IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v5y2019i1d10.1057_s41599-019-0220-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can resistant infections be perceptible in UK dairy farming?

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Helliwell

    (University of Nottingham, University Park)

  • Carol Morris

    (University of Nottingham, University Park)

  • Sujatha Raman

    (Australian National University)

Abstract

This paper interrogates the claim that antimicrobial-resistant infections are rarely encountered in animal agriculture. This has been widely reiterated by a range of academic, policy and industry stakeholders in the UK. Further support comes from the UK's Animal and Plant Health Agency’s (APHA) passive clinical surveillance regime, which relies on veterinarians to submit samples for analysis and similarly reports low levels of resistance amongst key animal pathogens. Building on social science work on knowledge-practices of animal health and disease, and insights from emerging literature on non-knowledge or ‘agnotology’, we investigate the conditions shaping what is known about antimicrobial-resistant infections on farms. In so doing, we find that how on-farm knowledge is produced about resistant infection is concurrently related to domains of imperceptibility or what cannot be known in the context of current practices. The paper discusses the findings of ethnographic research undertaken on an East Midlands dairy farm that highlight the following specific findings. First, farmers and veterinarians, when observing instances of treatment failure, draw on an experiential repertoire that effaces resistances and instead foregrounds the complexities of host-pathogen interaction, or failings in human behaviour, over pathogen-antibiotic interactions. Second, the knowledge-practices of both farmers and veterinarians, although adept at identifying and diagnosing infectious disease are not equipped to make resistance perceptible. Third, this imperceptibility has implications for antibiotic use practices. Most notably, veterinarians anticipate resistance when making antibiotic choices. However, because of the absence of farm level knowledge of resistance this anticipatory logic is informed through the prevalence of resistance ‘at large’. The analysis has implications for the existing passive resistance surveillance regime operating in the dairy sector, which relies on veterinarians and farmers voluntarily submitting samples for diagnostic and susceptibility testing. In effect this entrenches farm level imperceptibility and effacement by farmers and veterinarians within the national dairy surveillance regime. However, we also highlight opportunities for providing farm specific knowledge of resistance through the anticipatory logic of veterinarians and a more active regime of surveillance.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Helliwell & Carol Morris & Sujatha Raman, 2019. "Can resistant infections be perceptible in UK dairy farming?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-9, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:5:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-019-0220-2
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-019-0220-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-019-0220-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-019-0220-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Burgess, Jacquelin & Clark, Judy & Harrison, Carolyn M., 2000. "Knowledges in action: an actor network analysis of a wetland agri-environment scheme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 119-132, October.
    2. Lewis Holloway & Christopher Bear & Katy Wilkinson, 2014. "Robotic milking technologies and renegotiating situated ethical relationships on UK dairy farms," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(2), pages 185-199, June.
    3. Gareth Enticott, 2008. "The Spaces of Biosecurity: Prescribing and Negotiating Solutions to Bovine Tuberculosis," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(7), pages 1568-1582, July.
    4. Amy Proctor & Andrew Donaldson & Jeremy Phillipson & Philip Lowe, 2012. "Field Expertise in Rural Land Management," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(7), pages 1696-1711, July.
    5. Judith Tsouvalis & Susanne Seymour & Charles Watkins, 2000. "Exploring Knowledge-Cultures: Precision Farming, Yield Mapping, and the Expert–Farmer Interface," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(5), pages 909-924, May.
    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. Laure Bonnaud & Nicolas Fortané, 2021. "Being a vet: the veterinary profession in social science research," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(2), pages 125-149, June.

    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. Thomas, Emma & Riley, Mark & Spees, Jack, 2020. "Knowledge flows: Farmers’ social relations and knowledge sharing practices in ‘Catchment Sensitive Farming’," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    2. Ingram, Julie & Maye, Damian & Bailye, Clive & Barnes, Andrew & Bear, Christopher & Bell, Matthew & Cutress, David & Davies, Lynfa & de Boon, Auvikki & Dinnie, Liz & Gairdner, Julian & Hafferty, Caitl, 2022. "What are the priority research questions for digital agriculture?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    3. Hilary Geoghegan & Catherine Leyson, 2012. "On climate change and cultural geography: farming on the Lizard Peninsula, Cornwall, UK," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(1), pages 55-66, July.
    4. Julie Ingram, 2008. "Agronomist–farmer knowledge encounters: an analysis of knowledge exchange in the context of best management practices in England," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 25(3), pages 405-418, September.
    5. McGrath, Karen & Brown, Claire & Regan, Áine & Russell, Tomás, 2023. "Investigating narratives and trends in digital agriculture: A scoping study of social and behavioural science studies," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    6. Chapman, Mollie & Satterfield, Terre & Chan, Kai M.A., 2019. "When value conflicts are barriers: Can relational values help explain farmer participation in conservation incentive programs?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 464-475.
    7. Rebecca Schewe & Diana Stuart, 2015. "Diversity in agricultural technology adoption: How are automatic milking systems used and to what end?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(2), pages 199-213, June.
    8. Jane Mills & Hannah Chiswell & Peter Gaskell & Paul Courtney & Beth Brockett & George Cusworth & Matt Lobley, 2021. "Developing Farm-Level Social Indicators for Agri-Environment Schemes: A Focus on the Agents of Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-22, July.
    9. Jana Poláková, 2018. "Sustainability—Risk—Resilience: How Does the Case of the Good Agricultural and Environmental Conditions Measure up?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, May.
    10. Fabian Weckesser & Michael Beck & Kurt-Jürgen Hülsbergen & Sebastian Peisl, 2022. "A Digital Advisor Twin for Crop Nitrogen Management," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-22, February.
    11. Martin Lenihan & Kathryn Brasier, 2009. "Scaling down the European model of agriculture: the case of the Rural Environmental Protection Scheme in Ireland," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 26(4), pages 365-378, December.
    12. Steven McGreevy, 2012. "Lost in translation: incomer organic farmers, local knowledge, and the revitalization of upland Japanese hamlets," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 29(3), pages 393-412, September.
    13. Merisa S. Thompson, 2023. "Alternative visions of “ethical” dairying: changing entanglements with calves, cows and care," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(2), pages 693-707, June.
    14. Aguilar-Gallegos, Norman & Muñoz-Rodríguez, Manrrubio & Santoyo-Cortés, Horacio & Aguilar-Ávila, Jorge & Klerkx, Laurens, 2015. "Information networks that generate economic value: A study on clusters of adopters of new or improved technologies and practices among oil palm growers in Mexico," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 122-132.
    15. Helliwell, Richard, 2018. "Where did the marginal land go? Farmers perspectives on marginal land and its implications for adoption of dedicated energy crops," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 166-172.
    16. Chris Sneddon, 2003. "Reconfiguring Scale and Power: The Khong-Chi-Mun Project in Northeast Thailand," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 35(12), pages 2229-2250, December.
    17. Tyllianakis, Emmanouil & Martin-Ortega, Julia, 2021. "Agri-environmental schemes for biodiversity and environmental protection: How we are not yet “hitting the right keys”," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    18. Mick Lennon, 2015. "Explaining the currency of novel policy concepts: learning from green infrastructure planning," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(5), pages 1039-1057, October.
    19. Johanna Pfeiffer & Andreas Gabriel & Markus Gandorfer, 2021. "Understanding the public attitudinal acceptance of digital farming technologies: a nationwide survey in Germany," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(1), pages 107-128, February.
    20. Clemens Driessen & Leonie Heutinck, 2015. "Cows desiring to be milked? Milking robots and the co-evolution of ethics and technology on Dutch dairy farms," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(1), pages 3-20, March.

    More about this item

    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:pal:palcom:v:5:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-019-0220-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.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.