Did you know that one to two acres of rainforests are cleared every second for animal rearing and agriculture? Many species of animals and plants are becoming extinct, or on the brink of extinction because of deforestation. The rapid rate at which trees are being cut down can harm communities that depend on forests for their livelihood.
Another major concern is greenhouse gas emissions. Raising livestock generates Forests help lower the risks of sudden climate change and also tone down the impacts from natural disasters. Water is another natural resource that is being depleted rapidly. Did you know that 70 per cent of our planet comprises of water but only 2. Globally, livestock are responsible for burping and a small amount from farting the methane equivalent of 3. But the scientists at AgResearch hope it may be possible to reduce the contribution livestock farming is making to global warming.
The guilty organisms belong to an ancient group called the archaea, and they are capable of living in environments where there is no oxygen. Through a process known as enteric fermentation, these microbes decompose and ferment the plant materials eaten by the animals, producing methane as a byproduct. To release the pressure that can build up as this gas is produced, the animals then burp it out. To weed out the bacteria responsible, however, Leahy and her colleagues had to find a way of reproducing the oxygen-free conditions of the rumen in their laboratory.
Using DNA technology, they were then able to sequence the genomes of some of the key species. These then became the top targets for the development of a vaccine. This work allowed the team at AgResearch to systematically design vaccines that targeted several microbe species at the same time.
So far only a small number of cows and sheep have been given the vaccine in trials by the AgResearch team. But the team has picked up a good level of antibody in the saliva and also in the rumen, and antibodies have been recovered from faeces as well , according to the Pastoral Greenhouse Gas Research Consortium, the major funder of the research since To test this, animals must spend time in a respiratory chamber — a large transparent box, sealed except for a flow of fresh air.
Stale air leaving the box is sampled for its methane content. Measuring exactly how much methane a cow produces can be tricky without putting them in special chambers to measure the gases they emit Credit: Getty Images. The researchers are also attempting to make measurements outside the laboratory too to better replicate what goes on in the field. One approach is to use a modified feeding trough into which the animal has to put its head to eat.
As the animal exhales the device sucks up a sample of its breath. But definitive proof that vaccination cuts the amount of methane belched out by cows is still lacking. He is a molecular biologist in CFAES and is working to reduce the amount of methane cattle give off by improving their digestion. Another CFAES researcher, Chanhee Lee, an assistant professor of animal sciences, focuses on reducing the waste of cows — solids and gases.
In his studies, Lee tests the effectiveness of adding chemical or biological substances to cow feed to reduce the methane they produce. He also puts addititives in manure to lessen the nitrogen and phosphorus in it, thus reducing the odds of those compounds seeping into surface water.
As methane producers, cattle top humans — by a lot. In one day, a cow generates liters of methane, on average, while humans who produce methane only one-third of us do , give off a fraction of a liter of methane daily.
Reducing the methane gas cattle generate not only cuts greenhouse gas emissions but potentially allows more of the feed cattle consume to be directed to their body and production. That can lead to larger, stronger cows and steers, more milk and beef, Yu said.
Between 4 and 12 percent of the feed cattle eat is wasted through the methane gas they produce, he said. Knowledge, as a cognitive component, is indeed critical, but alone it cannot adequately predict pro-environmental behavior. The emotional component, which is related to attitudes and values, is essential for driving the transformation of knowledge to responsible environmental behavior [ 24 ]. Despite the complex relationship between the components, researchers have shown that expanding knowledge via environmental studies and educational activities leads to more positive attitudes towards the environment and more responsible environmental behavior [ 25 , 26 ].
It was found that the students had low ecological-environmental knowledge Tuncer et al. This is the gap between declared values and actual decisions [ 28 ]. An example of this was found in a survey conducted in the U. The relationship between rearing pets and empathy towards animals has been examined by a number of studies. Paul [ 31 ] found that empathy towards animals was significantly related to present or past ownership of pets. In a sample of adolescents in Scotland, it was found that children and young adults who reared pets loved farm animals and wild animals more than children who grew up without pets [ 32 ].
In addition, a number of studies have shown that pet owners demonstrate more empathy towards animals and show greater opposition to cruelty towards them [ 33 , 34 ]. Meat consumption is also related to attitudes towards animals.
For example, it has been found that the main reason for vegetarian nutrition is animal welfare [ 35 , 36 ]. In a qualitative study in which 11 vegetarians were interviewed, most of the interviewees related vegetarianism during adulthood to ownership of pets during their childhood [ 38 ]. In another study, vegetarian males related more positively to pets than non-vegetarian males [ 39 ].
Moreover, a number of studies have reported a higher proportion of pet owners among meat-avoiders [ 40 ]. As a rule, it seems that perception of the environment is also affected by attitudes towards animals.
Pifer, Shimizu and Pifer [ 41 ] found a significant relationship between concern for the environment and opposition to experiments on animals and concern for their rights in eleven out of fifteen countries. From this literature review we can appreciate the destructive impact of the livestock industry on various, diverse aspects of the environment. Due to increased global trade in animal products, crop production for animals, and long-term meat preservation, it seems that consumers have become spatially disconnected from the necessary processes involved in production of animal products [ 42 ].
They do not connect food products and environmental quality; and they are barely aware of the environmental impact of the consumption of animal products [ 23 ].
The aim of this current study is to examine the level of knowledge and awareness of students in Israel on topics related to environmental pollution caused by industrial animal food production.
Similarly, the study aspires to examine the behavior of participants with respect to this issue, and to determine whether there is a relationship between knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. The research hypothesis is that positive relationships will be found between the level of knowledge, attitudes, and behavior on topics related to environmental pollution caused by the livestock industry, whereby attitudes will mediate the relationship between the level of knowledge and behavior.
In addition, participants who own pets or owned them in the past will demonstrate greater knowledge, awareness, and pro-environmental behavior than other participants. The study was conducted among students enrolled at Ashkelon Academic College in Responding to the questionnaire indicated informed consent to participate in the survey.
There were no exclusion criteria for the study. For the current study, we used an anonymous, closed, self-completion questionnaire. We did not find questionnaires that examined the variables in the current study and a new questionnaire was therefore constructed. For this purpose, we conducted an extensive literature review. Since there were no similar previous questionnaire testing knowledge on livestock industry influence on the environment apart from surveys dealing with pork industry that is not relevant to the Israeli context.
The questionnaire was validated by sustainability experts using a content validation method. Subsequently, a pilot study was conducted among 10 students who do not study at Ashkelon Academic College, and two unclear questions were corrected. Knowledge—thirteen questions in which respondents were asked to indicate whether, in their opinion, the statement is correct or incorrect or whether they do not know.
For example: The livestock industry causes more environmental pollution than the transportation industry. For example: It is important to me that the food I eat is produced in a way that preserves animal rights. Behavior—seven questions. Consumption of animal products—respondents were asked to indicate at what frequency they consume beef, chicken, fish, eggs, dairy products, organic vegetables and meat substitutes on a scale ranging from 1 not at all to 5 every day.
This study was a cross-sectional study. In the first stage we conducted an extensive literature review for the purpose of constructing and validating the questionnaire. After approval from the ethics committee of the college, the questionnaires were programmed using Qualtrics and distributed to the students in March A reminder to complete the questionnaire was sent in the same way after two weeks.
On 5 April , the questionnaire was closed in the program. The time taken to answer the questionnaire was estimated at seven minutes on average. The introductory page to the questionnaire contained an explanation of the essence and aim of the questionnaire.
Completion of the questionnaire indicated informed consent to participate in the survey and the students could stop responding to it at any stage or to choose not to answer some of the questions. No questions were defined as compulsory. The relationships between the variables were examined by calculating Pearson correlations.
Mediation was examined using linear regressions according to Baron and Kenny [ 43 ]. Differences between groups were examined using independent t -tests. Finally, hierarchical multiple linear regression models were built to predict pro-environmental behavior, with gender and rearing animals as covariables. The model included variables that were found to be significantly related to behavior in the univariate analyses.
The sample characteristics are presented in Table 1. The distribution of responses to the statements that examined the level of knowledge with respect to environmental damage cause by the livestock industry is presented below Table 2. The variable ranged from 0— The mean value of the knowledge variable was 3.
The data are presented in reverse rank order. The mean value of the variable was 3. The distribution of responses to the statements, after combining categories, is presented below Table 4. The mean value of the behavior variable was 2.
In other words, the higher the level of knowledge, the more pro-environmental were the attitudes and behavior. More pro-environmental attitudes were related to more pro-environmental behavior. Therefore, the hypotheses are confirmed.
According to the method of Baron and Kenny [ 44 ], three linear regressions were performed Figure 1 : firstly, we examined the predictive ability of knowledge on behavior A. Secondly, we examined the predictive ability of knowledge on attitudes B. Thirdly, knowledge and attitudes were included as independent variables, with behavior as the dependent variable C.
In other words, if we controlled for the effect of attitude, there was still a relationship between knowledge and behavior, but it was weaker. The results of the hierarchical multiple linear regression models to predict pro-environmental behavior, where gender and rearing animals were covariables, are presented below Table 5.
The models included variables that were significantly related to behavior in the univariate analyses. Results of hierarchical linear regression models to predict pro-environmental behavior. In the final model, which included all of the variables that were significant in the previous models, the ability of all variables to predict pro-environmental behavior was maintained.
The present study examined the level of knowledge, attitudes and behavior of students on topics related to environmental pollution caused by the livestock industry.
Moreover, students do not demonstrate pro-environmental behavior in this context. These findings are in line with a number of studies conducted in Europe and the U. The greatest strength in this relationship was found between attitudes and behavior, followed by the relationship between level of knowledge and behavior and finally between level of knowledge and attitudes. Studies in environmental education have found a clear relationship between acquiring knowledge during an educational activity and an increase in positive attitudes towards the environment [ 20 , 26 , 27 , 46 ].
Many studies have strengthened this finding and shown that environmental knowledge is needed to drive responsible environmental behavior, and that it is a prerequisite for action [ 28 , 47 , 48 ]. The survey conducted by Rickinson [ 49 ] also showed that environmental knowledge is indeed an important component in the prevalence of supportive environmental behavior and is a prerequisite for formulating attitudes towards environmental problems.
However, knowledge is not the central component affecting behavior [ 25 ]; indeed, the findings of the present study show that the strength of the relationship between attitudes and behavior is greater than the strength of the relationship between knowledge and behavior.
It was also found that attitudes partially mediate the relationship between the level of knowledge and behavior. In other words, if we account for the effect of attitudes, there will still be a relationship between knowledge and behavior, but it will be weaker. The emotional component, which is related to attitudes and values, is necessary for driving the transformation of knowledge into responsible environmental behavior.
In other words, the environmental behavior of the individual may change due to changes in values, beliefs and pro-environmental norms. The theory of reasoned action TRA of Fishbein and Aizen [ 29 ], which connects beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behavior, can provide an explanation for this finding. Fishbein and Aizen claimed that the intention to conduct behavior is the best predictor of its occurrence, and it depends on the attitudes and norms held by the individual.
These will create motivation and intentions to act to reduce damages caused to the environment by the livestock industry. These findings are supported by a number of studies showing that pet owners demonstrate more empathy towards animals and greater opposition to cruelty towards them [ 32 , 34 , 35 ].
0コメント