Sabrina Gulab
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Previous Organizations / Institutes
The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years
Sabrina Gulab has a total of 25 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Alexander L. Metcalf
W.A. Franke College of Forestry and Conservation, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA
1 shared publication - Amalia Yiannaka
Department of Agricultural Economics University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln Nebraska United States of America
1 shared publication - Brady W. Allred
W.A. Franke College of Forestry and Conservation, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA
1 shared publication - Brian C. Chaffin
W.A. Franke College of Forestry and Conservation, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA
1 shared publication - Caleb P. Roberts
U.S. Geological Survey, Arkansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit University of Arkansas Fayetteville Arkansas USA
1 shared publication - Christopher R. Gustafson
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, United States
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 21 May 2025
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Environmental Management
- Vol. 387, 125820
Reconciling scale using the Resist-Accept-Direct (RAD) Framework to improve management of woody encroachment in grasslands
- 21 May 2025
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Environmental Management
- Vol. 387, 125820
Open AccessReconciling scale using the Resist-Accept-Direct (RAD) Framework to improve management of woody encroachment in grasslands
- Open Access
- 8 June 2022
- Published by MDPI AG in Sustainability
- Vol. 14 (12) , 7035
U.S. Consumer Attitudes toward Antibiotic Use in Livestock Production
Antimicrobial resistance, which decreases the efficacy of antibiotics and other antimicrobials, has led to concerns about the use of antibiotics in livestock production. Consumers play an important role in influencing producers’ decisions about the use of antimicrobials through their choices in the marketplace, which are driven by attitudes toward these practices. This study examines consumers’ levels of concern about (and acceptance of) the use of antibiotics in livestock production for four objectives: to treat, control, and prevent infections, and to promote growth. Results reveal that the majority of respondents were highly concerned about antibiotic use to promote growth in livestock production and considered this use to be unacceptable. Participants with higher objective knowledge of antibiotic resistance and antibiotic use in livestock production were more likely to accept antibiotic use to treat and control disease, but less likely to accept its use to prevent disease or to promote growth. Participants with high levels of trust in the livestock industry were more likely to accept antibiotic use to control and prevent infections and to be neutral about antibiotic use to promote growth in food animals. Respondents who believed that antibiotic use decreases animal welfare were more likely to be very concerned about antibiotic use to treat, prevent, and control disease, and less likely to accept antibiotic use to treat diseases in food animals. The study findings should be of interest to producers considering the adoption of sustainable technologies and production practices, food retailers making procurement decisions, and policymakers identifying policies that can alleviate antimicrobial resistance in the agri-food sector.
- 8 June 2022
- Published by MDPI AG in Sustainability
- Vol. 14 (12) , 7035
Open AccessU.S. Consumer Attitudes toward Antibiotic Use in Livestock Production
Antimicrobial resistance, which decreases the efficacy of antibiotics and other antimicrobials, has led to concerns about the use of antibiotics in livestock production. Consumers play an important role in influencing producers’ decisions about the use of antimicrobials through their choices in the marketplace, which are driven by attitudes toward these practices. This study examines consumers’ levels of concern about (and acceptance of) the use of antibiotics in livestock production for four objectives: to treat, control, and prevent infections, and to promote growth. Results reveal that the majority of respondents were highly concerned about antibiotic use to promote growth in livestock production and considered this use to be unacceptable. Participants with higher objective knowledge of antibiotic resistance and antibiotic use in livestock production were more likely to accept antibiotic use to treat and control disease, but less likely to accept its use to prevent disease or to promote growth. Participants with high levels of trust in the livestock industry were more likely to accept antibiotic use to control and prevent infections and to be neutral about antibiotic use to promote growth in food animals. Respondents who believed that antibiotic use decreases animal welfare were more likely to be very concerned about antibiotic use to treat, prevent, and control disease, and less likely to accept antibiotic use to treat diseases in food animals. The study findings should be of interest to producers considering the adoption of sustainable technologies and production practices, food retailers making procurement decisions, and policymakers identifying policies that can alleviate antimicrobial resistance in the agri-food sector.