IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v16y2019i19p3625-d271272.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intensive Livestock Farming and Residential Health: Experts’ Views

Author

Listed:
  • Valérie Eijrond

    (Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Liesbeth Claassen

    (Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    Centre for Environmental Security and Safety, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), 3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands)

  • Joke van der Giessen

    (Centre for Infectious Disease Control Netherlands, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), 3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands)

  • Danielle Timmermans

    (Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The presence of intensive livestock farms in close vicinity to residential areas in the Netherlands is a complex problem characterised by knowledge uncertainty about the effects on residential health, overlapping value-driven concerns and stakeholder diversity. In order to address concerns about the health effects and effectively manage the debate about intensive livestock farming, constructive stakeholder dialogues are encouraged, informed by current scientific insights. We explored the current knowledge, beliefs and concerns of scientific experts, following the mental models approach. A summary expert model was derived from scanning the relevant literature and informed by interviews with 20 scientific experts. The study shows imprecise use of terminology by experts. Moreover, they appear to perceive intensive livestock farming not as a major health problem at least at this moment for neighbouring residents in the Netherlands. Broader themes such as (environmental) unsustainability and biodiversity loss seem a more prominent concern among the experts. Our study questions whether dialogues should only focus on residential health or cover broader values and concerns. However, mental models about risk may differ with other stakeholders, impeding communication. Hence, we will identify other stakeholders’ knowledge, beliefs and value-based concerns in the light of facilitating constructed dialogues between stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Valérie Eijrond & Liesbeth Claassen & Joke van der Giessen & Danielle Timmermans, 2019. "Intensive Livestock Farming and Residential Health: Experts’ Views," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-16, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:19:p:3625-:d:271272
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/19/3625/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/19/3625/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sandra S. Batie, 2008. "Wicked Problems and Applied Economics," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(5), pages 1176-1191.
    2. Marleen Kraaij-Dirkzwager & Joost Van der Ree & Erik Lebret, 2017. "Rapid Assessment of Stakeholder Concerns about Public Health. An Introduction to a Fast and Inexpensive Approach Applied on Health Concerns about Intensive Animal Production Systems," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Horton, R.A. & Wing, S. & Marshall, S.W. & Brownley, K.A., 2009. "Malodor as a trigger of stress and negative mood in neighbors of industrial hog operations," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 99(S3), pages 610-615.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sophia Dollmann & Lucie Vermeulen & Ana Maria de Roda Husman, 2021. "Untangling the Governance of Public Health Aspects of Manure in The Netherlands," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-17, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nicos A. Scordis & Yoshihiko Suzawa & Astrid Zwick & Lucia Ruckner, 2014. "Principles for Sustainable Insurance: Risk Management and Value," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 17(2), pages 265-276, September.
    2. Paul R. Hindsley & O. Ashton Morgan, 2022. "The Role of Cultural Worldviews in Willingness to Pay for Environmental Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(2), pages 243-269, February.
    3. Ahearn, Mary Clare & Armbruster, Walt & Young, Robert, 2016. "Big Data's Potential to Improve Food Supply Chain Environmental Sustainability and Food Safety," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 19(A), pages 1-18, June.
    4. Małgorzata Okrasa & Justyna Szulc & Agnieszka Brochocka & Beata Gutarowska, 2021. "Application of Olfactometry to Assess the Anti-Odor Properties of Filtering Facepiece Respirators Containing Activated Carbon Nonwovens," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-12, August.
    5. Elena G. Irwin & Andrew M. Isserman & Maureen Kilkenny & Mark D. Partridge, 2010. "A Century of Research on Rural Development and Regional Issues," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(2), pages 522-553.
    6. Domenico Dentoni & Verena Bitzer & Greetje Schouten, 2018. "Harnessing Wicked Problems in Multi-stakeholder Partnerships," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(2), pages 333-356, June.
    7. Vinicius Minatogawa & Matheus Franco & Izabela Simon Rampasso & Maria Holgado & Diego Garrido & Hernan Pinto & Ruy Quadros, 2022. "Towards Systematic Sustainable Business Model Innovation: What Can We Learn from Business Model Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-35, March.
    8. Samia Sediri & Michel Trommetter & Nathalie Frascaria-Lacoste & Juan Fernandez-Manjarrés, 2020. "Transformability as a Wicked Problem: A Cautionary Tale?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-19, July.
    9. Sandra Waddock, 2020. "Reframing and Transforming Economics around Life," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-16, September.
    10. Toman Michael, 2014. "The need for multiple types of information to inform climate change assessment," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 5(3), pages 469-485, December.
    11. Bellanger, Manuel & Fonner, Robert & Holland, Daniel S. & Libecap, Gary D. & Lipton, Douglas W. & Scemama, Pierre & Speir, Cameron & Thébaud, Olivier, 2021. "Cross-sectoral externalities related to natural resources and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Kwideok Han & Jeffrey Vitale & Yong-Geon Lee & Inbae Ji, 2022. "Measuring the Economic Value of the Negative Externality of Livestock Malodor in South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-13, August.
    13. Xavier Pavie & Daphné Carthy, 2014. "Addressing the Wicked Problem of Responsible Innovation through Design Thinking," Working Papers hal-00921428, HAL.
    14. Cavicchi, Alessio & Rinaldi, Chiara & Corsi, Michele, 2013. "Higher Education Institutions as Managers of Wicked Problems: Place Branding and Rural Development in Marche Region, Italy," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 16(A), pages 1-18.
    15. Kolikow, Steven & Kragt, Marit Ellen & Mugera, Amin W., 2012. "An interdisciplinary framework of limits and barriers to climate change adaptation in agriculture," Working Papers 120467, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    16. Mary A. Fox & L. Elizabeth Brewer & Lawrence Martin, 2017. "An Overview of Literature Topics Related to Current Concepts, Methods, Tools, and Applications for Cumulative Risk Assessment (2007–2016)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-28, April.
    17. Margot Hurlbert & Joyeeta Gupta, 2016. "Adaptive Governance, Uncertainty, and Risk: Policy Framing and Responses to Climate Change, Drought, and Flood," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 339-356, February.
    18. repec:rri:wpaper:201019 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Gauly, Sarah & Kühl, Sarah & Spiller, Achim, 2017. "Uncovering strategies of hidden intention in multi-stakeholder initiatives: The case of pasture-raised milk," DARE Discussion Papers 1704, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    20. Moon, Wanki, 2011. "Is agriculture compatible with free trade?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 13-24.
    21. Robert, Yawson, 2014. "The Theory and Practice of Case-In-Point Teaching of Organizational Leadership," MPRA Paper 55941, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    intensive livestock farming; mental models;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:19:p:3625-:d:271272. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.