Randomized trial finds micro-subsidies and social norm exposure fail to reduce antibiotic use in poultry farmers, highlighting barriers to adopting alternative farming practices.
Antibiotic overuse in the livestock sector has negative environmental implications and leads to bacterial resistance. We set up a randomized controlled trial in two locations in China among poultry farmers to evaluate the effects of a two-pronged approach: Providing micro- subsidies for alternative production methods and exposing farmers to differential norms through role models. These interventions, alone or combined, resulted in no detectable effects on antibiotic use and profits. However, in the wealthier location, the combination of the two interventions prompted the use of alternative technologies. However, the degree of take-up was limited, and the recommended accompanying changes in sanitation measures were not fully implemented (although sanitation measures improved, possibly due to the information campaign, which was delivered to all farmers at the start of the study). No such behavioural changes were observed in the poorer location (although this lack of effects might also be partially due to supply constraints in the poorer location).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: