Abstract
Integrating technology into agricultural systems has gained considerable traction, particularly over the last half century. Agricultural systems that incorporate the public’s concerns regarding farm animal welfare are more likely to be socially accepted in the long term, a key but often forgotten component of sustainability. Gene editing is a tool that has received considerable attention in the last five years, given its potential capacity to improve farm animal health, welfare, and production efficiency. This study aimed to explore the attitudes of Brazilian citizens regarding the applications of gene editing in cattle that generate offspring without horns; are more resistant to heat; and have increased muscle tissue. Using a mixed-methods approach, we surveyed participants via face-to-face, using in-depth interviews (Study 1) and an online questionnaire containing closed-ended questions (Study 2). Overall, the acceptability of gene editing was low and in cases where support was given it was highly dependent on the type and purpose of the application proposed. Using gene editing to improve muscle tissue growth was viewed as less acceptable compared to using gene editing to reduce heat stress or to produce hornless cattle. Support declined when the application was perceived to harm animal welfare, to be profit motivated or to reinforce the status quo of intensive livestock systems. The acceptability of gene editing was reduced when perceptions of risks and benefits were viewed as unevenly or unfairly distributed among consumers, corporations, different types of farmers, and the animals. Interviewees did not consider gene editing a “natural” process, citing dissenting reasons such as the high degree of human interference and the acceleration of natural processes. Our findings raised several issues that may need to be addressed for gene editing to comply with the social pillar of sustainable agriculture.
Highlights
The concept of sustainability takes into account economic, environmental and social aspects [1,2]
As our findings suggest, when people become aware of the practices and reasons behind their use in the animal industry, new questions emerge about why animals are treated as they are in these systems or why some interventions are necessary, or whether the adoption of gene editing will produce significant changes to the system
In line with many in the scientific community that present it as a promising tool to contribute to the sustainability of animal agriculture, some participants did acknowledge the potential for gene editing to help tackle animal production, health and welfare challenges
Summary
The concept of sustainability takes into account economic, environmental and social aspects [1,2]. The interactions between the different stakeholders, animal production practices and concerns about animal welfare are complex and must be included in discussions when striving for sustainability. Failure to include the end users of products of food animal agriculture can result in consumer demands being expressed in ways (i.e., the legislative sphere) without taking. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4966 into account the needs of producers or the animals [3]. Approaches such as this can cause great damage to certain segments of the animal production sector, especially small-scale producers who may have difficulty adapting to abrupt external demands
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
