Ongoing

This project deploys a range of methods to illicit information and build a comprehensive picture of the different factors that shape, drive and characterise equid-supported industries globally. These include:
1. Desk-based review of existing literature on the topic;
2. A survey (questionnaire) targeted at relevant INGOs, local/regional partners, policy-makers and academic networks to illicit further information on the range of industries that donkeys and their hybrids are currently involved in;
3. Key informant interviews with relevant stakeholders identified through the questionnaire (above) to explore industry sites in more detail, including working conditions, welfare challenges, socio-political and economic dynamics; 
4. Utilise existing empirical material, collaborating with researchers who have previously investigated equid-supported industry sites; 
5. Where critical gaps remain, identify sites for investigation (fieldwork). This will be particularly important if we are to gain in-depth insights into working conditions, human-equid relations and equid experiences (a specific methodology would be developed in this case, likely combining welfare assessments, QBA and ethnographic fieldwork, including interviews, observations and photo/video data).

1) A search of donkeys and their hybrids being advertised for sale via publicly accessible websites, social media and online auction catalogues. Details provided in the advert (location, age, sex, breed/type, colour, whether being sold as an individual, pair or group, information relating to breeding status, health status and behaviour, suitability, price etc.) to be recorded in a password protected Excel spreadsheet. Data will be recorded on a minimum of a weekly basis and for a full calendar year to get full seasonal representation.

Broad, descriptive data analysis will be employed to uncover trends and patterns.  

2a) Cross-sectional online survey hosted on Microsoft Forms aimed at both current and prospective donkey/donkey hybrid owners/guardians in the UK.  We are aiming to collaborate with a University for this part so that it is more independent and to avoid potentially skewing responses by it being solely a TDS survey.  Adopting a collaborative approach will also hopefully be beneficial for advertising and dissemination of the survey to a wider group of participants. The survey will be publicised on social media and via relevant newsletters.  Participants will be encouraged to share the survey details within their relevant networks to maximise reach.  

The survey will consist of a mix of demographic questions, closed-ended multiple-choice questions and a small number of open-ended (free text) questions.  

Key topics will include: owner demographics and location, current donkey/donkey hybrid demographic information, donkey/donkey hybrid owning timeline/history, method of acquisition, purchase price/rehoming fee, reason for acquisition, whether the donkey/donkey hybrid(s) matched their description/lived up to expectations, main sources of donkey/hybrid education/information.

The survey will remain active for 1 month, after which the number of responses will be checked and a decision made on whether to extend the time.

The data will be statistically interpreted to identify any significant patterns and relationships. Open-ended questions will be transcribed and thematically analysed using NVivo.

Survey participants will be asked if they would like to take part in a focus group / interview and details will be taken accordingly.

Survey participants contact data will be numericalised to preserve confidentiality whilst retaining contact information for those who volunteer for focus group interviews.

2b) Focus groups/interviews with relevant stakeholders including both prospective and current donkey/donkey hybrid owners/carers (to include private homes, guardian homes, educational establishments, commercial operators), along with breeders, dealers and welfare charity representatives. A purposive sampling strategy will be used to capture the breadth of perspectives and experiences.

Focus groups and interviews will be undertaken after gaining consent to do so (see attached information sheet and consent form). They will be recorded and preferably conducted online but face to face remains an option if required - subject to suitability and budget. Each focus group will likely have between 4 and 12 participants and there will likely be 3 questions posed to the group during the session.  Key topics will be determined upon trends identified within the survey data. 

This research applies a twofold methodology to better understand public experiences and perceptions on site, using:

(a) Emotional mapping - a participatory approach that enables the representation of subjective, emotional and/or affective responses to a space or place. This method will be used to identify emotional "hotspots" at The Donkey Sanctuary (areas that have significance for the public, physically, emotionally, spiritually) and understand these in relation to ideas/perceptions of donkeys and donkey welfare.

(2) Emplaced and mobile interviews - established methods in human geography that will be used to elicit public responses to the donkeys in the context of their environment, which will in turn, tell us something about public perceptions of donkeys and donkey welfare in a sanctuary setting. Interviews will be used alongside the emotional mapping exercise to enrich/give depth to the cartographic information.

Mixed methods of FOI requests to licensing authorities, data extraction from AMS, interviews and netnography. 

Phase 0: Invite a group of experts. 

List of experts: 

• The Donkey Sanctuary team: - Welfare Assessment team: João Brandão Rodrigues; - Education team: Michelle Whitham-Jones, Tracey Warren; - Research team: Laura Kubasiewicz; - Equine Operations (Sanctuary): Andrew Judge, Maxine Carter; - El Refugio del Burrito: Francisco Zambrano; - Regional teams (IPP): Luis Aguilar (México), Asmamaw Kassaye (Ethiopia), Obadiah Sing'Oei (Kenya). 
• FECTU: Cesc Aldabó. 
• School of Technology and Management, Polytechnic Institute of Bragança: Luis Queijo. 
• University of Melbourne: Mathilde Merridale. 

Phase 1: Online research on existing animal-drawn vehicles used worldwide. Selection of best models / desirable features of different models. 

Phase 2: Online discussion among experts, focused on aims 1 to 4. Creation of technical drawings of the prototype. Development of guidelines. 

Phase 3: Complete aims 5. Filming of the do-it-yourself process taking place at the School of Technology and Management (Bragança, Portugal) facilities, in straight collaboration with their technical staff. Build the DIY donkey cart online course. 

Phase 4: Complete aim 6. Lab tests to simulate different scenarios related with position of the cargo and the operator, to take place at the School of Technology and Management facilities, using our multipurpose donkey cart prototype. Specific tests will be decided by experts, depending on the final aspect of the prototype. 

Phase 5*: Field trial of the multipurpose animal-drawn prototype (place(s) to be decided). Phase 5 is the only phase directly involving donkeys. Prior to this phase, an Ethical and health and safety considerations form will be submitted for approval, ensuring that there are clear ethical standards in place for any donkeys involved in the trials. 

Phase 6: Complete aim 7 and 8: Selection and training of local manufacturers / Train the trainers’ process

• A desk-based review of the role of equids in sites of disaster, conflict and crisis, including how they contribute to community resilience. This is informed by document analysis (policy papers, historical texts, and academic publications) as well as semi-structured interviews with key informants, primarily field staff working in frontline services in crisis zones (conducted between June-July 2020).
• A field-based assessment of the role of pack mules in disaster recovery after the 2015 earthquake in Nepal; this component will include both qualitative (semi-structured interviews) and quantitative (structured questionnaires) tools to gain a complete picture from equid owners, people in affected communities and NGOs involved in the disaster response.

We used both qualitative and quantitative techniques to review over 100 scientific articles, which were identified using a snowball technique and key search terms; manually checking each article to ensure its relevance. For the quantitative analysis, articles were classified under the following categories: Publication date; Country of study; Discipline of article; Type of article (field-based; literature-based or management-based); Biome (of study area); Focus of impact (whether impacts where measured/discussed with specific reference to donkeys, or for wider groups of species); Evidencing impact (whether an article measured environmental impact, discussed environmental impact or referred to presence only). All articles were qualitatively reviewed using NVivo (v.12.0) for categorical and thematic analysis as well as critical discourse analysis. This involved the identification of different issues that regularly appeared in the literature, ascribing fine-grade codes or ‘topic codes’. We then worked from topics to themes, systematically coding these themes while reflecting on meanings, positionality and underlying agendas. We also assessed the overall framing of the article, examining the extent to which donkeys were framed in positive, negative or neutral terms.

This project consists of a critical review of academic literature, grey literature (institutional reports, working papers, government documents), media reports, and communications with field researchers and practitioners. Articles were identified using a snowball technique (Echeverri et al., 2018), using key search phrases (‘feral donkey’, ‘wild burro’, ‘feral equus asinus’, ‘free-roaming donkey’, ‘free-ranging donkey’, ‘wild donkey’). These articles were then checked for their relevance. Articles were treated as both information sources (to elicit empirical knowledge) and as cultural artefacts (Bowen, 2009; Clarke, 2005) for categorical and thematic analysis as well as critical discourse analysis. Using these articles as representations of societal and scholarly discourse, we systematically reviewed the use of donkey labels and elicited their meaning, in order to reveal inconsistencies and underlying agendas.

In this multi-disciplinary project we aim to identify the risk factors for sarcoids and to identify specific ‘molecular signatures’ that will aid in the management and treatment of sarcoids in donkeys.