IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v14y2024i8p1315-d1452538.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Perception of Brazilian Livestock Regarding the Use of Precision Livestock Farming for Animal Welfare

Author

Listed:
  • Michele da Rocha Moreira

    (Department of Biosystems Engineering, Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz, Universidade de São Paulo (ESALQ/USP), Piracicaba 13418-900, Brazil)

  • Aldie Trabachini

    (Department of Biosystems Engineering, Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz, Universidade de São Paulo (ESALQ/USP), Piracicaba 13418-900, Brazil)

  • Magno do Nascimento Amorim

    (Department of Biosystems Engineering, Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz, Universidade de São Paulo (ESALQ/USP), Piracicaba 13418-900, Brazil)

  • Érik dos Santos Harada

    (Department of Biosystems Engineering, Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz, Universidade de São Paulo (ESALQ/USP), Piracicaba 13418-900, Brazil)

  • Marcelo Andrade da Silva

    (Department of Exact Sciences, Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz, Universidade de São Paulo (ESALQ/USP), Piracicaba 13418-900, Brazil)

  • Késia Oliveira da Silva-Miranda

    (Department of Biosystems Engineering, Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz, Universidade de São Paulo (ESALQ/USP), Piracicaba 13418-900, Brazil)

Abstract

This study explores pig producers’ perceptions regarding the use of technologies for animal welfare in pig farming, highlighting the gap between the productive sector and academic institutions. The research was conducted through a questionnaire administered to producers from different cities in Brazil, addressing topics such as property infrastructure, technology adoption, knowledge about animal welfare, and interaction with academic institutions. The results revealed that although the majority of producers have access to information about technologies and animal welfare, there is a perceived resistance to adopting these technologies, reflected in the lack of interest in responding to academic questionnaires. The analysis also points to the influence of producers’ profiles, highlighting the importance of academic education and experience in the sector in the perception and adoption of technologies. Additionally, the research highlights the growing presence of commercial companies, filling the gap between academic research and practical application and suggesting the need for more effective strategies to engage producers in the debate on animal welfare and related technologies. These results have important implications for the development of policies and practices aimed at the sustainable advancement of livestock, encouraging greater integration and collaboration among the various actors in the sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Michele da Rocha Moreira & Aldie Trabachini & Magno do Nascimento Amorim & Érik dos Santos Harada & Marcelo Andrade da Silva & Késia Oliveira da Silva-Miranda, 2024. "The Perception of Brazilian Livestock Regarding the Use of Precision Livestock Farming for Animal Welfare," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:14:y:2024:i:8:p:1315-:d:1452538
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/8/1315/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/8/1315/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Qinghua Wu & Xiaoliang Guan & Jun Zhang & Yang Xu, 2019. "The Role of Rural Infrastructure in Reducing Production Costs and Promoting Resource-Conserving Agriculture," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-13, September.
    2. Monte, Edson Zambon & Teixeira, Erly Cardoso, 2006. "Determinantes da Adoção da Tecnologia de Despolpamento na Cafeicultura," Brazilian Journal of Rural Economy and Sociology (Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural-RESR), Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural, vol. 44(2), pages 1-17, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lea Piscitelli & Annalisa De Boni & Rocco Roma & Giovanni Ottomano Palmisano, 2023. "Carbon Farming: How to Support Farmers in Choosing the Best Management Strategies for Low-Impact Food Production," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Shiyao Zhou & Chen Qing & Jia He & Dingde Xu, 2023. "Impact of Agricultural Division of Labor on Fertilizer Reduction Application: Evidence from Western China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Yue Shen & Cheng Wang, 2021. "Optimisation of Garbage Bin Layout in Rural Infrastructure for Promoting the Renovation of Rural Human Settlements: Case Study of Yuding Village in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-14, November.
    4. Ming-Feng Hsieh & Yir-Hueih Luh, 2022. "Is Contract Farming with Modern Distributors Partnership for Higher Returns? Analysis of Rice Farm Households in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-16, November.
    5. Silva, Eduardo Cesar & Junior, Luiz Gonzaga Castro & Costa, Cássio Henrique Garcia & Andrade, Fabrício Teixeira, 2014. "Determinant Factors in Adopting Socio-environmental Certifications in Coffee Farms," Brazilian Journal of Rural Economy and Sociology (Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural-RESR), Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural, vol. 52(3), pages 1-12, September.
    6. Xiaocheng Wang & Chenxi Yang & Cuixia Qiao, 2024. "Agricultural Service Trade and Green Development: A Perspective Based on China’s Agricultural Total Factor Productivity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-23, September.
    7. Silva, Eduardo Cesar & Castro Junior, Luiz Gonzaga & Costa, Cássio Henrique Garcia & Andrade, Fabrício Teixeira, 2014. "Determinant Factors in Adopting Socio-environmental Certifications in Coffee Farms," Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural (RESR), Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural, vol. 52(3), January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:14:y:2024:i:8:p:1315-:d:1452538. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.