z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Improving working equine welfare in ‘hard-win’ situations, where gains are difficult, expensive or marginal
Author(s) -
Joy Pritchard,
Melissa M. Upjohn,
Tamsin Hirson
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0191950
Subject(s) - welfare , psychological intervention , population , government (linguistics) , animal welfare , public relations , business , political science , medicine , nursing , environmental health , linguistics , philosophy , ecology , law , biology
Purpose Brooke is a non-government organisation with working equine welfare programmes across Africa, Asia and Latin America. In 2014, staff from ten country programmes were asked to identify ‘no-win’ situations (subsequently reframed as ‘hard-wins’)—where improving equine welfare is proving difficult, expensive and/or marginal—in order to inform strategic decisions on how to approach, manage and mitigate for such situations. Methods The Delphi-type consultation process had three phases. Round 1 posed five questions in the form of a workshop, survey and semi-structured interviews. Round 2 re-presented key themes and sense-checked initial conclusions. Round 3 reviewed the nature and prevalence of hard-win situations at an international meeting of all participants. Results Reasons given for hard-win situations included: no economic or social benefit from caring for working animals; poor resource availability; lack of empathy for working equids or their owners among wider stakeholders; deep-seated social issues, such as addiction or illegal working; areas with a high animal turnover or migratory human population; lack of community cooperation or cohesion; unsafe areas where welfare interventions cannot be adequately supported. Participants estimated the prevalence of hard-win situations as 40–70% of their work. They suggested some current ways of working that may be contributing to the problem, and opportunities to tackle hard-wins more effectively. Conclusion and animal welfare implications Respondents agreed that if equine welfare improvements are to span generations of animals, interventions cannot rely on relatively simple, technical knowledge-transfer strategies and quick-wins alone. Programmes need to be more flexible and iterative and less risk-averse in their approaches to embedding good equine welfare practices in all relevant actors. Consultation recommendations informed development of Brooke’s new global strategy, a revised organisational structure and redefinition of roles and responsibilities to streamline ways to approach hard-wins in the complex environments and socio-economic contexts in which working equids are found.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here