SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Istanbul Veterinary Sciences / 2021 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3

University students' perception of animal welfare and opinions on consumption of milk and dairy products

Pınar ŞEKER
Hakan GÜLER
Abdurrahman KÖSEMAN
İbrahim ŞEKER
Pages
149–158
Publication Date
2021-12-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

However, more information and necessary training support should be provided to bring them to the desired level.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to determine the opinions of university students on the consumption of milk and dairy products within the scope of animal welfare.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The research was carried out with 361 randomly selected students from Samsun Ondokuz Mayıs University, Turkey, using a face-to-face questionnaire.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, more information and necessary training support should be provided to bring them to the desired level.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Animal welfare · dairy product · milk consumption

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine the opinions of university students on the consumption of milk and dairy products within the scope of animal welfare. The research was carried out with 361 randomly selected students from Samsun Ondokuz Mayıs University, Turkey, using a face-to-face questionnaire. In the study, the rate of students who think that, they do not have information about the presence and amount of cholesterol in milk and dairy products was 77.35%, milk and dairy products contain all the nutritional elements was 35.62%, UHT milk is not spoiled for a long time due to heat treatment was 28.90%, milk, cheese, yoghurt prices are normal were 63.34%, 40.41%, 68.31%, respectively, there was a welfare problem in farm animals was 56.00%. Also, the rate of students who want label information about milk and dairy products produced from animals raised under welfare conditions was 75.43%. The rates of students who can pay up to 10%, 11-25%, and more than 25% for milk and dairy products because they are suitable for animal welfare were determined as 64.74%, 26.14% and 9.12%, respectively. As a result, it was determined that university students' perceptions of animal welfare and their views on milk and dairy products consumption were generally at an acceptable level. However, more information and necessary training support should be provided to bring them to the desired level.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞEKER, P., GÜLER, H., KÖSEMAN, A., ŞEKER, İ. (2021). University students' perception of animal welfare and opinions on consumption of milk and dairy products. Journal of Istanbul Veterinary Sciences, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3, 149–158. https://ajindex.com/articles/681237

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Akgül, A. (2005). Tıbbi araştırmalarda istatistiksel analiz teknikleri. 3 ed. Ankara. Turkey: Emek Ofset Ltd Şti. Anonymous. (2020, October 16). Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi. Retrieved from https://www.omu.edu.tr. Averós, X., Aparicio, M. A., Ferrari, P., Guy, J. H., Hubbard, C., Schmid, O., Ilieski, V., & Spoolder, H. A. M. (2013). The effect of steps to promote higher levels of farm animal welfare across the EU. Societal versus animal scientists’ perceptions of animal welfare. Animals, 3, 786-807.
  2. Bozkurt, Z., & Koçak, K. (2017). Gıdalarda hayvan refahı etiketlemesi. Kocatepe Veteriner Dergisi, 10 (4), 337-349.
  3. Campmans-Kuijpers, M. J. E., Singh-Povel, C., Steijns, J., & Beulens, J. W. J. (2016). The association of dairy intake of children and adolescents with different food and nutrient intakes in the Netherlands. BMC Pediatrics, 16, 2. Carlsson, F. R. C.; Rykblom, P. E. F.; & Lagerkvist, C. J. (2007). Consumer benefits of labels and bans on genetically modified food - An empirical analysis using choice experiments. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 89, 152–161.
  4. Cornish, A., Raubenheimer, D., & McGreevy, P. (2016). What we know about the public’s level of concern for farm animal welfare in food production in developed countries. Animals, 6, 74. Demirel, A. F., & Çak, B. (2016). The importance of animal welfare applications in food safety in terms of the relevant legislation in Turkey and the European Union. Van Veterinary Journal, 27 (2), 111-116.
  5. Durmaz, H, Sağun, E, & Tarakçı, Z. (2002). Yüksekokul öğrencilerinin içme sütü tüketim alışkanlıkları. Van Veterinary Journal, 13 (2), 69-73.
  6. Erdoğan, N., & Çiçek, H. (2015). Hayvansal gıdaların tüketim yapısı ve tüketici tercihlerinin belirlenmesi üzerine bir araştırma: üniversite personeli örneği. Kocatepe Veteriner Dergisi, 8 (1), 25-31. Górska-Warsewicz, H., Rejman, K., Laskowski, W., & Czeczotko, M. (2019). Milk and dairy products and their nutritional contribution to the average polish diet. Nutrients, 11, 1771. Harvey, D., & Hubbard, C. (2013). The supply chain’s role in improving animal welfare. Animals, 3, 767-785.
  7. Huang, F., Wang, H., Wang, Z., Zhang, J., Su, C., Du, W., Jiang, H., Jia, X., Ouyang, Y., Wang Y., Li L., & Zhang, B. (2019). Knowledge, behavior and consumption types of milk and dairy products among the Chinese aged 60 and above in 15 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities) in 2015. Wei Sheng Yan Jiu, 48 (1), 9-15.
  8. Frey, U. J., & Pirscher, F. (2018). Willingness to pay a