Key Findings
Attempts are made on a daily basis to intervene in and reduce the spread of TB on farms ranging from the dissemination of guidance and advice to farmers via leaflets and farming publications, through to the testing of cattle, removal of reactors, and placing of movement restrictions on herds. The ITA Trial, however, is the first of its kind within Wales to capitalise on the strengths of the existing farmer-vet relationship in order to make a positive intervention, which moves beyond any stereotypical conceptions of farmer’s attitudes towards disease control and/ or notions of a ‘standard’ farm, and attempts to engender change in biosecurity practice by tailoring advice at the level of the individual farm and farmer. In doing so it directly engages with the all important socio-cultural dimensions of risk and disease control which are all too often neglected in other contemporary biosecurity initiatives. It creates space for two-way knowledge transfer and with it, an enhanced awareness of how biosecurity actions can be effectively incorporated into everyday farming systems in a range of different contexts.
It would have been too simplistic to draw a definitive conclusion from the research data as to the success or failure of the ITA in achieving the overarching aim, based solely on a review of whether or not participating farmers undertook to implement any actions recommended by the vets within the time span of the Trial. Arguably, far more significant than any quantitative levels of change in biosecurity practice, was the experience – for the farmers as well as the vets - of actually being involved in the Trial. From this perspective, by separating out awareness and understanding of disease risk from actual uptake of improved biosecurity, recognition can then be given to the impact that participation in the Trial had on the vets as well as the farmers.
When it was initially conceived the ITA Trial was very much focused on improving the biosecurity skills, learning and knowledge, of farmers. In practice, there was substantial evidence to suggest that both sets of actors learnt from the experience and certainly both reported positive benefits that had been derived from participating. Most often, these benefits related to their having become more aware and more knowledgeable of the disease control risks which are presented by everyday farming practices. On this basis, the evidence suggests that the overarching aim of the Trial was in many senses exceeded. Not only did the ITA raise awareness and understanding about bTB disease risks amongst the farmers, but also amongst the vets.
In the case of the farmers, increasing their awareness of the presence of disease risks is a vital first step to any subsequent stages of behaviour change. For many, the fact that by the end of the Trial they were more conscious of the risks – even if it was still not something that they were prepared to accept, or change their practices in response to - must be regarded as a successful outcome of the Trial. This was especially so in the case of the farmers for whom the immediate opportunity costs (particularly labour and time) were highest.
Amongst the hobby type farmers who potentially had more expendable resources and, therefore, a greater capacity to implement recommended actions, more tangible evidence of change could be expected (and very often, in the case of the ITA, was achieved). Amongst the commercial type farmers, however, even the most intangible of changes – in particular, achieving a heightened cognitive awareness of risk – was a step in the right direction.
Given the starting point (and also adverse disease control and economic farming context) from which many were participating in the ITA, any more progress than this towards cultural change would require a timeline considerably longer than that of the (12 month) Trial. Further, given the impossibility for the vets of being able to guarantee the effectiveness of any of the recommended action points in preventing TB disease spread, the basis from which the vets were able to stimulate change was at times very thin. Indeed, the pre-existing trusting and respectful nature of the vet-farmer relationship appeared fundamental to the effectiveness of the Trial.
Acknowledgement of the special relationship which exists between farmers and their local vets (and the value sets on which they are commonly based), enables lessons to be learnt on the most effective ways of communicating with (all types of) farmers when behaviour change is required. The result is a far more conducive environment for making improvements to current disease control practice through a process which instigates a more effective spread and wider acceptance of rights, roles and responsibilities at the lowest operational level.
Back to Biosecurity and Risk theme page.
