没有。风险认知的这些差异可以很好地从兴趣、经验和潜在危险控制选项的差异中解释。我们的研究不仅反映了与集约畜牧业相关的感知风险,还揭示了对不同人群重要的全球和多层面的合理关切和观点。我们认为,在沟通人类健康风险时,应该考虑到风险视角的这些差异,在讨论集约畜牧业的风险时也应该更明确地解决这些差异,以便制定更具包容性的政策,得到利益相关者的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Contrasting perspectives on the risks of intensive livestock farming in The Netherlands: a survey study.

In the Netherlands, intensive livestock farming is a recurrent topic of societal debate with stakeholders having quite different perspectives on the benefits and harms. In particular, stakeholders appear to have different perceptions on the risks to human and animal health. This paper reports a quantitative analysis of a survey on the perceptions of risks and benefits of intensive livestock farming conducted among the general public, including people living in livestock dense municipalities (n = 808), farmers (n = 237) and other stakeholders (n = 367). Results show that farmers and citizens have contrasting views about the benefits and concerns and in particular about the risks of intensive livestock farming for human health as well as animal well-being. People living in livestock dense communities held a somewhat more positive view than the general public, yet odour hinder and air quality was perceived as a serious health problem, but not by farmers. These differences in risk perceptions may well be explained from differences in interest, experience and options for control of potential hazards. Our study reflects more than just the perceived risks related to intensive livestock farming, but also reveal the global and multidimensional legitimate concerns and views on what matter to different groups of people. We argue that these differences in risk perspectives should be taken into account when communicating about human health risks, and should also be more explicitly addressed in discussions about the risks of intensive livestock farming in order to develop more inclusive policies that are supported by stakeholders.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Risk Research
Journal of Risk Research SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: The Journal of Risk Research is an international journal that publishes peer-reviewed theoretical and empirical research articles within the risk field from the areas of social, physical and health sciences and engineering, as well as articles related to decision making, regulation and policy issues in all disciplines. Articles will be published in English. The main aims of the Journal of Risk Research are to stimulate intellectual debate, to promote better risk management practices and to contribute to the development of risk management methodologies. Journal of Risk Research is the official journal of the Society for Risk Analysis Europe and the Society for Risk Analysis Japan.
期刊最新文献
Beyond the singular and linear risk approach Investigating the psychological impact of communicating epistemic uncertainty in personalized and generic risk estimates: an experimental study Securing public spaces: public willingness to sacrifice convenience and privacy for security at three U.S. public venues Seismic hazard and risk analysis in The Netherlands for deep subsurface activities in practice The role of knowledge and trust in developing risk perceptions of autonomous vehicles: a moderated mediation model
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1