Zookeepers - The most important animal in the zoo?

Education to improve knowledge of animal welfare is not a universal component of training for zoo staff, and little is reported about the perspectives of zoo staff on the need for such education. This paper reports results from structured telephone interviews of a diverse sample of eight Chinese and eight European zoo staff about aspects of zoological animal welfare, education and zoological practices. These qualitative data were thematically analyzed and key themes generated. Similar themes emerged across regions: Zoo staff consider professional attributes including motivation and enthusiasm to be important alongside formal training, zoo staff value learning opportunities but don't always feel supported, and contextual information including wild animal ecology was considered important content in zoo animal welfare education.

Is Animal Welfare an Internationally Understood Concept in the Zoo World? Thematic Analysis of Two Regional Groups of Zoo Staff.

Universal frameworks for zoo animal welfare have been suggested. However, there is little evidence of a cross-cultural understanding of zoo animal welfare. This paper reports themes emerging from a qualitative study of international (European and Chinese) zoo professionals on zoo animal welfare issues. Structured telephone interviews were conducted with eight Chinese and eight European zoo staff, covering aspects of zoological animal welfare, conservation and zoological husbandry practices. These qualitative data were thematically analysed, and key themes generated. This paper describes three themes relating to 'What is animal welfare' 'Animal welfare frameworks' and 'The human element in animal welfare'. This analysis indicates that the concept of animal welfare has cultural equivalence across Europe and between Europe and China, and that zoo staff are familiar with welfare frameworks. In China, a need for senior leadership and motivating staff to improve animal welfare emerged.

Happy or healthy? How members of the public prioritise farm animal health and natural behaviours.

The importance given to minimising health issues and promoting natural behaviours is a polarising issue within farm animal welfare. It is predominantly thought that members of the public prioritise animals being able to behave naturally over other aspects of farm animal welfare, such as addressing health issues. However, public perspectives may be more multi-dimensional than is generally thought, with the importance given to these different elements of welfare dependent on the situation and state of the animals in question. To examine this, a factorial survey using vignettes, which experimentally manipulated the different levels of health (high health vs. low health) and natural behaviour provision (high behaviour vs. low behaviour), was completed by a sample (n = 810) representative of the UK population (on age, gender, ethnicity). Contrary to the predominant view, this study found animal health had the greatest effect on participants' judgements, explaining more of the variance in their assessments of animal welfare than any other factor. However, findings also indicated that participants considered animal welfare to be most positive when both health issues are minimised and natural behaviours are promoted. Attitudes to natural behaviours also varied more between participants, with females, individuals who do not (regularly) eat meat and those with a greater belief in animal mind giving greater priority to natural behaviours. In the context of public and private welfare standards seeking to meet public expectations, this study provides important insights into how public perspectives of animal welfare are more nuanced than previously thought, influenced by the context of the animal, the aspect of welfare in question and personal characteristics.

Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on animal behaviour and welfare researchers.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in many changes in the way research is conducted. Some specific groups (e.g. women) and activities (e.g. teaching) may have been disproportionally affected. Our aim was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on animal behaviour and welfare researchers' work experience and productivity, focussing on gender, care role, career stage and teaching load. An online survey asked researchers about childcare, research and teaching load and associated changes due to the pandemic, among others, and included the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) and the Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviours (ISSB). From June-July 2020, 117 completed responses were received from 28 countries. Time available for writing papers and grants either increased (36 %), decreased (31 %) or these tasks were halted completely (12 %). Perceived productivity was significantly lower for caregivers (P < 0.001) and for men as compared to women (P < 0.001); and low productivity was associated with more stress (higher PSS: P < 0.001). Respondents' experience of the pandemic related to the PSS (b = -0.03 ± 0.02; P = 0.03) and to self-assessed personality traits (P = 0.01). The average PSS of 21 ± 6.5 was greater than the reference value of 15, and was higher when respondents had low job security (P < 0.001) and when they more strongly characterised themselves as perfectionists, hard-working, empathetic and worried (P = 0.02). Respondents who had an intense care role received most social support (P = 0.04). Teaching load increased for 25 % of the respondents but did not significantly relate to any of the response variables. Overall, caregivers and early career researchers faced the most difficulties, and personality traits had a major impact on the ability to cope with the changes caused by the pandemic.

What Is so Positive about Positive Animal Welfare?-A Critical Review of the Literature.

It is claimed that positive animal welfare (PAW) developed over the last decade in reaction to animal welfare focusing too much on avoiding negatives. However, it remains unclear what PAW adds to the animal welfare literature and to what extent its ideas are new. Through a critical review of the PAW literature, we aim to separate different aspects of PAW and situate it in relation to the traditional animal welfare literature. We find that the core PAW literature is small (n = 10 papers) but links to wider areas of current research interest. The PAW literature is defined by four features: (1) positive emotions which is arguably the most widely acknowledged; (2) positive affective engagement which serves to functionally link positive emotions to goal-directed behavior; (3) quality of life which serves to situate PAW within the context of finding the right balance of positives over negatives; (4) happiness which brings a full life perspective to PAW. While the two first points are already part of welfare research going back decades, the two latter points could be linked to more recent research agendas concerning aggregation and how specific events may affect the ability of animals to make the best of their lives.

What Are the Positives? Exploring Positive Welfare Indicators in a Qualitative Interview Study with Livestock Farmers.

To support the furtherance of positive animal welfare, there is a need to develop meaningful and practical positive welfare indicators for on-farm welfare assessment. Considering the perspectives of farmers is arguably critical in this regard. Doing so helps ensure positive welfare indicators reflect farmers' existing welfare norms and attitudes and, are thus, of practical relevance to them. However, a key issue for such development is the dearth of knowledge on farmers' perspectives of positive welfare. To address this, this study uses qualitative interviews to directly examine livestock farmers' perspectives of positive welfare. Findings reveal that farmers describe elements of positive welfare which are broadly in line with indicators suggested in the positive welfare literature. These elements include animal autonomy, play, positive affect, positive human-animal relationships, social interaction, and appropriate genetic selection. Additionally, this study finds that farmers construct the reduction of negative aspects of welfare as their primary management concern and mostly construct positive welfare as arising indirectly from this. Insights into the importance that farmers of different sectors and systems give to different aspects of positive welfare indicators are also explored. The implications of these findings and the similitudes between farmers' perspectives and the positive welfare literature are discussed.

Citizens' and Farmers' Framing of 'Positive Animal Welfare' and the Implications for Framing Positive Welfare in Communication.

Human perception can depend on how an individual frames information in thought and how information is framed in communication. For example, framing something positively, instead of negatively, can change an individual's response. This is of relevance to 'positive animal welfare', which places greater emphasis on farm animals being provided with opportunities for positive experiences. However, little is known about how this framing of animal welfare may influence the perception of key animal welfare stakeholders. Through a qualitative interview study with farmers and citizens, undertaken in Scotland, UK, this paper explores what positive animal welfare evokes to these key welfare stakeholders and highlights the implications of such internal frames for effectively communicating positive welfare in society. Results indicate that citizens make sense of positive welfare by contrasting positive and negative aspects of welfare, and thus frame it as animals having 'positive experiences' or being 'free from negative experiences'. Farmers draw from their existing frames of animal welfare to frame positive welfare as 'good husbandry', 'proactive welfare improvement' or the 'animal's point of view'. Implications of such internal frames (e.g., the triggering of 'negative welfare' associations by the word 'positive') for the effective communication of positive welfare are also presented.

Reducing the Consumer Attitude⁻Behaviour Gap in Animal Welfare: The Potential Role of 'Nudges'.

Citizen concern for the welfare of farm animals is well documented. However, there is a notable gap between people saying they want improved farm animal welfare and how they actually behave as a consumer. This is known as the citizen⁻consumer attitude⁻behaviour gap. As improvements in farm animal welfare can be affected by market demand, the choices consumers make become important. This paper introduces the concept of 'nudging' and discusses how it could be applied to reduce the attitude⁻behaviour gap amongst consumers. By designing the choice environment to better reflect the behavioural biases known to impact human decision-making, 'nudge' tools function to prompt individuals to make choices that are aligned with their stated intentions. Four 'nudge' tools: self-nudges, choice architecture, social norms and pre-commitments are discussed. The behavioural rationales for their use are reviewed and examples of how they might be applied to animal welfare provided. Improved farm animal welfare arguably requires improved pro-welfare consumer behaviour. This paper highlights how this might be encouraged by: self-nudging the salience of an ethical self-image; altering the choice architecture to influence decision-making; articulating social norms to impact behaviour; and using pre-commitment devices to overcome self-control issues.