IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v38y2021i4d10.1007_s10460-021-10197-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How animal agriculture stakeholders define, perceive, and are impacted by antimicrobial resistance: challenging the Wellcome Trust’s Reframing Resistance principles

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriel K. Innes

    (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

  • Agnes Markos

    (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

  • Kathryn R. Dalton

    (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

  • Caitlin A. Gould

    (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
    Environmental Health and Engineering)

  • Keeve E. Nachman

    (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

  • Jessica Fanzo

    (John Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics
    Johns Hopkins University)

  • Anne Barnhill

    (John Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics)

  • Shannon Frattaroli

    (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
    The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

  • Meghan F. Davis

    (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

Abstract

Humans, animals, and the environment face a universal crisis: antimicrobial resistance (AR). Addressing AR and its multi-disciplinary causes across many sectors including in human and veterinary medicine remains underdeveloped. One barrier to AR efforts is an inconsistent process to incorporate the plenitude of stakeholders about what AR is and how to stifle its development and spread—especially stakeholders from the animal agriculture sector, one of the largest purchasers of antimicrobial drugs. In 2019, The Wellcome Trust released Reframing Resistance: How to communicate about antimicrobial resistance effectively (Reframing Resistance), which proposed the need to establish a consistent and harmonized messaging effort that describes the AR crisis and its global implications for health and wellbeing across all stakeholders. Yet, Reframing Resistance does not specifically engage the animal agriculture community. This study investigates the gap between two principles recommended by Reframing Resistance and animal agriculture stakeholders. For this analysis, the research group conducted 31 semi-structured interviews with a diverse group of United States animal agriculture stakeholders. Participants reported attitudes, beliefs, and practices about a variety of issues, including how they defined AR and what entities the AR crisis impacts most. Exploration of Reframing Resistance’s Principle 2, “explain the fundamentals succinctly” and Principle 3, “emphasis that this is universal issue; it can affect anyone, including you” reveals disagreement in both the fundamentals of AR and consensus of “who” the AR crisis impacts. Principle 2 may do better to acknowledge that animal agriculture stakeholders espouse a complex array of perspectives that cannot be summed up in a single perspective or principle. As a primary tool to combat AR, behavior change must be accomplished first through outreach to stakeholder groups and understanding their perspectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabriel K. Innes & Agnes Markos & Kathryn R. Dalton & Caitlin A. Gould & Keeve E. Nachman & Jessica Fanzo & Anne Barnhill & Shannon Frattaroli & Meghan F. Davis, 2021. "How animal agriculture stakeholders define, perceive, and are impacted by antimicrobial resistance: challenging the Wellcome Trust’s Reframing Resistance principles," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(4), pages 893-909, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:38:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s10460-021-10197-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-021-10197-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10460-021-10197-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-021-10197-y?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. Jessica M. A. Blair, 2018. "A climate for antibiotic resistance," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(6), pages 460-461, June.
    2. Scott H. Podolsky, 2018. "The evolving response to antibiotic resistance (1945–2018)," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-8, December.
    3. Tingting Liu & Randall J. F. Bruins & Matthew T. Heberling, 2018. "Factors Influencing Farmers’ Adoption of Best Management Practices: A Review and Synthesis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-26, February.
    4. Sue Walker, 2019. "Effective antimicrobial resistance communication: the role of information design," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Derek R. MacFadden & Sarah F. McGough & David Fisman & Mauricio Santillana & John S. Brownstein, 2018. "Antibiotic resistance increases with local temperature," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(6), pages 510-514, June.
    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. Áine Regan & Sharon Sweeney & Claire McKernan & Tony Benson & Moira Dean, 2023. "Consumer perception and understanding of the risks of antibiotic use and antimicrobial resistance in farming," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 989-1001, September.

    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. Nicolas Fortané, 2021. "Antimicrobial resistance: preventive approaches to the rescue? Professional expertise and business model of French “industrial” veterinarians," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(2), pages 213-238, June.
    2. Lenore Manderson, 2020. "Prescribing, care and resistance: antibiotic use in urban South Africa," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Oscar Montes de Oca Munguia & Rick Llewellyn, 2020. "The Adopters versus the Technology: Which Matters More when Predicting or Explaining Adoption?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 80-91, March.
    4. Kristina Beethem & Sandra T. Marquart-Pyatt & Jennifer Lai & Tian Guo, 2023. "Navigating the information landscape: public and private information source access by midwest farmers," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 1117-1135, September.
    5. Massey, J.H. & Reba, M.L. & Adviento-Borbe, M.A. & Chiu, Y.L. & Payne, G.K., 2022. "Direct comparisons of four irrigation systems on a commercial rice farm: Irrigation water use efficiencies and water dynamics," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    6. Pongspikul, Tayatorn & McCann, Laura M., 2020. "Farmers’ Adoption of Pressure Irrigation Systems: The Case of Cotton Producers in the Southeastern versus Southwestern U.S," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304332, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Mohamed Ghali & Maha Ben Jaballah & Nejla Ben Arfa & Annie Sigwalt, 2022. "Analysis of factors that influence adoption of agroecological practices in viticulture," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 103(3), pages 179-209, September.
    8. Patrick Baur, 2020. "When farmers are pulled in too many directions: comparing institutional drivers of food safety and environmental sustainability in California agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(4), pages 1175-1194, December.
    9. Meenakshi Sharma & Rajesh Kaushal & Prashant Kaushik & Seeram Ramakrishna, 2021. "Carbon Farming: Prospects and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-15, October.
    10. Margarita Velandia & Roderick Rejesus & Christopher Clark & Karen L. DeLong & Annette Wszelaki & Susan Schexnayder & Kimberly Jensen, 2020. "Evaluating the Relationship between Fruit and Vegetable Growers Use of Plastic Biodegradable Mulches, and Environmental Stewardship and Labor Savings: The Case of Tennessee Fruit and Vegetable Farmers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, March.
    11. Jane Musole Kwenye & Xiaoting Hou Jones & Alan Renwick, 2023. "Understanding Land-Use Trade-off Decision Making Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process: Insights from Agricultural Land Managers in Zambia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, February.
    12. Jessica Rudnick & Mark Lubell & Sat Darshan S. Khalsa & Stephanie Tatge & Liza Wood & Molly Sears & Patrick H. Brown, 2021. "A farm systems approach to the adoption of sustainable nitrogen management practices in California," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 783-801, September.
    13. Irina Pilvere & Aleksejs Nipers & Agnese Krievina & Ilze Upite & Daniels Kotovs, 2022. "LASAM Model: An Important Tool in the Decision Support System for Policymakers and Farmers," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-26, May.
    14. Maura Calliera & Andrea Di Guardo & Alba L’Astorina & Maurizio Polli & Antonio Finizio & Ettore Capri, 2023. "Integrating Environmental and Social Dimensions with Science-Based Knowledge for a Sustainable Pesticides Management—A Project of Lombardy Region in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-15, May.
    15. Salaisook, Phastraporn & Faysse, Nicolas & Tsusaka, Takuji W., 2020. "Reasons for adoption of sustainable land management practices in a changing context: A mixed approach in Thailand," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    16. Charlotte Brives & Jessica Pourraz, 2020. "Phage therapy as a potential solution in the fight against AMR: obstacles and possible futures," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-11, December.
    17. Daxini, Amar & Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Barnes, Andrew P., 2019. "Understanding farmers’ intentions to follow a nutrient management plan using the theory of planned behaviour," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 428-437.
    18. Devon Johnson & Maya Almaraz & Jessica Rudnick & Lauren E. Parker & Steven M. Ostoja & Sat Darshan S. Khalsa, 2023. "Farmer Adoption of Climate-Smart Practices Is Driven by Farm Characteristics, Information Sources, and Practice Benefits and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-12, May.
    19. Aslihan Arslan & Kristin Floress & Christine Lamanna & Leslie Lipper & Solomon Asfaw & Todd Rosenstock, 2020. "IFAD RESEARCH SERIES 63 - The adoption of improved agricultural technologies - A meta-analysis for Africa," IFAD Research Series 304758, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
    20. Alan Renwick & Robyn Dynes & Paul Johnstone & Warren King & Lania Holt & Jemma Penelope, 2019. "Challenges and Opportunities for Land Use Transformation: Insights from the Central Plains Water Scheme in New Zealand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-18, September.

    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:spr:agrhuv:v:38:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s10460-021-10197-y. 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: http://www.springer.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.