Influencing Change: When "Best Practice" Changes and the Prototypical Good Farmer Turns Bad

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Influencing Change : When "Best Practice" Changes and the Prototypical Good Farmer Turns Bad. / Green, Laura; Kaler, Jasmeet; Liu, Nicola; Ferguson, Eamonn.

In: Frontiers In Veterinary Science, Vol. 7, 161, 31.03.2020.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{33934425ae474e93a19cf1871eb0a4b0,
title = "Influencing Change: When {"}Best Practice{"} Changes and the Prototypical Good Farmer Turns Bad",
abstract = "Twenty-nine farmers with a flock prevalence of lameness >5% were visited in 2013. They participated in a facilitated discussion on treatment of footrot, and evidence-based new {"}best practice.{"} One year later, farmers were revisited and management and motivators for change were discussed. Farmers were asked how they would persuade other farmers to adopt {"}best practice.{"} Initially, most participants were resigned to having lame sheep. They believed that prototypical {"}good farmers{"} (including trusted family) practiced foot trimming, the traditional {"}best practice{"} and that the new {"}best practice{"} would be expensive and time consuming. Between 2013 and 2014 lameness prevalence reduced from 7.6 to 4.3%. The major behavioral changes were reduction in foot trimming, increased use of antibacterials to treat footrot, and treating sheep within a week of becoming lame. In 2014, participants were re-interviewed. They reported that an increased knowledge of the evidence-base, trust in the facilitator and talking to other trusted farmers who had already adopted the new {"}best practice{"} overcame concerns about the prototypical {"}good farmer{"} and motivated change. Persistent change occurred because participants observed health benefits for their sheep and that the new {"}best practice{"} had saved time and money. Participants stated that other farmers would be convinced to change to the new {"}best practice{"} because it saved time and money, ironically, these were among the original barriers to change. This is possibly an example of cognitive dissonance because farmers had become positive about the benefits of saving time and money following a change in their own behaviors.",
keywords = "behavioral change, cognitive dissonance, cultural capital, longitudinal intervention study, prototypical farmer, sheep, treatment of lameness, trust",
author = "Laura Green and Jasmeet Kaler and Nicola Liu and Eamonn Ferguson",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2020 Green, Kaler, Liu and Ferguson.",
year = "2020",
month = mar,
day = "31",
doi = "10.3389/fvets.2020.00161",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
journal = "Frontiers In Veterinary Science",
issn = "2297-1769",
publisher = "Frontiers Research Foundation",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Influencing Change

T2 - When "Best Practice" Changes and the Prototypical Good Farmer Turns Bad

AU - Green, Laura

AU - Kaler, Jasmeet

AU - Liu, Nicola

AU - Ferguson, Eamonn

N1 - Copyright © 2020 Green, Kaler, Liu and Ferguson.

PY - 2020/3/31

Y1 - 2020/3/31

N2 - Twenty-nine farmers with a flock prevalence of lameness >5% were visited in 2013. They participated in a facilitated discussion on treatment of footrot, and evidence-based new "best practice." One year later, farmers were revisited and management and motivators for change were discussed. Farmers were asked how they would persuade other farmers to adopt "best practice." Initially, most participants were resigned to having lame sheep. They believed that prototypical "good farmers" (including trusted family) practiced foot trimming, the traditional "best practice" and that the new "best practice" would be expensive and time consuming. Between 2013 and 2014 lameness prevalence reduced from 7.6 to 4.3%. The major behavioral changes were reduction in foot trimming, increased use of antibacterials to treat footrot, and treating sheep within a week of becoming lame. In 2014, participants were re-interviewed. They reported that an increased knowledge of the evidence-base, trust in the facilitator and talking to other trusted farmers who had already adopted the new "best practice" overcame concerns about the prototypical "good farmer" and motivated change. Persistent change occurred because participants observed health benefits for their sheep and that the new "best practice" had saved time and money. Participants stated that other farmers would be convinced to change to the new "best practice" because it saved time and money, ironically, these were among the original barriers to change. This is possibly an example of cognitive dissonance because farmers had become positive about the benefits of saving time and money following a change in their own behaviors.

AB - Twenty-nine farmers with a flock prevalence of lameness >5% were visited in 2013. They participated in a facilitated discussion on treatment of footrot, and evidence-based new "best practice." One year later, farmers were revisited and management and motivators for change were discussed. Farmers were asked how they would persuade other farmers to adopt "best practice." Initially, most participants were resigned to having lame sheep. They believed that prototypical "good farmers" (including trusted family) practiced foot trimming, the traditional "best practice" and that the new "best practice" would be expensive and time consuming. Between 2013 and 2014 lameness prevalence reduced from 7.6 to 4.3%. The major behavioral changes were reduction in foot trimming, increased use of antibacterials to treat footrot, and treating sheep within a week of becoming lame. In 2014, participants were re-interviewed. They reported that an increased knowledge of the evidence-base, trust in the facilitator and talking to other trusted farmers who had already adopted the new "best practice" overcame concerns about the prototypical "good farmer" and motivated change. Persistent change occurred because participants observed health benefits for their sheep and that the new "best practice" had saved time and money. Participants stated that other farmers would be convinced to change to the new "best practice" because it saved time and money, ironically, these were among the original barriers to change. This is possibly an example of cognitive dissonance because farmers had become positive about the benefits of saving time and money following a change in their own behaviors.

KW - behavioral change

KW - cognitive dissonance

KW - cultural capital

KW - longitudinal intervention study

KW - prototypical farmer

KW - sheep

KW - treatment of lameness

KW - trust

U2 - 10.3389/fvets.2020.00161

DO - 10.3389/fvets.2020.00161

M3 - Article

C2 - 32296722

VL - 7

JO - Frontiers In Veterinary Science

JF - Frontiers In Veterinary Science

SN - 2297-1769

M1 - 161

ER -