A Holistic Model for Enhancing Swine Welfare via Behavioral Ethics Framework

Thesis Abstract

The welfare of intensively farmed swine is compromised by divergent ethical considerations among stakeholders and gaps between welfare guidelines and on-farm practices, necessitating an integrated framework that aligns behavioral ethics with welfare outcomes. This study aims to develop and validate a holistic model that enhances swine welfare through a Behavioral Ethics Framework (BEF) that integrates moral cognition, stakeholder behavior, and welfare indicators within a systems approach. Specific objectives are (1) to identify ethical decision-making processes and norm internalization among farmers, veterinarians, and farm workers; (2) to map the relationships between perceived welfare, observable animal-based and resource-based indicators, and ethical behaviors; (3) to formulate a BEF comprising (a) moral awareness, (b) ethical motivation, (c) behavioral intention, and (d) organizational governance factors; (4) to test the BEF against empirical welfare outcomes using a multi-site, mixed-methods design; and (5) to provide context-specific recommendations for policy and practice. A cross-sectional, convergent mixed-methods design will be employed across 18 commercial swine production units in three regions to ensure variation in management systems and welfare practices. The population includes farm managers, veterinarians, stock people, and labor supervisors (n ? 216 across sites). Quantitative data will be collected via a standardized BEF questionnaire (validated subscales for moral foundations, ethical climate, and pro-welfare behaviors) and comprehensive welfare assessments using animal-based indicators (skin lesions, lameness, body condition, ear and tail postures) and resource-based measures (space allowance, enrichment, tail docking practices). Sample size calculations anticipate a minimum of 200 respondents to detect medium effects (f² = 0.15) at 80% power and ? = 0.05, with 18 sites providing hierarchical data for multilevel modeling. Qualitative data will be obtained through semi-structured interviews (n ? 54; 3–4 per site) and focus groups (6 groups) to elucidate contextual factors shaping ethical decision-making. Observational welfare data will be gathered over four seasonal cycles to account for temporal variation. Analytical approaches include exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to validate BEF constructs, multilevel structural equation modeling (MSEM) to test hypothesized pathways from moral awareness and ethical climate to welfare outcomes, and hierarchical linear modeling to account for clustering at the farm level. Regression analyses will identify predictors of welfare scores, while thematic analysis will be applied to interview and focus group data to extract emergent themes related to ethical norms, governance practices, and perceived barriers to welfare improvements. The theoretical underpinning integrates the Normative Ethics Theory and Behavioral Economics concepts with the Theory of Planned Behavior, extended by the Ethical Climate Theory and the Capability Approach to welfare, to justify a composite BEF model. Expected findings include robust associations between high ethical climate, strong moral awareness, and proactive welfare-enhancing behaviors, translating into improved animal-based welfare indicators and richer environmental enrichment usage. The BEF is anticipated to explain a meaningful proportion of variance in welfare outcomes (R² ? 0.25 at the animal level, with additional variance at the farm level) and to reveal sector-specific moderating factors such as farm size, tenure, and training quality. The study will contribute to knowledge by integrating ethical cognition with practical welfare metrics within a scalable framework adaptable to diverse production contexts, advancing theoretical integration across ethics, behavior, and animal welfare science. Implications include the development of a diagnostic BEF tool for on-farm welfare auditing, targeted training modules to strengthen ethical climates, and policy guidance promoting governance structures that embed welfare as an ethical standard. The study concludes that holistic welfare improvement requires synchronized intervention at individual, organizational, and systemic levels, with recommendations for continuous ethics-focused professional development, enhanced enrichment programs, transparent welfare reporting, and incentives aligned with welfare-first decision-making.