Table 5 Sample assumptions in an AMR- intervention theory of change exercise
Input and project output | Outcome | Assumptions |
|---|---|---|
Farmer receives training and written information on how to reduce antibiotic use and the importance of AMR | Farmers have increased knowledge on antibiotic use and AMR | • Farmers have enough background knowledge to understand the information • Farmers feel the relevance for them • Farmers are comfortable reading |
Farmer receives messages, support and other communication that promote readiness to change | Farmers are motivated to change behaviour | • Farmers believe that change of behaviour will have benefits that exceed costs • Farmers believe that change of behaviour is feasible and socially desirable • Veterinarians and other actors stop promoting antibiotics |
Farmers have access to options that can reduce antimicrobial use | Farmers change practice and reduce antibiotic use | • Farmers can afford inputs needed • Farmers can afford alternatives • Farmers see benefits from reducing antibiotics |
Reduction of antibiotics leads to reduced antimicrobial resistance in animals, animal products and animal environment | • There are no other sources of antibiotics for the animals that farmers cannot control • Reduced use per animal is not countered by increase in the number of animals | |
Reduced AMR in humans | • AMR in animals is contributing significantly to human AMR |