FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
PloS one2021; 16(5); e0251002; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251002

Evaluation of long-term welfare initiatives on working equid welfare and social transmission of knowledge in Mexico.

Abstract: Working equids play an essential role in supporting livelihoods, providing resilience and income security to people around the world, yet their welfare is often poor. Consequently, animal welfare focussed NGOs employ a range of initiatives aimed at improving standards of working equid welfare. However, there is debate surrounding the efficacy of welfare initiatives utilised and long term monitoring and evaluation of initiatives is rarely undertaken. This study compares equid welfare and the social transmission of welfare information across Mexican communities that had previously received differing intervention histories (veterinary treatment plus educational initiatives, veterinary treatment only and control communities) in order to assess their efficacy. Indicators of equid welfare were assessed using the Equid Assessment Research and Scoping tool and included body condition score, skin alterations, lameness, general health status and reaction to observer approach. Owners were interviewed about their involvement in previous welfare initiatives, beliefs regarding equid emotions and pain, and the social transmission of welfare knowledge, including whether they ask advice about their equid or discuss its health with others and whether there is a specific individual that they consider to be 'good with equids' in their community. In total 266 owners were interviewed from 25 communities across three states. Better welfare (specifically body condition and skin alteration scores) was seen in communities where a history of combined free veterinary treatment and educational initiatives had taken place compared to those that had only received veterinary treatment or control communities. The social transfer of welfare knowledge was also higher in these communities, suggesting that the discussion and transfer of equid welfare advice within communities can act as a mechanism to disseminate good welfare practices more widely. Our results suggest that using a combined approach may enhance the success of welfare initiatives, a finding that may impact future NGO programming.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2021-05-04 PubMed ID: 33945552PubMed Central: PMC8096037DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251002Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research paper investigates the effectiveness of long-term welfare initiatives on the wellbeing of working equids, animals such as horses, donkeys, and mules, in Mexico, and explores how knowledge about these initiatives spreads within communities.

Objective of the Research

  • The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of different kinds of interventions – particularly veterinary treatment and educational initiatives – on the welfare of working equids. In addition, the research seeks to understand how information on equid welfare is socially transmitted within communities that had received these interventions.

Methodology

  • The researchers used the Equid Assessment Research and Scoping (EARS) tool to assess welfare indicators such as body condition score, skin alterations, lameness, general health status, and reaction to observer approach in working equids situated in different Mexican communities.
  • The investigation also involved interviewing 266 equid owners from 25 communities across three Mexican states. These interviews aimed to gather data about the owners’ involvement in previous welfare initiatives, their beliefs concerning equid emotions and pain, and the dissemination of welfare knowledge within their community.

Findings

  • Communities that had a history of both veterinary treatment and educational initiatives concerning equid welfare showed better welfare indicators, such as better body condition and improved skin condition, compared to communities that had only received veterinary treatment or no interventions at all.
  • In addition, these communities demonstrated a higher rate of social transmission of welfare knowledge, suggesting that discussions about equid welfare within communities can spread good practices more widely.

Implications

  • These results indicate that welfare initiatives can significantly improve the condition of working equids when they involve both veterinary treatment and education. This combination seems more effective than interventions focusing on veterinary treatment alone.
  • The research suggests that the spread of knowledge within communities can act as a catalyst to promote better welfare practices, which implies that NGOs should prioritize communication and education when implementing welfare initiatives.

Cite This Article

APA
Haddy E, Burden F, Fernando-Martínez JA, Legaria-Ramírez D, Raw Z, Brown J, Kaminski J, Proops L. (2021). Evaluation of long-term welfare initiatives on working equid welfare and social transmission of knowledge in Mexico. PLoS One, 16(5), e0251002. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251002

Publication

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
NlmUniqueID: 101285081
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 16
Issue: 5
Pages: e0251002
PII: e0251002

Researcher Affiliations

Haddy, Emily
  • Department of Psychology, Centre for Comparative and Evolutionary Psychology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.
Burden, Faith
  • The Donkey Sanctuary, Sidmouth, Devon, United Kingdom.
Fernando-Martínez, José Antonio
  • Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Programma Donkey Sanctuary-Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, D.F. Mexico, Mexico.
Legaria-Ramírez, Dafne
  • Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Programma Donkey Sanctuary-Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, D.F. Mexico, Mexico.
Raw, Zoe
  • The Donkey Sanctuary, Sidmouth, Devon, United Kingdom.
Brown, Julia
  • School of the Environment, Geography & Geosciences, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.
Kaminski, Juliane
  • Department of Psychology, Centre for Comparative and Evolutionary Psychology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.
Proops, Leanne
  • Department of Psychology, Centre for Comparative and Evolutionary Psychology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.

MeSH Terms

  • Animal Husbandry / methods
  • Animal Husbandry / statistics & numerical data
  • Animal Welfare / statistics & numerical data
  • Animals
  • Equidae
  • Female
  • Horses
  • Knowledge
  • Male
  • Mexico

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

References

This article includes 55 references
  1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAOSTAT [Internet]. 2014. Available from: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QA.
  2. Stringer A. Improving animal health for poverty alleviation and sustainable livelihoods.. Vet Rec 2014 Nov 29;175(21):526-9.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.g6281pubmed: 25431381google scholar: lookup
  3. Arriaga-Jordán CM, Pearson RA. The contribution of livestock to smallholder livelihoods: the situation in Mexico. BSAP Occas Publ 2004;33:99–115.
  4. Pritchard JC. Animal traction and transport in the 21st century: getting the priorities right.. Vet J 2010 Dec;186(3):271-4.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2010.08.004pubmed: 20833088google scholar: lookup
  5. Valette D. Invisible Helpers: Women’s views on the contributions of working donkeys, horses, and mules to their lives. Key findings from research in Ethiopia, Kenya, India and Pakistan. 2014.
  6. Martin Curran M, Smith DG. The impact of donkey ownership on the livelihoods of female peri-urban dwellers in Ethiopia.. Trop Anim Health Prod 2005 Nov;37 Suppl 1:67-86.
    pubmed: 16335072doi: 10.1007/s11250-005-9009-ygoogle scholar: lookup
  7. Pritchard JC, Lindberg AC, Main DC, Whay HR. Assessment of the welfare of working horses, mules and donkeys, using health and behaviour parameters.. Prev Vet Med 2005 Jul 12;69(3-4):265-83.
    doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2005.02.002pubmed: 15907574google scholar: lookup
  8. Sánchez-Casanova RE, Masri-Daba M, Alonso-Díaz MÁ, Méndez-Bernal A, Hernández-Gil M, Fernando-Martínez JA. Prevalence of cutaneous pathological conditions and factors associated with the presence of skin wounds in working equids in tropical regions of Veracruz, Mexico.. Trop Anim Health Prod 2014 Mar;46(3):555-61.
    doi: 10.1007/s11250-013-0529-6pubmed: 24488621google scholar: lookup
  9. Tesfaye A, Martin Curran M. A longitudinal survey of market donkeys in Ethiopia.. Trop Anim Health Prod 2005 Nov;37 Suppl 1:87-100.
    doi: 10.1007/s11250-005-9010-5pubmed: 16335073google scholar: lookup
  10. Reix CE, Burn CC, Pritchard JC, Barr AR, Whay HR. The range and prevalence of clinical signs and conformation associated with lameness in working draught donkeys in Pakistan.. Equine Vet J 2014 Nov;46(6):771-7.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12231pubmed: 24433378google scholar: lookup
  11. Pritchard JC, Burn CC, Barr AR, Whay HR. Validity of indicators of dehydration in working horses: a longitudinal study of changes in skin tent duration, mucous membrane dryness and drinking behaviour.. Equine Vet J 2008 Sep;40(6):558-64.
    doi: 10.2746/042516408X297462pubmed: 18356129google scholar: lookup
  12. Burn CC, Dennison TL, Whay HR. Relationships between behaviour and health in working horses, donkeys, and mules in developing countries. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2010;126(3–4):109–18.
  13. Upjohn MM, Pfeiffer DU, Verheyen KL. Helping working Equidae and their owners in developing countries: monitoring and evaluation of evidence-based interventions.. Vet J 2014 Feb;199(2):210-6.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2013.09.065pubmed: 24269105google scholar: lookup
  14. Whay HR, Dikshit AK, Hockenhull J, Parker RM, Banerjee A, Hughes SI, Pritchard JC, Reix CE. Evaluation of changes in equine care and limb-related abnormalities in working horses in Jaipur, India, as part of a two year participatory intervention study.. PLoS One 2015;10(5):e0126160.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0126160pmc: PMC4441452pubmed: 26000967google scholar: lookup
  15. Aguirre V, Orihuela A. Assessment of the impact of an animal welfare educational course with first grade children in rural schools in the state of morelos, mexico. Early Child Educ J 2010;38(1):27–31.
  16. ICWE. International Coalition for Working Equids [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Nov 4]. Available from: https://www.icweworkingequids.org/#:~:text = The International Coalition for Working,7.12 on the Welfare of.
  17. Martin Curran M, Feseha G, Smith DG. The impact of access to animal health services on donkey health and livelihoods in Ethiopia.. Trop Anim Health Prod 2005 Nov;37 Suppl 1:47-65.
    pubmed: 16335071doi: 10.1007/s11250-005-9008-zgoogle scholar: lookup
  18. Crane MA, Khallaayoune K, Scantlebury C, Christley RM. A randomized triple blind trial to assess the effect of an anthelmintic programme for working equids in Morocco.. BMC Vet Res 2011 Jan 5;7:1.
    doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-7-1pmc: PMC3022536pubmed: 21208398google scholar: lookup
  19. Galindo F, de Aluja A, Cagigas R, Huerta LA, Tadich TA. Application of the Hands-On Donkey Tool for Assessing the Welfare of Working Equids at Tuliman, Mexico.. J Appl Anim Welf Sci 2018 Jan-Mar;21(1):93-100.
    doi: 10.1080/10888705.2017.1351365pubmed: 28762781google scholar: lookup
  20. Mohite DS, Sheikh CS, Singh S, Kalita J, Williams S, Compston PC. Using Qualitative Methods to Explore Farrier-Related Barriers to Successful Farriery Interventions for Equine Welfare in India.. Animals (Basel) 2019 May 18;9(5).
    doi: 10.3390/ani9050252pmc: PMC6562430pubmed: 31109080google scholar: lookup
  21. Attwood GA, Upjohn MM, Verheyen KLP. What impact does skills training have? A tracer study of students of a saddlery, farriery, and business skills training programme conducted in Lesotho in 2007. 2010.
  22. Madariaga-Najera M, Torres-Sevilla MA. Perception and relationship changes of owners towards their mules to improve animal-human welfare in Tlaxcala, Mexico. 2014;p. 120–1.
  23. Reix CE, Dikshit AK, Hockenhull J, Parker RM, Banerjee A, Burn CC, Pritchard JC, Whay HR. A two-year participatory intervention project with owners to reduce lameness and limb abnormalities in working horses in Jaipur, India.. PLoS One 2015;10(4):e0124342.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0124342pmc: PMC4405470pubmed: 25898014google scholar: lookup
  24. Rogers S. Moving from a treatment-focussed to prevention-focussed approach. 2010.
  25. Hernandez-Gil M, Rivero-Moreno A, Madariaga-Najera M, Vasquez-Rios JE, Fernando-Martínez JA. Changing the approach: promoting animal welfare where livelihoods rely on equids. 2014;p. 67–71.
  26. Rodríguez Rodas DA, Perez J. Design of an equine welfare network matrix as the implementation model for equine welfare projects in Guatemala. 2014;p. 58–62.
  27. Grimshaw JM, Shirran L, Thomas R, Mowatt G, Fraser C, Bero L, Grilli R, Harvey E, Oxman A, O'Brien MA. Changing provider behavior: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions.. Med Care 2001 Aug;39(8 Suppl 2):II2-45.
    pubmed: 11583120
  28. Demissie TD, Desalegn T. Including the excluded: use of government extension services to improve equine welfare. 2014;p. 87–9.
  29. Narayanaswamy L. Problematizing “Knowledge-for-Development.”. Dev Change 2013;44(5):1065–86.
  30. Stringer AP, Bell CE, Christley RM, Gebreab F, Tefera G, Reed K, Trawford A, Pinchbeck GL. A cluster-randomised controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of different knowledge-transfer interventions for rural working equid users in Ethiopia.. Prev Vet Med 2011 Jun 15;100(2):90-9.
    doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2011.02.001pmc: PMC3149660pubmed: 21420748google scholar: lookup
  31. Wallen KE, Daut EF. The challenge and opportunity of behaviour change methods and frameworks to reduce demand for illegal wildlife. Nat Conserv 2018;26:55–75.
  32. Van Dijk L, Pritchard JC, Pradhan SK, Wells K. Sharing the Load: A guide to improving the welfare of working animals through collective action. 2011.
  33. Leeb C, Henstridge C, Dewhurst K, Bazeley K. Welfare assessment of working donkeys: Assessment of the impact of an animal healthcare project in West Kenya. Anim Welf 2003;12(4):689–94.
  34. Martin M. The Impact of Community Animal Health Services on Farmers in Low-Income Countries: A Literature Review. 2001.
  35. Whay HR, Main DCJ, Green LE, Webster AJF. Animal-based measures for the assessment of welfare state of dairy cattle, pigs and laying hens: consensus of expert opinion. Anim Welf 2003;12(205–217).
  36. Kottek M, Grieser J, Beck C, Rudolf B, Rubel F. World Map of the Koppen-Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorol Zeitschrift 2006;15(3):259–63.
  37. Raw Z, Rodrigues JB, Rickards K, Ryding J, Norris SL, Judge A, Kubasiewicz LM, Watson TL, Little H, Hart B, Sullivan R, Garrett C, Burden FA. Equid Assessment, Research and Scoping (EARS): The Development and Implementation of a New Equid Welfare Assessment and Monitoring Tool.. Animals (Basel) 2020 Feb 13;10(2).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10020297pmc: PMC7070371pubmed: 32069910google scholar: lookup
  38. Hartung C, Lerer A, Anokwa Y, Tseng C, Brunette W, Borriello G. Open data kit: tools to build information services for developing regions. 2010.
  39. Bott-Knutson, Rebecca C Mclean A, Heleski CR. Community-based participatory research interfaced with equine welfare assessment to learn about working equids and their owners in Vera Cruz, Mexico. 2014.
  40. García-Pérez MA, Nunez-Anton V. Cellwise Residual Analysis in Two-Way Contingency Tables. Educ Psychol Meas 2003;63(5):825–39.
    doi: 10.1177/0013164403251280google scholar: lookup
  41. IBM Corporation. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Armonk NY: IBM Corp.; 2019.
  42. Haddy E, Burden F, Prado-Ortiz O, Zappi H, Raw Z, Proops L. Comparison of working equid welfare across three regions of Mexico.. Equine Vet J 2021 Jul;53(4):763-770.
    pubmed: 32920907doi: 10.1111/evj.13349google scholar: lookup
  43. Shah SZA, Nawaz S, Laghari H, Shafi M, Upjohn M, Eager R. Minimising cart donkeys’ foot conditions through community awareness-raising, capacity-building and linking relevant stakeholders in Jacobabad, Pakistan. 2014;p. 145–9.
  44. Degenhardt L, Mathers B, Vickerman P, Rhodes T, Latkin C, Hickman M. Prevention of HIV infection for people who inject drugs: why individual, structural, and combination approaches are needed.. Lancet 2010 Jul 24;376(9737):285-301.
    pubmed: 20650522doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60742-8google scholar: lookup
  45. Reinke W, Splett J, Robeson E, Offutt C. Combining School and Family Interventions for the Prevention and Early Intervention of Disruptive Behavior Problems in Children: A Public Health Perspective. Psychol Sch 2009;46(1).
  46. Ali ABA, El Sayed MA, McLean AK, Heleski CR. Aggression in working mules and subsequent aggressive treatment by their handlers in Egyptian brick kilns—Cause or effect?. J Vet Behav 2019;29:95–101.
  47. Decety J, Jackson PL. The functional architecture of human empathy.. Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev 2004 Jun;3(2):71-100.
    doi: 10.1177/1534582304267187pubmed: 15537986google scholar: lookup
  48. Ellingsen K, Zanella AJ, Bjerkås E, Indrebø A. The relationship between empathy, perception of pain and attitudes toward pets among Norwegian dog owners. Anthrozoos 2010;23(3):231–43.
  49. Luna D, Tadich TA. Why Should Human-Animal Interactions Be Included in Research of Working Equids' Welfare?. Animals (Basel) 2019 Jan 30;9(2).
    doi: 10.3390/ani9020042pmc: PMC6406816pubmed: 30704022google scholar: lookup
  50. Wilson JH, Warboys D, Turoff D, Reyes DC, Turner T. Maximising educational opportunities by using a veterinary team in a community-based equine welfare programme. 2014;p. 213.
  51. Tadich TA, Stuardo Escobar LH. Strategies for improving the welfare of working equids in the Americas: a Chilean example.. Rev Sci Tech 2014 Apr;33(1):203-11.
    doi: 10.20506/rst.33.1.2271pubmed: 25000793google scholar: lookup
  52. Hernandez-Gil M, Rivero-Moreno A, Fernando Martínez JA, Huerta-Lopez L, Prado-Ortiz O, Reyes-Corona V. A new strategy of community partnership to improve the welfare of working equids in Mexico. 2014;p. 104–8.
  53. Knight J, Weir S, Woldehanna T. The role of education in facilitating risk-taking and innovation in agriculture. J Dev Stud 2003;39(6):1–22.
  54. Reagans R, McEvily B. Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range. Adm Sci Q 2010;48(2):240–67.
  55. Pritchard J, Upjohn M, Hirson T. Improving working equine welfare in 'hard-win' situations, where gains are difficult, expensive or marginal.. PLoS One 2018;13(2):e0191950.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191950pmc: PMC5800664pubmed: 29408887google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 4 times.
  1. Merridale-Punter MS, Wiethoelter AK, El-Hage CM, Hitchens PL. Prevalence and Factors Associated with Working Equid Lameness in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Animals (Basel) 2022 Nov 10;12(22).
    doi: 10.3390/ani12223100pubmed: 36428328google scholar: lookup
  2. Cameron A, Freeman SL, Wild I, Burridge J, Burrell K. Scoping Review of the Socioeconomic Value of Working Equids, and the Impact of Educational Interventions Aimed at Improving Their Welfare. Animals (Basel) 2026 Jan 7;16(2).
    doi: 10.3390/ani16020165pubmed: 41594356google scholar: lookup
  3. Raw Z, Collins JA, Burden FA. What Is a Working Equid? Analysis of Current Terminology and a Suggested Definition. Animals (Basel) 2024 Jul 9;14(14).
    doi: 10.3390/ani14142026pubmed: 39061488google scholar: lookup
  4. Yalew A, Darge D, Melake BM. Assessment of community-based intervention approaches to improve the health and welfare of working donkeys in selected areas of Sidama region, Southern Ethiopia. Front Vet Sci 2023;10:1253448.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1253448pubmed: 38317786google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,780 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.