The application of a sentiment analysis approach to explore public understandings of animal agriculture

Ideas about farming are important components of consumers' value judgements about the foods they purchase and consume. Nevertheless, a divide exists between public perceptions and the realities of agricultural practices. We take a novel approach, using sentiment analysis, amongst other methods, to explore what consumers think about farming and how the visual elements of agricultural images might contribute to these perceptions. Data were drawn from responses to questions about three photographs of contemporary UK dairy farms, part of an online survey (n = 521), exploring public perceptions of food and farming. Sentiment and content analysis, descriptive statistics and Spearman's rank correlations were used to analyse the data. Participants thought good animal farming involves an evaluation of both farmers' skill and the relative ethical correctness of certain farming practices. Dirt and untidiness were linked with an increased likelihood of animal disease, and cleanliness and tidiness with a decreased likelihood. According to respondents, keeping cattle inside was problematic, whereas keeping animals outside is more appropriate, linked to their ability to graze in fields and the perceived goodness of a grass-based diet. Respondents discussed the need for farmers to be qualified, passionate and care for their animals. The paper concludes by reflecting on the use of images and sentiment analysis in this type of research, suggesting that along with certain benefits there are limitations to these methods

Changing interventions in farm animal health and welfare: a governmentality approach to the case of lameness

Lameness is a significant health and welfare issue in farmed animals. This paper uses a governmentality approach, which focuses on how a problem is made governable, to examine an emerging ‘ecology of devices’ introduced to intervene in, and attempt to reduce, on-farm incidence of lameness. These devices are associated with advisers who work with farmers on-farm; they enact lameness as a governable entity, are tools to assess the existence of lameness against established norms, and prescribe actions to be taken in response to evidence of lameness. In doing this they subjectify farmers and advisers into seeing and responding to lameness in particular ways. Using concepts of governmentality alongside other perspectives on the power relations and the simplifications and complexities involved in interventions in animal health and farm practice, the paper draws on in-depth research with advisers including vets and other paraprofessionals who work with farmers, and their cows and sheep. It explores how this set of devices introduces particular techniques and practices in lameness management, and produces farmer and adviser subjectivities. It then explores some of the problematics of this mode of governing lameness, including analysis of the limitations and unintended consequences of attempts to simplify lameness management. The paper concludes by arguing that its approach is valuable in analysing ongoing intensification of interventions in farming practices and in understanding the limits of such interventions and the unanticipated divergences from expected conduct

Interspecies encounters with endemic health conditions: co-producing BVD and lameness with cows and sheep in the north of England

This paper focuses on the relationships between people and farmed nonhuman animals, and between these animals and the farmed environments they encounter, in the enactment of interspecies endemic disease situations. It examines how the nonhuman embodied capacities, agency and subjectivities of cows and sheep on farms in the north of England make a difference to how the endemic conditions of lameness and bovine viral diarrhoea (BVD) are encountered and responded to by farmers and advisers. The paper draws on empirical research with farmers and their advisers, and explores three key, inter-related, themes: first, the importance of intersubjective relationships between people and animals on farms; second, the nonhuman components of the ‘disease situations’ associated with endemic diseases, including animals’ embodied characteristics and behaviours and the relationships between bodies and environments on different farms; and finally the ways in which animal agency and resistance makes a difference to on-farm interventions aiming to prevent or treat lameness and BVD. The paper concludes by arguing that animals’ capacities, and nonhuman difference, should be taken further into account in future policy and practice interventions in endemic disease in farmed animals

Exploring farmer and advisor lameness management behaviours using the COM-B model of behaviour change

This paper applies the COM-B framework to farmer and farm advisor understandings and responses to lameness in sheep, beef, and dairy systems. It reflects on how farmers' and advisors' capability, opportunity, and motivation (COM-B) influence lameness management practices in these farming systems, and considers the interaction between these three factors, and stakeholders' behaviour.Interviews with 29 farmers and 21 farm advisors in the north of England were conducted. Thematic analysis was undertaken with results categorised in relation to the COM-B framework focusing on barriers and enablers of lameness management. Use of the COM-B model provides a useful means of understanding the underlying behavioural mechanisms that contribute towards the persistence of lameness. This includes the complexities and interactions which hamper implementation of lameness management best practice. The findings highlight three key areas to address with interventions to improve lameness management on farm: 1) removing physical and social barriers for lameness management; 2) improving psychological capability and motivation for lameness management; and 3) facilitating relationships and developing communication between farmers and advisors.In particular, the value of exploring both farmer and advisor perspectives on behaviour in the animal health context is demonstrated. Future interventions should look to target these three areas to overcome barriers and focus on factors that enable positive lameness practices to occur

Living with cows, sheep and endemic disease in the north of England: embodied care, biosocial collectivities and killability.

This paper engages with debates surrounding practices of care in complex situations where human and non-human lives are entangled. Focusing on the embodied practices of care involving farmers, their advisers and cows and sheep in the North of England, the paper explores how biosocial collectivities fabricate care around endemic health conditions in specific farming situations. Based on in-depth research with farmers and advisers, the paper examines how Bovine Viral Diarrhoea (BVD) and lameness are made ‘visible’ and become cared about, what practices are mobilised in response to an evident need to care, and how some animals are, paradoxically, made ‘killable’ in the practising of care for populations of cows and sheep. The paper discusses how the perspectives of farmers and advisers are aligned in developing practices of care for animals, although there are some tensions and differences between these groups. Advisers focus on making endemic diseases important to farmers, so that they become enrolled into taking prescribed action. However, the sets of competing priorities farmers have to address, in complex on-farm situations, along with some resistance to taking prescribed action, produces other perspectives on and practices of care. The paper concludes by emphasising the problematics of practising care in farming, showing how care for endemic disease coexists with harm to some animals and the reproduction of modes of farming which make it more likely that endemic conditions persist

Lively commodities and endemic diseases: shifting commodity situations and nonhuman disability in cattle and sheep on UK farms

The concept of ‘lively commodities’ captures how aspects of the life of certain entities affect their commodification and exchange within capitalist economic systems. Their status as being, or comprised of, living things matters to their commodification in different ways in particular places and spaces and at particular times. This paper uses the empirical example of diseased farmed animals in the north of England to examine the effects of susceptibility to disease on the process of lively commodification, drawing on conceptualisations of nonhuman disability and relations of care alongside literature on lively commodities, and exploring cases of multi-lifeform co-production of disease. It thus focuses on moments where the liveliness of animals means that commodification ‘goes wrong’, because liveliness means susceptibility to injury and disease, alongside its potential for economic production. The paper focuses on two important endemic conditions affecting UK farming: lameness in cattle and sheep, and bovine viral diarrhoea (BVD) in cattle. These conditions significantly affect animals' welfare and impact on farm productivity. Drawing on qualitative analysis of transcripts from in-depth interviews with 29 farmers and 21 farm advisers (e.g. vets), the paper examines three empirical themes where farming practices are strongly affected by the lively nature of the commodities being produced: first, the anticipatory practice of breeding animals resistant or vulnerable to disease; second, lameness and nonhuman disability; and third, BVD and threats to agricultural biosecurity. The paper concludes by revisiting the concept of lively commodities in situations where farmed animals are diseased, and reflects on the implications of this for their shifting commodity status in particular times and places

Public health engagement in alcohol licensing in England and Scotland:the ExILEnS mixedmethod, natural experiment evaluation

Background: International systematic reviews suggest an association between alcohol availability and increased alcohol-related harms. Alcohol availability is regulated through separate locally-administered licensing systems in England and Scotland, in which local public health teams (PHTs) have a statutory role. The system in Scotland includes a public health objective for licensing. PHTs engage to varying degrees in licensing matters but no previous study has sought to objectively characterise and measure their activity, examined its effectiveness, or compared practices between Scotland and England. Aim: To critically assess the impact and mechanisms of impact of PHT engagement in alcohol premises licensing on alcohol-related harms in England and Scotland.Methods: We recruited 39 diverse PHTs in England (n=27) and Scotland (n=12). PHTs more active in licensing were recruited first and then matched to lower activity PHTs. Using structured interviews (n=66), documentation analysis, and expert consultation, we developed and applied the Public Health engagement In Alcohol Licensing (PHIAL) measure to quantify six-monthly activity levels from 2012 to 2019. Time series of PHIAL scores, and health and crime outcomes for each area, were analysed using multivariable negative binomial mixed-effects models to assess correlations between outcome and exposure, with 18-month average PHIAL score as the primary exposure metric. In-depth interviews (n=53) and a workshop (n=10) explored PHT approaches and potential mechanisms of impact of alcohol availability interventions with PHT members and licensing stakeholders (local authority licensing officers, managers and lawyers/clerks, police staff with a licensing remit, local elected representatives).Findings: 19 PHT activity types were assessed in six categories: (1) staffing; (2) reviewing and (3) responding to licence applications; (4) data usage; (5) influencing licensing stakeholders/policy; and (6) public involvement. Usage and intensity of activities and overall approaches varied within and between areas over time, including between Scotland and England. The latter variation could be explained by legal, structural and philosophical differences, including Scotland’s public health objective. This objective was felt to legitimise PH considerations and the use of PH data within licensing. Quantitative analysis showed no clear evidence of association between level of PHT activity and the health or crime outcomes examined, using the primary exposure or other metrics (neither change in, nor cumulative, PHIAL scores). Qualitative data suggested that PHT input was valued by many licensing stakeholders, and that alcohol availability may lead to harms by affecting the accessibility, visibility and norms of alcohol consumption, but that the licensing systems have limited power to act in the interests of public health.Conclusions: This study provides no evidence that PHT engagement in local licensing matters was associated with measurable downstream reductions in crime or health harms, in the short term, or over a 7-year follow-up period. The extensive qualitative data suggest that PHT engagement is valued and appears to be slowly reorienting the licensing system to better address health (and other) harms, especially in Scotland, but this will take time. A rise in home drinking, alcohol deliveries, and the inherent inability of the licensing system to reduce, or in the case of online sales, to contain availability, may explain the null findings, and will continue to limit the potential of these licensing systems to address alcohol-related harms. Future work: Further analysis could consider the relative success of different PHT approaches in terms of changing alcohol availability and retailing. A key gap relates to the nature and impact of online availability on alcohol consumption, harms and inequalities, alongside development and study of relevant policy options. A national approach to licensing data and oversight would greatly facilitate future studies and public health input to licensing. Limitations: Our interview data and therefore PHIAL scores may be limited by recall bias where documentary evidence of public health activity was not available, and by possible variability in grading of such activity, though steps were taken to minimise both. The analyses would have benefited from additional data on licensing policies and environmental changes that might have affected availability or harms in the study areas. Funding details:This study was funded by the NIHR Public Health Research programme (15/129/11). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. Frank de Vocht is partly funded by National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West) at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust. Study registration:The study was registered with the Research Registry (researchregistry6162) on 26th October 2020. The study protocol was published in BMC Medical Research Methodology on 6th November 2018.<br/

Public health engagement in alcohol licensing in England and Scotland:the ExILEnS mixed-method, natural experiment evaluation

BACKGROUND: International systematic reviews suggest an association between alcohol availability and increased alcohol-related harms. Alcohol availability is regulated through separate locally administered licensing systems in England and Scotland, in which local public health teams have a statutory role. The system in Scotland includes a public health objective for licensing. Public health teams engage to varying degrees in licensing matters but no previous study has sought to objectively characterise and measure their activity, examine their effectiveness, or compare practices between Scotland and England.AIM: To critically assess the impact and mechanisms of impact of public health team engagement in alcohol premises licensing on alcohol-related harms in England and Scotland.METHODS: We recruited 39 diverse public health teams in England (n = 27) and Scotland (n = 12). Public health teams more active in licensing were recruited first and then matched to lower-activity public health teams. Using structured interviews (n = 66), documentation analysis, and expert consultation, we developed and applied the Public Health Engagement In Alcohol Licensing (PHIAL) measure to quantify six-monthly activity levels from 2012 to 2019. Time series of PHIAL scores, and health and crime outcomes for each area, were analysed using multivariable negative binomial mixed-effects models to assess correlations between outcome and exposure, with 18-month average PHIAL score as the primary exposure metric. In-depth interviews (n = 53) and a workshop (n = 10) explored public health team approaches and potential mechanisms of impact of alcohol availability interventions with public health team members and licensing stakeholders (local authority licensing officers, managers and lawyers/clerks, police staff with a licensing remit, local elected representatives).FINDINGS: Nineteen public health team activity types were assessed in six categories: (1) staffing; (2) reviewing and (3) responding to licence applications; (4) data usage; (5) influencing licensing stakeholders/policy; and (6) public involvement. Usage and intensity of activities and overall approaches varied within and between areas over time, including between Scotland and England. The latter variation could be explained by legal, structural and philosophical differences, including Scotland's public health objective. This objective was felt to legitimise public health considerations and the use of public health data within licensing. Quantitative analysis showed no clear evidence of association between level of public health team activity and the health or crime outcomes examined, using the primary exposure or other metrics (neither change in, nor cumulative, PHIAL scores). Qualitative data suggested that public health team input was valued by many licensing stakeholders, and that alcohol availability may lead to harms by affecting the accessibility, visibility and norms of alcohol consumption, but that the licensing systems have limited power to act in the interests of public health.CONCLUSIONS: This study provides no evidence that public health team engagement in local licensing matters was associated with measurable downstream reductions in crime or health harms, in the short term, or over a 7-year follow-up period. The extensive qualitative data suggest that public health team engagement is valued and appears to be slowly reorienting the licensing system to better address health (and other) harms, especially in Scotland, but this will take time. A rise in home drinking, alcohol deliveries, and the inherent inability of the licensing system to reduce - or in the case of online sales, to contain - availability, may explain the null findings and will continue to limit the potential of these licensing systems to address alcohol-related harms.FUTURE WORK: Further analysis could consider the relative success of different public health team approaches in terms of changing alcohol availability and retailing. A key gap relates to the nature and impact of online availability on alcohol consumption, harms and inequalities, alongside development and study of relevant policy options. A national approach to licensing data and oversight would greatly facilitate future studies and public health input to licensing.LIMITATIONS: Our interview data and therefore PHIAL scores may be limited by recall bias where documentary evidence of public health activity was not available, and by possible variability in grading of such activity, though steps were taken to minimise both. The analyses would have benefited from additional data on licensing policies and environmental changes that might have affected availability or harms in the study areas.STUDY REGISTRATION: The study was registered with the Research Registry (researchregistry6162) on 26 October 2020. The study protocol was published in BMC Medical Research Methodology on 6 November 2018.FUNDING: This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme as award number 15/129/11.</p

Public health engagement in alcohol licensing in England and Scotland:The ExILEnS mixed-method, natural experiment evaluation

BACKGROUND: International systematic reviews suggest an association between alcohol availability and increased alcohol-related harms. Alcohol availability is regulated through separate locally administered licensing systems in England and Scotland, in which local public health teams have a statutory role. The system in Scotland includes a public health objective for licensing. Public health teams engage to varying degrees in licensing matters but no previous study has sought to objectively characterise and measure their activity, examine their effectiveness, or compare practices between Scotland and England.AIM: To critically assess the impact and mechanisms of impact of public health team engagement in alcohol premises licensing on alcohol-related harms in England and Scotland.METHODS: We recruited 39 diverse public health teams in England (n = 27) and Scotland (n = 12). Public health teams more active in licensing were recruited first and then matched to lower-activity public health teams. Using structured interviews (n = 66), documentation analysis, and expert consultation, we developed and applied the Public Health Engagement In Alcohol Licensing (PHIAL) measure to quantify six-monthly activity levels from 2012 to 2019. Time series of PHIAL scores, and health and crime outcomes for each area, were analysed using multivariable negative binomial mixed-effects models to assess correlations between outcome and exposure, with 18-month average PHIAL score as the primary exposure metric. In-depth interviews (n = 53) and a workshop (n = 10) explored public health team approaches and potential mechanisms of impact of alcohol availability interventions with public health team members and licensing stakeholders (local authority licensing officers, managers and lawyers/clerks, police staff with a licensing remit, local elected representatives).FINDINGS: Nineteen public health team activity types were assessed in six categories: (1) staffing; (2) reviewing and (3) responding to licence applications; (4) data usage; (5) influencing licensing stakeholders/policy; and (6) public involvement. Usage and intensity of activities and overall approaches varied within and between areas over time, including between Scotland and England. The latter variation could be explained by legal, structural and philosophical differences, including Scotland's public health objective. This objective was felt to legitimise public health considerations and the use of public health data within licensing. Quantitative analysis showed no clear evidence of association between level of public health team activity and the health or crime outcomes examined, using the primary exposure or other metrics (neither change in, nor cumulative, PHIAL scores). Qualitative data suggested that public health team input was valued by many licensing stakeholders, and that alcohol availability may lead to harms by affecting the accessibility, visibility and norms of alcohol consumption, but that the licensing systems have limited power to act in the interests of public health.CONCLUSIONS: This study provides no evidence that public health team engagement in local licensing matters was associated with measurable downstream reductions in crime or health harms, in the short term, or over a 7-year follow-up period. The extensive qualitative data suggest that public health team engagement is valued and appears to be slowly reorienting the licensing system to better address health (and other) harms, especially in Scotland, but this will take time. A rise in home drinking, alcohol deliveries, and the inherent inability of the licensing system to reduce - or in the case of online sales, to contain - availability, may explain the null findings and will continue to limit the potential of these licensing systems to address alcohol-related harms.FUTURE WORK: Further analysis could consider the relative success of different public health team approaches in terms of changing alcohol availability and retailing. A key gap relates to the nature and impact of online availability on alcohol consumption, harms and inequalities, alongside development and study of relevant policy options. A national approach to licensing data and oversight would greatly facilitate future studies and public health input to licensing.LIMITATIONS: Our interview data and therefore PHIAL scores may be limited by recall bias where documentary evidence of public health activity was not available, and by possible variability in grading of such activity, though steps were taken to minimise both. The analyses would have benefited from additional data on licensing policies and environmental changes that might have affected availability or harms in the study areas.STUDY REGISTRATION: The study was registered with the Research Registry (researchregistry6162) on 26 October 2020. The study protocol was published in BMC Medical Research Methodology on 6 November 2018.FUNDING: This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme as award number 15/129/11.</p

Factors influencing public health engagement in alcohol licensing in England and Scotland including legal and structural differences:comparative interview analysis

BACKGROUND: Greater availability of alcohol is associated with higher consumption and harms. The legal systems, by which premises are licensed to sell alcohol in England and Scotland, differ in several ways. The 'Exploring the impact of alcohol licensing in England and Scotland' study measured public health team activity regarding alcohol licensing from 2012 to 2019 and identified seven differences between England and Scotland in the timing and type of activities undertaken.OBJECTIVES: To qualitatively describe the seven previously identified differences between Scotland and England in public health approaches to alcohol licensing, and to examine, from the perspective of public health professionals, what factors may explain these differences.METHODS: Ninety-four interviews were conducted with 52 professionals from 14 English and 6 Scottish public health teams selected for diversity who had been actively engaging with alcohol licensing. Interviews focused primarily on the nature of their engagement (n = 66) and their rationale for the approaches taken (n = 28). Interview data were analysed thematically using NVivo. Findings were constructed by discussion across the research team, to describe and explain the differences in practice found.FINDINGS: Diverse legal, practical and other factors appeared to explain the seven differences. (1) Earlier engagement in licensing by Scottish public health teams in 2012-3 may have arisen from differences in the timing of legislative changes giving public health a statutory role and support from Alcohol Focus Scotland. (2) Public Health England provided significant support from 2014 in England, contributing to an increase in activity from that point. (3) Renewals of statements of licensing policy were required more frequently in Scotland and at the same time for all Licensing Boards, probably explaining greater focus on policy in Scotland. (4) Organisational structures in Scotland, with public health stakeholders spread across several organisations, likely explained greater involvement of senior leaders there. (5) Without a public health objective for licensing, English public health teams felt less confident about making objections to licence applications without other stakeholders such as the police, and instead commonly negotiated conditions on licences with applicants. In contrast, Scottish public health teams felt any direct contact with applicants was inappropriate due to conflicts of interest. (6) With the public health objective in Scotland, public health teams there were more active in making independent objections to licence applications. Further in Scotland, licensing committee meetings are held to consider all new applications regardless of whether objections have been submitted; unlike in England where there was a greater incentive to resolve objections, because then a meeting was not required. (7) Finally, Scottish public health teams involved the public more in licensing process, partly because of statutory licensing forums there.CONCLUSIONS: The alcohol premises licensing systems in England and Scotland differ in important ways including and beyond the lack of a public health objective for licensing in England. These and other differences, including support of national and local bodies, have shaped opportunities for, and the nature of, public health engagement. Further research could examine the relative success of the approaches taken by public health teams and how temporary increases in availability are handled in the two licensing systems.FUNDING: This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Reseacrh programme as award number 15/129/11.</p