Cargando…

Improving working equine welfare in ‘hard-win’ situations, where gains are difficult, expensive or marginal

PURPOSE: Brooke is a non-government organisation with working equine welfare programmes across Africa, Asia and Latin America. In 2014, staff from ten country programmes were asked to identify ‘no-win’ situations (subsequently reframed as ‘hard-wins’)—where improving equine welfare is proving diffic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pritchard, Joy, Upjohn, Melissa, Hirson, Tamsin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5800664/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29408887
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0191950
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: Brooke is a non-government organisation with working equine welfare programmes across Africa, Asia and Latin America. In 2014, staff from ten country programmes were asked to identify ‘no-win’ situations (subsequently reframed as ‘hard-wins’)—where improving equine welfare is proving difficult, expensive and/or marginal—in order to inform strategic decisions on how to approach, manage and mitigate for such situations. METHODS: The Delphi-type consultation process had three phases. Round 1 posed five questions in the form of a workshop, survey and semi-structured interviews. Round 2 re-presented key themes and sense-checked initial conclusions. Round 3 reviewed the nature and prevalence of hard-win situations at an international meeting of all participants. RESULTS: Reasons given for hard-win situations included: no economic or social benefit from caring for working animals; poor resource availability; lack of empathy for working equids or their owners among wider stakeholders; deep-seated social issues, such as addiction or illegal working; areas with a high animal turnover or migratory human population; lack of community cooperation or cohesion; unsafe areas where welfare interventions cannot be adequately supported. Participants estimated the prevalence of hard-win situations as 40–70% of their work. They suggested some current ways of working that may be contributing to the problem, and opportunities to tackle hard-wins more effectively. CONCLUSION AND ANIMAL WELFARE IMPLICATIONS: Respondents agreed that if equine welfare improvements are to span generations of animals, interventions cannot rely on relatively simple, technical knowledge-transfer strategies and quick-wins alone. Programmes need to be more flexible and iterative and less risk-averse in their approaches to embedding good equine welfare practices in all relevant actors. Consultation recommendations informed development of Brooke’s new global strategy, a revised organisational structure and redefinition of roles and responsibilities to streamline ways to approach hard-wins in the complex environments and socio-economic contexts in which working equids are found.