How equestrians conceptualise horse welfare: Does it facilitate or hinder change?

Q4 Medicine
Acta Hepatologica Japonica Pub Date : 2023-09-01 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1017/awf.2023.79
Karen L Luke, Andrea Rawluk, Tina McAdie, Bradley P Smith, Amanda K Warren-Smith
{"title":"How equestrians conceptualise horse welfare: Does it facilitate or hinder change?","authors":"Karen L Luke, Andrea Rawluk, Tina McAdie, Bradley P Smith, Amanda K Warren-Smith","doi":"10.1017/awf.2023.79","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>More than ever the welfare of horses in equestrian sport is in the spotlight. In response to this scrutiny, one peak body, the Federation Equestre Internationale (FEI) has created an Equine Ethics and Wellbeing Commission to protect their sport's longevity. However, for welfare-based strategies to be successful, the conceptualisation of horse welfare must align across various stakeholders, including the general public. The value-laden nature of welfare makes agreement on its definition, even among scientists, difficult. Given little is known about how equestrians conceptualise horse welfare, we interviewed 19 Australian amateur equestrians using a semi-structured format. Systems thinking and the Five Domains Model provided the theoretical framework and informed our methods. Using reflexive thematic analysis, three themes were identified: (1) good horse welfare is tangible; (2) owners misinterpret unwanted horse behaviour; and (3) equestrians publicly minimise horse welfare issues but are privately concerned. Our results highlight participants' conceptualisations of horse welfare do not align with the Five Domains Model; participants' ideal of prioritising horse welfare does not align with their practice; and there is inconsistency between what participants share publicly and what they think privately about horse welfare. These findings can inform the development of programmes to improve ridden horse welfare throughout the horse industry. As a starting point, programmes that provide a safe space for equestrians to explore their private horse welfare concerns, and programmes that build a partnership mindset to facilitate knowledge exchange between all stakeholders are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":35810,"journal":{"name":"Acta Hepatologica Japonica","volume":"46 1","pages":"e59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10937214/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Hepatologica Japonica","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/awf.2023.79","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

More than ever the welfare of horses in equestrian sport is in the spotlight. In response to this scrutiny, one peak body, the Federation Equestre Internationale (FEI) has created an Equine Ethics and Wellbeing Commission to protect their sport's longevity. However, for welfare-based strategies to be successful, the conceptualisation of horse welfare must align across various stakeholders, including the general public. The value-laden nature of welfare makes agreement on its definition, even among scientists, difficult. Given little is known about how equestrians conceptualise horse welfare, we interviewed 19 Australian amateur equestrians using a semi-structured format. Systems thinking and the Five Domains Model provided the theoretical framework and informed our methods. Using reflexive thematic analysis, three themes were identified: (1) good horse welfare is tangible; (2) owners misinterpret unwanted horse behaviour; and (3) equestrians publicly minimise horse welfare issues but are privately concerned. Our results highlight participants' conceptualisations of horse welfare do not align with the Five Domains Model; participants' ideal of prioritising horse welfare does not align with their practice; and there is inconsistency between what participants share publicly and what they think privately about horse welfare. These findings can inform the development of programmes to improve ridden horse welfare throughout the horse industry. As a starting point, programmes that provide a safe space for equestrians to explore their private horse welfare concerns, and programmes that build a partnership mindset to facilitate knowledge exchange between all stakeholders are needed.

马术爱好者如何看待马匹福利:是促进还是阻碍变革?
马术运动中马的福利比以往任何时候都受到关注。为了应对这一审查,国际马术联合会(FEI)这一顶级机构成立了马匹道德与福利委员会,以保护其运动的长盛不衰。然而,以福利为基础的战略要想取得成功,马匹福利的概念必须与包括公众在内的各利益相关方保持一致。由于马匹福利的价值属性,即使是科学家也很难就其定义达成一致。鉴于人们对马术爱好者如何看待马匹福利知之甚少,我们采用半结构化的形式采访了 19 名澳大利亚业余马术爱好者。系统思维和五域模型为我们提供了理论框架和方法。通过反思性主题分析,我们确定了三个主题:(1) 良好的马匹福利是有形的;(2) 马主误解了马匹不受欢迎的行为;(3) 马术爱好者在公开场合尽量减少马匹福利问题,但私下里却非常关注。我们的研究结果突出表明,参与者对马福利的概念与五大领域模型不一致;参与者将马福利放在首位的理想与他们的实践不一致;参与者公开分享的内容与他们私下对马福利的看法不一致。这些发现可以为制定改善整个马业骑马福利的计划提供参考。作为起点,我们需要为马术爱好者提供一个安全的空间来探讨他们私下对马福利的担忧,并建立一种伙伴关系的思维模式,以促进所有利益相关者之间的知识交流。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Acta Hepatologica Japonica
Acta Hepatologica Japonica Medicine-Hepatology
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
65
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信