What are farm animals thinking?

New research is revealing surprising complexity in the minds of goats, pigs, and other livestock.

Exploring power and participation through informal livestock knowledge networks.

Participatory epidemiology programmes aim to collect data by engaging local communities in knowledge sharing around livestock health. Critics of participatory approaches often cite the extractive nature of data collection and unequal power relations between researcher and researched as at odds with the original vision of participatory programming. This paper starts from the position that rural livestock owners are situated within multiple overlapping webs of relationships through which they exchange disease information and access resources. Participatory programmes are suggested as weaving new threads into these wider networks in a process that may be accepted or rejected by indigenous actors. Qualitative interviews were used to gather empirical data on the exchange of information around livestock health knowledge through indigenous relationships and a Participatory Disease Surveillance (PDS) programme within a Gabra pastoralist community in Northern Kenya. Subsequent analysis identified four pathway typologies; this paper provides a qualitative comparative analysis of each to explore the nature of participation within the study population. The paper concludes that social science approaches have a key role to play in understanding how relationships within and between indigenous and development actors can influence participation in development projects.

Social stress as a cause of diseases in farm animals: Current knowledge and future directions.

Over the past 50 years, biomedical research has established a strong linkage between psychosocial stress and disease risk in humans, which has transformed the understanding of stress and the role it plays in human lives. This research has led to personalized medicine where a reduction in daily life stress is a main goal for many people with debilitating illnesses. This review describes the supporting evidence that social stress also plays a critical role in farm animal disease prevention, and may be a mediator by which common management practices can increase disease risk. There is evidence that social factors, including deprivation of social contact ('social isolation'), reducing space allowance ('crowding') and disturbing social order ('social instability') trigger physiological and behavioral indicators of stress in livestock. Less research exists, however, linking management practices that trigger social stress with higher disease risk. Suggestions are offered for future research opportunities, and practical, evidence-based recommendations are made for reducing the negative effects of social isolation, instability and crowding. The current evidence that social factors contribute to disease risk in farm animals is not as convincing as the human literature, but remains a promising and important area for future research.

Backyard poultry raising in Bangladesh: a valued resource for the villagers and a setting for zoonotic transmission of avian influenza. A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Backyard poultry raising is common in rural communities and a valued resource that provides food and income for subsistence farmers. Close contact with infected backyard poultry has been associated with H5N1 human cases in different countries. The emergence of this virus within Bangladesh means that backyard poultry raisers are at risk of avian influenza infections. The aim of this study was to understand why people raise backyard poultry and to characterize people's regular interaction with their poultry. METHODS: In 2008, a qualitative study was conducted in two villages from two districts of Bangladesh. In a social mapping exercise the villagers drew all the households in their village: 115 households in the village in Netrokona and 85 households in the village in Rajshahi District. Selected were 40 households (20 households from each of the two villages) for data collection through in-depth interviews (n=40) and household mapping (n=40), and observation sessions (n=16). RESULTS: In both villages, 92% of households raised backyard poultry. The majority of the owners was female and used the money earned from poultry raising to purchase cooking ingredients, clothing, and agricultural seeds, and pay for children's education expenses. The households consumed poultry meat and eggs. In the village in Netrokona, 80% (85/106) of households kept poultry inside the bedroom. In the village in Rajshahi, 87% (68/78) of households had separate cage/night sheds. During feeding the poultry and cleaning the poultry raising areas, villagers came into contact with poultry and poultry feces. Poultry scavenged for food on the floor, bed, in the food pot and around the place where food was cooked. Poultry drank from and bathed in the same body of water that villagers used for bathing and washing utensils and clothes. CONCLUSION: Although raising poultry provides essential support to the families' livelihoods, it exposes them to the risk of avian influenza through close contact with their poultry. Simple warnings to avoid poultry contact are unlikely to change practices that are essential to household survival. Interventions that help to protect poultry flocks and improve household profitability are more likely to be practiced.