Perspective on pig welfare among different professional groups in Poland

Sell-Kubiak, Ewa; Ludwiczak, Agnieszka; Łodyga, Dagmara; Cieleń, Gabriela; Grunert, Klaus G.

doi:10.2478/aspr-2025-0030

Abstract

This study examined the knowledge of Polish citizens regarding pig welfare, comparing the perspectives of farmers, animal science/veterinary professionals, students, and regular citizens. An online survey, distributed from August 6th to September 1st, 2023, gathered 140 responses. The survey assessed participants’ understanding of pig welfare and their reactions to videos depicting various pig behaviours. Targeted recruitment ensured that farmers, professionals, and students comprised 42% of the respondents (N=59). Kruskal-Wallis tests and Principal Component Analysis revealed that professional groups exhibited the most significant differences in video perception, with students differing most from regular citizens. All groups accurately identified pig behaviours, suggesting a tendency towards increased animal welfare awareness, even among those with limited farm animal contact. Limitations include the online survey format and targeted recruitment of specific professional groups.

References

ALONSO M.E., GONZÁLEZ-MONTAÑA J.R., LOMILLOS J.M., 2020 – Consumers’ concerns and perceptions of farm animal welfare. Animals 10, 1-13.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
BLOKHUIS H.J., 2008 – International cooperation in animal welfare: the Welfare Quality® project. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 50, S10.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
CAMERLINK I., TURNER S.P., 2017 – Farmers’ perception of aggression between growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, SI: Ethology and sustainability 192, 42-47.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
DUIJVESTEIJN N., BENARD M., REIMERT I., CAMERLINK I., 2014 – Same pig, different conclusions: stakeholders differ in qualitative behaviour assessment. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27, 1019-1047.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
FERNANDES J.N., HEMSWORTH P.H., COLEMAN G.J., 2021 – Costs and benefits of improving farm animal welfare. Agriculture 11(2), 104.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
FLEMING P.A., CLARKE T., WICKHAM S.L., STOCKMAN C.A., BARNES A.L., COLLINS T., MILLER D.W., 2016 – The contribution of qualitative behavioural assessment to appraisal of livestock welfare. Animal Production Science 56, 1569-1578.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
GRUNERT K.G., SONNTAG W.I., GLANZ-CHANOS V., FORUM S., 2018 – Consumer interest in environmental impact, safety, health and animal welfare aspects of modern pig production : results of a cross-national choice experiment. Meat Science 137, 123-129.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
HANUS G., 2021 – Rationalization as new trend in food behavior of polish consumers. In Eurasian Business Perspectives (eds. Bilgin, M.H., Danis, H., Demir, E., Vale, S.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 347-360.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
HUSSON F., LÊ, S., & PAGÈS, J., 2011 – Exploratory multivariate analysis by example using R Boca Raton: CRC press Vol. 15, 1-60.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
KATT F., MEIXNER O., 2020 – Trends in food science & technology a systematic review of drivers influencing consumer willingness to pay for organic food. Trends in Food Science & Technology 100, 374-388.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
LI S., KALLAS Z., 2021 – Meta-analysis of consumers’ willingness to pay for sustainable food products. Appetite 163, 105239.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
LUDWICZAK A., KASPROWICZ-POTOCKA M., ZAWORSKA-ZAKRZEWSKA A., SKŁADANOWSKA-BARYZA J., RODRIGUEZ-ESTEVEZ V., SANZ-FERNANDEZ S., DIAZ-GAONA C., FERRARI P., JUUL PEDERSEN L., COUTO M.Y.R, REVILLA I., SELL-KUBIAK E., 2023 – Husbandry practices associated with extensification in European pig production and their effects on pork quality. Meat Science 206, 109339.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
MAŁAŻEWSKA S., GAJOS E., 2018 – Animal welfare as a public good in polish opinion. Annals of the Polish Association of Agricultural and Agribusiness Economists XIX, 153–158.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
MARINOVA D., BÁNÁTI D., BOGUEVA D., 2024 – Flexitarianism: responding to the health and environmental challenges of human diets. In Consumer Perceptions and Food (ed. Bogueva, D.). Springer Nature, Singapore pp. 333-348.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
MOLNÁR M., FRASER D., 2020 – Protecting farm animal welfare during intensification: Farmer perceptions of economic and regulatory pressures. Animal Welfare 29(2), 133-141.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
NEZLEK J.B., FORESTELL C.A., 2020 – Vegetarianism as a social identity. current opinion in food science, sensory science & consumer perception. Food Physics and Material Science 33, 45-51.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
PAWLEWICZ A., 2020 – Change of price premiums trend for organic food products: the example of the polish egg market. Agriculture 10, 35.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
RESANO H., PEREZ-CUETO F.J.A., DE BARCELLOS M.D., VEFLEN-OLSEN N., GRUNERT K.G., VERBEKE,W., 2011 – Consumer satisfaction with pork meat and derived products in five European countries. Appetite 56, 167-170.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
ROUSING T., WEMELSFELDER F., 2006 – Qualitative assessment of social behaviour of dairy cows housed in loose housing systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 101, 40-53.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
SELL-KUBIAK E., LUDWICZAK A., CIELEŃ G., GRUNERT K.G., 2025 – Attitudes of selected Polish consumer groups towards pork and welfare labels. Animal Science and Genetics 21(3), 119-131.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
SZTANDARSKI P., MARCHEWKA J., JASZCZYK A., SOLKA M., MICHNOWSKA H., POGORZELSKI G., STRZAŁKOWSKA N., BARŁOWSKA K., DAMAZIAK K., STELMASIAK A., WÓJCIK W., ADAMEK-URBAŃSKA D., LUDWICZAK A., SELL-KUBIAK E., HORBAŃCZUK J.O., KEMP B., SPOOLDER H., 2025 – Effects of husbandry practices on Ross 308 and Hubbard chicken hybrids welfare: Husbandry effects on broiler welfare. Poultry Science 104(6), 105129.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
TE VELDE H., AARTS N., VAN WOERKUM C., 2002 – Dealing with ambivalence: farmers’ and consumers’ perceptions of animal welfare in livestock breeding.” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15, 203-219.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
TØNNESEN M.T., GRUNERT K.G., 2021 – Social-psychological determinants of young consumers’ consumption of pork. Food Quality and Preference 93, 104262.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
VANHONACKER F., VERBEKE W., VAN POUCKE E., BUIJS S., TUYTTENS F.A.M., 2009a – Societal concern related to stocking density, pen size and group size in farm animal production. Livestock Science 123, 16-22.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
VANHONACKER F., VERBEKE W., VAN POUCKE E., BUIJS S., TUYTTENS F.A.M., 2009b – Societal concern related to stocking density, pen size and group size in farm animal production. Livestock Science 123, 16-22.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
VERBEKE W., PÉREZ-CUETO F.J.A., BARCELLOS M.D. DE KRYSTALLIS A., GRUNERT K.G., 2010 – European citizen and consumer attitudes and preferences regarding beef and pork. Meat Science 84, 284-292.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
WEIBLE D., CHRISTOPH-SCHULZ I., SALAMON P., ZANDER K., 2016 – Citizens’ perception of modern pig production in Germany: a mixed-method research approach. British Food Journal 118, 2014-2032.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
WEMELSFELDER F., HUNTER T.E.A., MENDL M.T., LAWRENCE A.B., 2001 – Assessing the ‘whole animal’: a free choice profiling approach. Animal Behaviour 62, 209-220.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Perspective on pig welfare among different professional groups in Poland

Abstract

Paradigm

My account