ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2023
Social and ethical implications of data and technology use on farms: a qualitative study of Swedish dairy and pig farmers.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Step Too Far? Public Perceptions on Navigating the Introduction of Robot Technologies into the Human-Animal Relationship in Agriculture.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- CowPainCheck: AI-based facial expression analysis for dairy cow welfare.Journal of animal science and technology · 2026Review
- "You're opening Pandora's Box": Public attitudes on AI and robotics in Australian agriculture.PloS one · 2025Article
- Who cares for happy cows? Exploring views of dairy stakeholders around an imaginary automated animal-based welfare assessment tool.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- How do pig veterinarians view technology-assisted data utilisation for pig health and welfare management? A qualitative study in Spain, the Netherlands, and Ireland.Porcine health management · 2024Article
- Data recording and use of data tools for pig health management: perspectives of stakeholders in pig farming.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Livestock farmers are being increasingly encouraged to adopt digital health technologies on their farms. Digital innovations may have unintended consequences, but there tends to be a pro-innovation bias in previous literature. This has led to a movement towards "responsible innovation," an approach that questions the social and ethical challenges of research and innovation. This paper explores the social and ethical issues of data and technologies on Swedish dairy and pig farms from a critical perspective. Methods: Six focus groups were conducted with thirteen dairy and thirteen pig farmers. The data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and a digital critical health lens, which focuses on concepts of identity and power. Results and discussion: The analysis generated four themes: extending the self, sense of agency, quantifying animals, and managing human labour. The findings suggest that technologies can change and form the identities of farmers, their workers, and animals by increasing the visibility of behaviours and bodies through data collection. Technologies can also facilitate techniques of power such as conforming to norms, hierarchical surveillance, and segregation of populations based on data. There were many contradictions in the way that technology was used on farms which suggests that farmers cannot be dichotomised into those who are opposed to and those that support adoption of technologies. Emotions and morality played an important role in the way animals were managed and technologies were used by farmers. Thus, when developing innovations, we need to consider users' feelings and attachments towards the technologies. Technologies have different impacts on farmers and farm workers which suggests that we need to ensure that we understand the perspectives of multiple user groups when developing innovations, including those that might be least empowered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.