Work

Short communication: Between tradition and innovation: farmers’ decision-making on artificial incubation in small-scale poultry systems

Year: 2026

Type: article

Abstract: This study aims to investigate how farmers perceive, justify, and evaluate the use of natural and artificial incubation, as well as the factors influencing their productive decisions. The research was conducted in four regions of Minas Gerais, Brazil, involving 87 family poultry farmers operating free-range production systems through qualitative content analysis. Results indicated the factors that influence the choice between incubation systems, farmers primarily associated artificial incubation with higher chick production (24.1%), the capacity to set more eggs (12.1%), and greater process control (8.6%). Conversely, constraints included concerns over poor results (6.0%), negative previous experiences (5.2%), and a lack of knowledge (4.3%), with some farmers inadvertently associating natural incubation with better outcomes (2.6%). In terms of perceptions regarding artificial incubation and its specific effects, the better utilization of hens, allowing them to continue laying eggs rather than brooding, was related by few producers (4.3%). Furthermore, when evaluating motivations to increase overall chick production, economic factors were the primary drivers, specifically the explicit desire to increase income (22.7%) and improve profitability (9.8%). However, these goals were hindered by systemic challenges such as production costs (3.3%) and a lack of infrastructure (2.2%). In conclusion, the decision-making process regarding incubation systems is not exclusively driven by objective productivity gains, rather, it is significantly mediated by farmers' subjective perceptions of risk, empirical knowledge, and their sociocultural context. Successful and sustainable technological transitions in small-scale poultry systems require continuous technical support and adequate training, strictly aligned with the traditional values and multifunctional dynamics of rural livelihoods.

Source: Poultry Science

DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2026.107581