Search

This study assesses the practices and views of Scottish dairy farmers relating to pasture-based and indoor systems. There are the debates about the environmental, economic and animal welfare implications of these systems. Indoor dairy farming is a contentious practice among the public. While this controversy is sometimes represented as a lack of public understanding, there is a need for more research on farmers’ views to facilitate discussion in the industry. A survey was posted to 909 dairy farmers in Scotland with questions about their grazing practices and attitudes to grazing and indoor systems. 254 surveys were completed, online and in paper form. There was a 26% response rate to the paper version of the survey. The results showed that 19% of respondents housed some or all the cows all year-round. 68% agreed or strongly agreed that cows should graze for part of the year and 51% agreed or strongly agreed that welfare was better if cows grazed for part of the year. These views coexisted with the view that management was more important than the type of system for determining profitability or welfare outcomes (83% and 82% strongly agree or agree respectively). Respondents whose system involved grazing and respondents who had spent longer in farming were moderately more likely to agree that cows should have access to pasture, and slightly less likely to agree that management was more important than system for determining welfare outcomes. The results indicate that the picture is more complicated than the public rejecting indoor dairy farming and those in the industry accepting it. The results showed that a majority preference for cows to graze co-existed with the view that management was more important than system. In terms of industry and policy recommendations, the research suggests that measures should be taken to safeguard farmers’ ability to graze through for instance research and advisory support on grazing; ensuring different systems are not penalised in the development of dairy sector environmental measures and recommendations; and potentially supply chains that financially rewards farmers for grazing.

Natural environments are associated with positive health and well-being. However, little is known about the influence of environmental qualities on well-being and the mechanisms underlying this association. This study explored whether perceived restorativeness and it subscales would mediate the effects of perceived biodiversity, perceived naturalness, walk duration and perceived intensity on emotional well-being.\ud \ud Participants (n = 127) of a national walking program in England completed pre- and post-walk questionnaires (n = 1009) for each group walk attended within a 13-week period. Multilevel mediation examined the hypothesised indirect effects.\ud \ud Perceived restorativeness mediated the effects of perceived bird biodiversity, perceived naturalness, and perceived walk intensity on positive affect, happiness and negative affect. The effect of walk duration on happiness was also mediated by perceived restorativeness. Perceived walk intensity had a direct effect on positive affect and happiness.\ud \ud Findings have implications for theory development, future biodiversity-health research and practitioners interested in designing restorative environments.

Although a growing volume of empirical research shows that being in nature is important for human 11 wellbeing, the definition of what constitutes an 'experience in nature', and how this is different from 12 other types of experiences, is very often left implied. In this paper we contrast everyday experiences 13 involving nature with a category of everyday experience in which most people regularly partake. We 14 present an exploratory study in which people (N=357) were explicitly asked to describe a memory 15 they had of an everyday ‘experience which involved nature’, as well as an everyday 'experience 16 which involved shopping’. The open-ended responses to these questions were analysed both 17 quantitatively and qualitatively. Nature experiences were generally found to be more positive than 18 shopping experiences, and they were more likely to be rated as ‘peaceful’ and ‘active’ compared to 19 shopping experiences. Follow-up analyses indicate a significant interaction between experience 20 category (nature or shopping), and the relationship between connectedness to nature and the amount 21 of pleasure associated with that experience: The more strongly connected to nature a respondent was, 22 the larger the disparity between the pleasantness of the shopping experience and that of the 23 experience in nature tended to be.

Against the backdrop of increasing interest in the relationship between Nature and health, this study examined the effect of perceived environment type and indicators of perceived environmental quality on short-term emotional well-being following outdoor group walks. \ud Participants (n = 127) of a national group walk program completed pre- and post-walk questionnaires for each walk attended (n = 1009) within a 13-week study period. Multilevel linear modelling was used to examine the main and moderation effects. To isolate the environmental from the physical activity elements, analyses controlled for walk duration and perceived intensity. \ud Analyses revealed that perceived restorativeness and perceived walk intensity predicted greater positive affect and happiness following an outdoor group walk. Perceived restorativeness and perceived bird biodiversity predicted post-walk negative affect. Perceived restorativeness moderated the relationship between perceived naturalness and positive affect. \ud Results suggest that restorative quality of an environment may be an important element for enhancing well-being, and that perceived restorativeness and naturalness of an environment may interact to amplify positive affect. These findings highlight the importance of further research on the contribution of environment type and quality on well-being, and the need to control for effects of physical activity in green exercise research.