Regulating antimicrobial resistance: market intermediaries, poultry and the audit lock-in
dc.contributor.author | Hinchliffe, S | |
dc.contributor.author | Bard, A | |
dc.contributor.author | Chan, KW | |
dc.contributor.author | Adam, K | |
dc.contributor.author | Bruce, A | |
dc.contributor.author | Reyher, K | |
dc.contributor.author | Buller, H | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-01-11T14:23:27Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2023-12-01 | |
dc.date.updated | 2024-01-11T12:18:58Z | |
dc.description.abstract | Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has become one of the defining challenges of the twenty-first century. Food production and farming are a key if troubling component of that challenge. Livestock production accounts for well over half of annual global consumption of antimicrobials, though the contribution of the sector to drug resistance is less clear. As a result, there is an injunction to act in advance of incontrovertible evidence for change. In this paper we engage with the role of market actors in the precautionary regulation of farming practices and AMR threats. The paper takes the UK poultry sector as exemplary of an audit-led process that has, in recent years, achieved impressive reductions in antimicrobial use. Using qualitative interview data with farmers and veterinarians we chart the changing practices that have accompanied this reduction in treatments. We use this analysis to raise some cautions around audit-led systems of regulation. Audits can lock farms and animals into particular versions of farming and animal health; they can elevate harmful compensatory practices (including disinfectant uses); and they can reproduce an actuarial approach to an issue that does not fit the conventions of risk management. The paper presents the considerable successes that have been achieved over a short period of time in a livestock sector, while generating notes of caution concerning the audit-led management of livestock-related AMR threats. | en_GB |
dc.description.sponsorship | Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) | en_GB |
dc.format.extent | 1-14 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Published online 1 December 2023 | en_GB |
dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-023-10525-4 | |
dc.identifier.grantnumber | ES/P008194/1 | en_GB |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10871/134999 | |
dc.identifier | ORCID: 0000-0002-0698-8924 (Hinchliffe, Steve) | |
dc.identifier | ScopusID: 57216758534 | 7006066481 (Hinchliffe, Steve) | |
dc.identifier | ORCID: 0000-0001-7729-6098 (Chan, Kin Wing) | |
dc.identifier | ScopusID: 57164203200 (Chan, Kin Wing) | |
dc.identifier | ResearcherID: P-3166-2019 (Chan, Kin Wing) | |
dc.language.iso | en | en_GB |
dc.publisher | Springer | en_GB |
dc.rights | © The Author(s) 2023. Open access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. | en_GB |
dc.subject | Antimicrobial resistance | en_GB |
dc.subject | Farming | en_GB |
dc.subject | Audit | en_GB |
dc.subject | Regulation | en_GB |
dc.subject | Social science | en_GB |
dc.title | Regulating antimicrobial resistance: market intermediaries, poultry and the audit lock-in | en_GB |
dc.type | Article | en_GB |
dc.date.available | 2024-01-11T14:23:27Z | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0889-048X | |
dc.description | This is the final version. Available on open access from Springer via the DOI in this record | en_GB |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1572-8366 | |
dc.identifier.journal | Agriculture and Human Values | en_GB |
dc.relation.ispartof | Agriculture and Human Values | |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | en_GB |
dcterms.dateAccepted | 2023-11-03 | |
rioxxterms.version | VoR | en_GB |
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate | 2023-12-01 | |
rioxxterms.type | Journal Article/Review | en_GB |
refterms.dateFCD | 2024-01-11T14:21:39Z | |
refterms.versionFCD | VoR | |
refterms.dateFOA | 2024-01-11T14:23:28Z | |
refterms.panel | C | en_GB |
refterms.dateFirstOnline | 2023-12-01 |
Files in this item
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © The Author(s) 2023. Open access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.