Edited by: Felicity Ann Huntingford, University of Glasgow, United Kingdom
Reviewed by: Janicke Nordgreen, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Norway; Sunil Kadri, Universidad Austral de Chile, Chile; Sally Wyke, University of Glasgow, United Kingdom
This article was submitted to Animal Behavior and Welfare, a section of the journal Frontiers in Veterinary Science
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
As a veterinarian and academic in aquaculture, in my personal experience, most farmers are concerned for their animals and want to take good care of them. There has been substantial improvement in the welfare of farmed fish in recent decades, but improvements have been inconsistent across culture systems and species. Where there has been a lack of progress, it is not simply due to the more obvious barriers, for example, lack of clear messages, lack of effective dissemination, or cost of implementation. Why have the good intentions of farmers and research by academics failed to improve the care of many farmed fish? The reasons would appear to be complex; however, human behavioral theory (this term is used to differentiate from animal ethology) offers both a conceptual framework and practical guidelines for improving the care of fish by influencing the behavior of farmers. Here, I present some background context and apply human behavioral theory to examples of on-farm care of fish.
I have been fortunate to work as a veterinarian, researcher, and teacher in aquaculture in many parts of the world for over three and a half decades. In all that time, meeting and talking with many fish (and shrimp) farmers, I have never encountered one who intentionally mistreated their animals. Most expressed considerable concern for their animals [e.g., (
While there has been some significant progress in the practical care of farmed fish over the last three decades, progress has been inconsistent across culture systems and species. I have observed many cases of extremely poor fish welfare, especially around the time of harvest and slaughter. In my experience, such treatment of fish did not appear to be due to malice; in some cases, it was due to lack of understanding or resources, but in many cases, it was failure to implement existing viable strategies. Even in the best farming systems, there is still the potential for improvements in fish welfare and the question remains how should we achieve such gains?
Personally, working in both the applied and academic contexts, the relationship between improved academic understanding of welfare and practical care has been far from clear to me. Where translation from academic to applied context has been ineffective, it was not always due to the more obvious barriers, for example, lack of clear messages, lack of effective dissemination, or cost of implementation. While complex and unresolved scientific or ethical arguments are difficult to translate into husbandry practices, not all aspects of animal welfare are complex or still widely debated. Even where scientific issues are clear and effectively disseminated, and there is a demonstrable benefit for the business, progress remains limited.
Therefore, there must be other barriers to the translation from academic endeavors to practical animal welfare. Reflecting on how theoretical understanding has influenced my own practical actions regarding fish welfare, I find that some information has remained academic theory while other examples have affected my behavior. For example, work by Victoria Braithwaite on simple manipulations in the environment and feeding of juvenile cod (
Seeking to understand why some evidence affects behavior and some does not (personally and at an industry or national level), I looked outside the field of animal health, welfare, and husbandry for a conceptual framework. The relationship between information and subsequent action by people is central to public policy and many other areas. Further reading on influencing behavior introduced me to what is referred to as “behavioural theory” in the literature. Here, I use the term “human behavioural theory” to differentiate it from animal ethology. There is a large body of literature and many examples of successful application of the theory to influence peoples' behavior.
Human behavioral theory is used to understand and influence human behavior by governments and others. It demonstrates that evidence is only one aspect of the suite of influences and contexts that affect our decisions. The concept that our decision making can be influenced was developed by Richard Thaler, a Nobel Prize-winning behavioral economist. The concept is based on influencing our behavior by utilizing our cognitive shortcuts and biases. Influencing people's behavior is a complex issue and has the potential to be used for unsavory purposes; however, given its success and positive benefits in many areas, it also has the potential to improve the way people care for fish and other animals.
Below, I present evidence for some of the statements above (e.g., farmers want to take care of their fish, barriers to applying better care, and example of a successful welfare initiative) and then apply human behavioral theory to examples of applied fish welfare. The aim is to explore the potential of this approach with a view to stimulating further work in this area and facilitate additional gains in the welfare of farmed fish.
Our caring relationship with animals appears to extend back tens of thousands of years, as discussed by Bradshaw (
Several key concepts that are important when conceptualizing and protecting fish welfare are still debated in the academic literature. There is a lack of agreement on definitions for, or the existence of sentience, consciousness, cognition, pain, positive, and negative emotions in fish. Therefore, the debate is likely to continue for some time (
Humane slaughter is widely accepted as essentially for good animal welfare (
There are examples of effective information dissemination between academics and industry. These range from original research papers, through summaries of the information (
Improving fish welfare can increase productivity and allow access to markets and therefore does not always have a net cost. Even when there is a net cost, there may be good reasons for bearing that cost, including compliance with legislation and worker satisfaction.
There is a common intuitive notion that animals that are well-cared for will be more productive and there is also quantifiable evidence for the relationship (
Legislative instruments are another incentive for protecting the fish welfare even if there is a net cost. Regulation has been introduced to protect the welfare of farmed animals, for example, in Europe [e.g., (
As discussed above, farmers may wish to take care of animals based on personal beliefs, and therefore, the benefits of better fish welfare may go beyond improved productivity or profits. For example, “
Despite the uncertain links between information and impact, some initiatives would appear to have been successful at disseminating information and promoting better welfare practices. The UK RSPCA Assured program (formerly Freedom Foods) has been adopted by more than 70% of the Scottish salmon farming industry (
Human behavior theory offers such a theoretical framework and practical guidelines to better understand the influences on how people care for farmed fish and help us to achieve more effective change in the future. A document on the relationship between public policy and changes in human behavior based in behavioral theory (
This is not an exhaustive list, reflective (conscious) and automatic (unconscious) thought processes are affected by different sub-sets of these influences (
Human behavioral theory has been used in a wide variety of contexts, for example, reducing the spread of HIV in sub-Saharan Africa. The UK's Department for International Development recognized and utilized the complex drivers of human behavior in a successful scheme to reverse the spread of HIV (
In the context of MINDSPACE, hypotheses regarding potential influences can be developed and tested to improve strategies for change. Below are some conjectures on why some farmers take better care of their fish or in some cases fail to do so.
We can also look at specific initiatives in this context, for example, the UK RSPCA Assured scheme (formerly Freedom Foods).
Working both in the academic and applied arenas of fish welfare gave me a personal perspective on the barriers or challenges to effective communication and implementation. Considering the implications of academic studies through the lens of human behavioral theory has the potential to develop more realistic pathways to impact. In the future, bringing expertise in human behavioral theory together with those interested in applied animal welfare has the potential to improve understanding and develop more effective strategies for change. Whether change is industry wide or more localized, the application of human behavioral theory offers a more effective approach than simply provision of information, training, and incentives.
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.
The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and has approved it for publication.
The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.