Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33803067›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2021

Chinese Public Attitudes towards, and Knowledge of, Animal Welfare.

Francesca Carnovale, Xiao Jin, David Arney, Kris Descovich, Wenliang Guo, Binlin Shi, Clive J C Phillips

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Developments in Chinese Attitudes to Animal Welfare.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. How and why animal welfare concerns evolve in developing countries.Animal frontiers : the review magazine of animal agriculture · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Francesca CarnovaleCollege of Animal Science, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 306 Zhaowuda Road, Inner Mongolia, Hohhot 010018, China.ORCID 0000-0001-7412-3415
Xiao JinCollege of Animal Science, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 306 Zhaowuda Road, Inner Mongolia, Hohhot 010018, China.
David ArneyInstitute of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 1, 51014 Tartu, Estonia.
Kris DescovichSchool of Veterinary Science, University of Queensland, Gatton, QLD 4343, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5149-001X
Wenliang GuoCollege of Animal Science, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 306 Zhaowuda Road, Inner Mongolia, Hohhot 010018, China.
Binlin ShiCollege of Animal Science, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 306 Zhaowuda Road, Inner Mongolia, Hohhot 010018, China.
Clive J C PhillipsCurtin University Sustainability Policy (CUSP) Institute, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1926-6357

Funding

Sino-Australian Animal Welfare Centre None
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Food-producing animals make up the majority of animals that humans manage globally, and China has been a major producer and exporter of animal products since the late 1990s. The opinions of the population in China regarding animal welfare are not as well understood as those in Europe. In China, animal welfare as a societal concern is still at an early stage of development. This survey of Chinese attitudes aimed to understand consumer knowledge of and behaviour towards animal welfare, and to determine whether harnessing consumer interests may be a potential future influence on the development of high-welfare agricultural production. Most participants were not aware of the meaning of animal welfare, but the number of those that were aware was higher than reported previously. The welfare of wild animals was rated particularly important compared to other animals. The links between welfare and the taste and/or safety of food were considered to be important, and Chinese consumers reported a willingness to pay more for food from animals produced in good welfare conditions, although the quality of the food was considered more important than the animal suffering. A large majority of the respondents reported that there should be legislation protecting animals and certification of welfare on farms, that animals on farms should be provided with enjoyable experiences and that transportation times should be minimised. Furthermore, most respondents reported that animals should be stunned before slaughter. We conclude that animal welfare is of importance to the Chinese consumer, in particular because of its connection to food quality.

Indexed as

animalsanimal welfareattitudesChinaEuropeknowledgelivestockmanagement

Identifiers

PMID33803067
PMCPMC8003013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.