Cargando…
Use of welfare outcome information in three types of dairy farm inspection reports
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the use of outcome-based observations within Assured Dairy Farm scheme (ADF), Soil Association Organic Standards (SA), and cross compliance (CC) farm assessment reports. METHODS: A total of 449 ADF reports, 37 SA reports and 26 CC reports were analyzed...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Asian-Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (AAAP) and Korean Society of Animal Science and Technology (KSAST)
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6127581/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29642675 http://dx.doi.org/10.5713/ajas.17.0851 |
_version_ | 1783353503217876992 |
---|---|
author | Lin, Yi-Chun Mullan, Siobhan Main, David C. J. |
author_facet | Lin, Yi-Chun Mullan, Siobhan Main, David C. J. |
author_sort | Lin, Yi-Chun |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the use of outcome-based observations within Assured Dairy Farm scheme (ADF), Soil Association Organic Standards (SA), and cross compliance (CC) farm assessment reports. METHODS: A total of 449 ADF reports, 37 SA reports and 26 CC reports were analyzed and their objective comments categorized as either resource-based or outcome-based. RESULTS: A mean of 61.0% of ADF questions were responded to with comments, in comparison to 25.0% of SA and, 21.0% of CC report questions. The SA and CC reports had significantly more outcome-based comments than the ADF (p<0.001). The assessors’ tendency of choosing resource-based approach was revealed in the questionnaire results. CONCLUSION: Generally, the comments were comprehensive and contained professional judgements. Large numbers of comments provided in the ADF reports were mostly compliant and resource-based evidence, which serves as proof of assessment rather than aiding the certifying process. The inclusion of specific welfare outcome measures in the SA inspection likely increased the use of outcome-based comments in the reports, irrespective of whether the farm achieved compliance with a given standards. The CC scheme, on the other hand, focused on providing outcome-based evidence to justify noncompliant decisions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6127581 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Asian-Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (AAAP) and Korean Society of Animal Science and Technology (KSAST) |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61275812018-09-11 Use of welfare outcome information in three types of dairy farm inspection reports Lin, Yi-Chun Mullan, Siobhan Main, David C. J. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci Article OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the use of outcome-based observations within Assured Dairy Farm scheme (ADF), Soil Association Organic Standards (SA), and cross compliance (CC) farm assessment reports. METHODS: A total of 449 ADF reports, 37 SA reports and 26 CC reports were analyzed and their objective comments categorized as either resource-based or outcome-based. RESULTS: A mean of 61.0% of ADF questions were responded to with comments, in comparison to 25.0% of SA and, 21.0% of CC report questions. The SA and CC reports had significantly more outcome-based comments than the ADF (p<0.001). The assessors’ tendency of choosing resource-based approach was revealed in the questionnaire results. CONCLUSION: Generally, the comments were comprehensive and contained professional judgements. Large numbers of comments provided in the ADF reports were mostly compliant and resource-based evidence, which serves as proof of assessment rather than aiding the certifying process. The inclusion of specific welfare outcome measures in the SA inspection likely increased the use of outcome-based comments in the reports, irrespective of whether the farm achieved compliance with a given standards. The CC scheme, on the other hand, focused on providing outcome-based evidence to justify noncompliant decisions. Asian-Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (AAAP) and Korean Society of Animal Science and Technology (KSAST) 2018-09 2018-04-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6127581/ /pubmed/29642675 http://dx.doi.org/10.5713/ajas.17.0851 Text en Copyright © 2018 by Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Article Lin, Yi-Chun Mullan, Siobhan Main, David C. J. Use of welfare outcome information in three types of dairy farm inspection reports |
title | Use of welfare outcome information in three types of dairy farm inspection reports |
title_full | Use of welfare outcome information in three types of dairy farm inspection reports |
title_fullStr | Use of welfare outcome information in three types of dairy farm inspection reports |
title_full_unstemmed | Use of welfare outcome information in three types of dairy farm inspection reports |
title_short | Use of welfare outcome information in three types of dairy farm inspection reports |
title_sort | use of welfare outcome information in three types of dairy farm inspection reports |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6127581/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29642675 http://dx.doi.org/10.5713/ajas.17.0851 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT linyichun useofwelfareoutcomeinformationinthreetypesofdairyfarminspectionreports AT mullansiobhan useofwelfareoutcomeinformationinthreetypesofdairyfarminspectionreports AT maindavidcj useofwelfareoutcomeinformationinthreetypesofdairyfarminspectionreports |