Pantaleo Gemma, Eleonora Nannoni, Barbara Padalino, Angelo Peli, Francesco Luca Alexander, Giovanni Buonaiuto, Luca Sardi, Giovanna Martelli
{"title":"马耳他居民对动物福利的认知和意识。","authors":"Pantaleo Gemma, Eleonora Nannoni, Barbara Padalino, Angelo Peli, Francesco Luca Alexander, Giovanni Buonaiuto, Luca Sardi, Giovanna Martelli","doi":"10.3390/ani15111634","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A representative sample of Maltese citizens (N = 384) was surveyed about their perception and attitude towards animal welfare and animal-friendly foods. Knowledge about animal welfare was self-evaluated as moderate (36%) or good (27%), and mass media (television, web and newspapers) were the primary information source (73%). Dairy cows were perceived as having the highest welfare (average rating 3 on a 1-to-5 scale), while conditions for broilers and pigs were perceived as more critical (average rating 2.7). Respondents consider animal welfare important (64%), the availability of welfare-friendly products in Malta limited (49%), and would support a national animal-friendly label (84%). Although 49% were willing to pay more for animal-friendly products, the accepted price increase was limited (increase below 10% for 37% of respondents, 20% were not willing to pay more and 27% were price-sensitive). Chi-squared analysis showed that the respondents' profession impacted the support towards an animal welfare label (<i>p</i> < 0.01), with business operators being the least interested. Urban respondents were more critical toward farm animal welfare and more supportive of establishing a national welfare label than rural respondents (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The latter were less convinced that their choices can influence the welfare of farm animals (<i>p</i> < 0.01). Women were more willing to pay for welfare improvements than men (<i>p</i> < 0.01). These findings emphasize a significant concern for animal welfare among respondents, coupled with a moderate willingness to pay. The strong support for a national animal welfare label warrants the question as to whether transparent labelling would allow consumers to translate their sensibility into ethical purchasing behaviour.</p>","PeriodicalId":7955,"journal":{"name":"Animals","volume":"15 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12153805/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perception and Awareness of Animal Welfare Among Residents of Malta.\",\"authors\":\"Pantaleo Gemma, Eleonora Nannoni, Barbara Padalino, Angelo Peli, Francesco Luca Alexander, Giovanni Buonaiuto, Luca Sardi, Giovanna Martelli\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/ani15111634\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A representative sample of Maltese citizens (N = 384) was surveyed about their perception and attitude towards animal welfare and animal-friendly foods. Knowledge about animal welfare was self-evaluated as moderate (36%) or good (27%), and mass media (television, web and newspapers) were the primary information source (73%). Dairy cows were perceived as having the highest welfare (average rating 3 on a 1-to-5 scale), while conditions for broilers and pigs were perceived as more critical (average rating 2.7). Respondents consider animal welfare important (64%), the availability of welfare-friendly products in Malta limited (49%), and would support a national animal-friendly label (84%). Although 49% were willing to pay more for animal-friendly products, the accepted price increase was limited (increase below 10% for 37% of respondents, 20% were not willing to pay more and 27% were price-sensitive). Chi-squared analysis showed that the respondents' profession impacted the support towards an animal welfare label (<i>p</i> < 0.01), with business operators being the least interested. Urban respondents were more critical toward farm animal welfare and more supportive of establishing a national welfare label than rural respondents (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The latter were less convinced that their choices can influence the welfare of farm animals (<i>p</i> < 0.01). Women were more willing to pay for welfare improvements than men (<i>p</i> < 0.01). These findings emphasize a significant concern for animal welfare among respondents, coupled with a moderate willingness to pay. The strong support for a national animal welfare label warrants the question as to whether transparent labelling would allow consumers to translate their sensibility into ethical purchasing behaviour.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Animals\",\"volume\":\"15 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12153805/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Animals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15111634\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animals","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15111634","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Perception and Awareness of Animal Welfare Among Residents of Malta.
A representative sample of Maltese citizens (N = 384) was surveyed about their perception and attitude towards animal welfare and animal-friendly foods. Knowledge about animal welfare was self-evaluated as moderate (36%) or good (27%), and mass media (television, web and newspapers) were the primary information source (73%). Dairy cows were perceived as having the highest welfare (average rating 3 on a 1-to-5 scale), while conditions for broilers and pigs were perceived as more critical (average rating 2.7). Respondents consider animal welfare important (64%), the availability of welfare-friendly products in Malta limited (49%), and would support a national animal-friendly label (84%). Although 49% were willing to pay more for animal-friendly products, the accepted price increase was limited (increase below 10% for 37% of respondents, 20% were not willing to pay more and 27% were price-sensitive). Chi-squared analysis showed that the respondents' profession impacted the support towards an animal welfare label (p < 0.01), with business operators being the least interested. Urban respondents were more critical toward farm animal welfare and more supportive of establishing a national welfare label than rural respondents (p < 0.05). The latter were less convinced that their choices can influence the welfare of farm animals (p < 0.01). Women were more willing to pay for welfare improvements than men (p < 0.01). These findings emphasize a significant concern for animal welfare among respondents, coupled with a moderate willingness to pay. The strong support for a national animal welfare label warrants the question as to whether transparent labelling would allow consumers to translate their sensibility into ethical purchasing behaviour.
AnimalsAgricultural and Biological Sciences-Animal Science and Zoology
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
3015
审稿时长
20.52 days
期刊介绍:
Animals (ISSN 2076-2615) is an international and interdisciplinary scholarly open access journal. It publishes original research articles, reviews, communications, and short notes that are relevant to any field of study that involves animals, including zoology, ethnozoology, animal science, animal ethics and animal welfare. However, preference will be given to those articles that provide an understanding of animals within a larger context (i.e., the animals'' interactions with the outside world, including humans). There is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research in as much detail as possible. Full experimental details and/or method of study, must be provided for research articles. Articles submitted that involve subjecting animals to unnecessary pain or suffering will not be accepted, and all articles must be submitted with the necessary ethical approval (please refer to the Ethical Guidelines for more information).