Table 2_It’s all a matter of perspective—a comparison of scientific experts’ vs. farmers’ opinions on Best Practices for pig welfare.docx

Nearly all proposed Best Practices received a higher rating from scientific experts than from farmers. Nevertheless, the highest and lowest rated measures were similar for both groups and numerous measures did not show a significant difference between farmers and scientific experts (p > 0.05). Top-rated candidate Best Practices included “Good barn climate/air quality” (median experts: 84.0% vs. median farmers: 72.0%, p = 1.000) as well as “Good health status” (81.5% vs. 75.0%; p = 1.000) for tail and ear lesions and “As little regrouping/mixing of animals on farm as possible” (88.0% vs. 71.0%, p = 0.006) for skin lesions.

Labor and cost-intensive candidate Best Practices such as “Lowering stocking density” (71.5% vs. 40.0%, p < 0.001) and “Enough feeding space per pig” (80.0% vs. 46.0%; p < 0.001) were scored significantly lower by farmers than by scientific experts. For bursitis, all proposed measures concerning floor condition showed a significant difference between the two groups (p < 0.05), with farmers again scoring all candidate Best Practices lower than scientific experts.</p>Conclusion<p>While scientific experts favored most measures, farmers gave lower scores, potentially due to their experience with practical constraints such as feasibility, workload and costs.

The ranking of candidate Best Practices, however, was similar in both groups, indicating a certain consensus. To promote the implementation of animal welfare measures on farms, it therefore seems important to consider farmers’ opinions and concerns and provide them with appropriate support.</p>