Social Acceptance of Dairy Farming: The Ambivalence Between the Two Faces of Modernity [Book Review]


Abstract
Society’s relationship with modern animal farming is an ambivalent one: on the one hand there is rising criticism about modern animal farming; on the other hand people appreciate certain aspects of it, such as increased food safety and low food prices. This ambivalence reflects the two faces of modernity: the negative (exploitation of nature and loss of traditions) and the positive (progress, convenience, and efficiency). This article draws on a national survey carried out in the Netherlands that aimed at gaining a deeper understanding about the acceptance of modern dairy farming in Dutch society. People take two dimensions into account when evaluating different aspects of modern dairy farming: (1) the way living beings are used for production and (2) the way a dairy farm functions as a business. In both these dimensions people appeared to adopt cautious opinions: most people preferred relatively traditional and natural farms and were concerned about the use of nature and treatment of animals in modern production—although this did not imply an outright rejection of modern animal farming. The study also looked for (and sought to explain) differences of opinion between social groups. Besides socio-demographic factors such as age and gender, farming experience and value-orientation (such as socially minded and professional) appeared to be important variables. The values and convictions within modern society can help to explain why some people are greatly concerned about animal welfare while some show less concern. This diversity also helps to explain why general information campaigns are quite ineffective in allaying concerns about modern animal farming
Keywords Society  Citizens  Public  Values  Animal farming
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10806-010-9256-4
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 42,956
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Moral Values and Attitudes Toward Dutch Sow Husbandry.Tamara J. Bergstra, Bart Gremmen & Elsbeth N. Stassen - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (2):375-401.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Are There Ideological Aspects to the Modernization of Agriculture?Egbert Hardeman & Henk Jochemsen - 2012 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (5):657-674.
Meat and Morality: Alternatives to Factory Farming. [REVIEW]Evelyn B. Pluhar - 2010 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23 (5):455-468.
Sustainable Agriculture is Humane, Humane Agriculture is Sustainable.Michael C. Appleby - 2005 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (3):293-303.
Varieties of Harm to Animals in Industrial Farming.Matthew C. Halteman - 2011 - Journal of Animal Ethics 1 (2):122-131.
The Farm as Clinic: Veterinary Expertise and the Transformation of Dairy Farming, 1930–1950.Abigail Woods - 2007 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 38 (2):462-487.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-11-18

Total views
53 ( #153,258 of 2,259,472 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #503,329 of 2,259,472 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature