Thinking and communicating about farm animal welfare: "de-polarizing" stakeholder views and why this matters, by Dr. Beth Ventura, University of Minnesota – with video!

How do groups like veterinarians, veterinary students, farmers, and the public perceive priorities and barriers to improving animal welfare? In her talk, Thinking and communicating about farm animal welfare: "de-polarizing" stakeholder views and why this matters, Dr. Beth Ventura,  Assistant Teaching Professor of Animal Behavior and Welfare at the University of Minnesota (UMN) shares exciting research approaches to answering these questions as well as lessons that point toward resolution of these challenges.

Ventura touches on how the beliefs each of us hold are founded in our experiences including our formal and informal education, cultural and religious learnings, and information acquired throughout daily life. The attitudes associated with these beliefs - that is,  the positive and negative emotions we associate with them – play a part in our decision making.

Decision-making related to animal welfare is often tied to the “Three circles” animal welfare framework: affective states, biological functioning and natural living. Different groups value these circles and their effect on animal welfare differently. Some place high importance on one circle, while others take a more balanced approach, valuing certain elements of each circle more equally. And valuation can change over time. Learn how opinions differ, as well as how we might work to bridge the gaps as we communicate, deliberate, plan and make decisions together for optimal animal welfare. Watch the video.