Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T05:21:19.027Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Designing animal welfare policies and monitoring progress

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

LJ Keeling ,
V Immink ,
C Hubbard ,
G Garrod ,
SA Edwards  and
P Ingenbleek
LJ Keeling*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7068, SE750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
V Immink
Affiliation:
Agricultural Economics Research Institute, Wageningen University and Research Centre, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, The Netherlands
C Hubbard
Affiliation:
Centre for Rural Economy, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE1 7RU, UK
G Garrod
Affiliation:
Centre for Rural Economy, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE1 7RU, UK
SA Edwards
Affiliation:
Centre for Rural Economy, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE1 7RU, UK
P Ingenbleek
Affiliation:
Agricultural Economics Research Institute, Wageningen University and Research Centre, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, The Netherlands
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: Linda.Keeling@slu.se
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A single solution to promote higher animal welfare across the whole EU is unlikely due to significant regional differences and because what is most appropriate for each region depends on many factors. Based on analyses of eight member and candidate EU countries, this paper provides a conceptual framework, an ‘animal welfare roadmap’, which can be used to assess the stage of maturity of a country in farm animal welfare policy development and identify appropriate policy instruments and indicators to monitor progress towards higher animal welfare. The ‘roadmap’ consists of five sequential stages: increasing compliance with legislation; raising awareness; product development; mainstreaming; and integration of animal welfare with other issues. For each stage, specific policy instruments are identified alongside the category of stakeholders most likely to be influential in the implementation of each instrument. The policy instruments used to achieve these stages are those used by government departments/agencies, private enterprises, academic bodies or non-governmental organisations who formulate standards for animal welfare. These are supported by indicators best suited to document their effectiveness. Although we have emphasised how different situations and contexts within the EU mean that there is no single optimal policy instrument for the EU as a whole, but rather appropriate policy instruments should be selected according to the stage of development of a country or sector, we do propose a harmonised choice of indicators to allow benchmarking of changes at the EU level with regard to progress towards animal welfare.

Keywords

animal-based measuresanimal welfareanimal welfare assessmentpolicypolicy indicatorspolicy instruments
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 21 , Issue S1: Proceedings of the UFAW International Symposium ‘Making animal improvements: Economic and other incentives and constraints’ Historic Dockyard, Portsmouth, UK, 2011 , May 2012 , pp. 95 - 105
Copyright
© 2012 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bennett, R and Appleby, M 2010 Animal welfare policy in the European Union. In: Oskam, A, Meester, G and Silvis, H (eds) EU Policy for Agriculture, Food and Rural Areas. Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Blokhuis, HJ, Veissier, I, Miele, M and Jones, RB 2010 The Welfare Quality® project and beyond: safeguarding farm animal well-being. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica A, Animal Science 60: 129–140Google Scholar
European Commission 2005 Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farm animals. European Commission: Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
European Commission 2007 Attitudes of EU citizens towards animal welfare 270-7wave 66.1 March. European Commission: Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
European Commission 2009 Options for labelling and the establishment of a European Network of Reference Centres for the protection and welfare of animals. European Commission: Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Evans, A and Miele, M 2008 Consumers’ views about farm animal welfare. Part II: European comparative report based on focus group research. Welfare Quality Report No 5. Welfare Quality®: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Harper, G and Henson, S 2001 Consumer Concerns about Animal Welfare and the Impact on Food Choice, EU-FAIR CT98-3678. (Available at ec.europe.eu)Google Scholar
Hubbard, C and Garrod, G 2011 Development of Policy Instruments and Indicators towards the Action Plan on Animal Welfare - Delphi Report, March. EconWelfare Project. (Available at ec.europe.eu)Google Scholar
Hubbard, C, Garrod, G and Keeling, LJ 2011a Short list of potential policy instruments to promote high(er) animal welfare. Deliverable 3.2 EconWelfare Project. (Available at ec.europe.eu)Google Scholar
Hubbard, C, Garrod, G and Keeling, LJ 2011b List of appropriate indicators to monitor progress towards further improved animal welfare. Deliverable 3.3 EconWelfare Project. (Available at ec.europe.eu)Google Scholar
Immink, V, Ingenbleek, P and Keeling, LJ 2010 Report on development of policy instruments towards the Action Plan on Animal Welfare, SWOT-analysis of instruments following brainstorm meetings and literature. Deliverable 3.1 EconWelfare Project. (Available at ec.europe.eu)Google Scholar
Ingenbleek, PTM, Blokhuis, H, Butterworth, A and Keeling, L 2011 A scenario analysis on the implementation of a farm animal welfare assessment system. Animal Welfare 20: 613–621Google Scholar
Ingenbleek, PTM, Immink, VM, Keeling, LJ, Spoolder, HAM and Bokma, M 2012 EU Farm animal welfare policy: developing a comprehensive policy framework. Food Policy, in pressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jain, SC 1997 Marketing, planning and strategy. South-Western College Publishing: Cincinnati, USAGoogle Scholar
Kjaernes, U and Lavik, R 2008 Opinions on animal welfare and food consumption in seven European countries. In: Kjaernes, U, Bock, B, Roe, E and Roex, J (eds) Welfare Quality® Reports, No 7. Consumption, Distribution and Production of Farm Animal Welfare pp 3–117. Welfare Quality®: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Lagerkvist, CJ and Hess, S 2010 A meta-analysis of consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare. European Review of Agricultural Economics 38(1): 55–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbq043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McInerney, J 2004 Animal welfare, economics and policy. Report on a study undertaken for the Farm & Animal Health Economics Division of Defra. Defra: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Monroe, B 2003 Pricing: Making Profitable Decisions. McGraw-Hill: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Parrott, PAW 2004 Hen welfare: consumers’ perspective. In: Perry, GC (eds) Welfare of the Laying Hen Poultry Science Symposium Series, Volume 27 pp 11–22. CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Roe, E and Higgin, M 2008 European meat and dairy retail distribution and supply networks: a comparative study of the current and potential markets for welfare-friendly foodstuffs in six European countries. In: Kjaernes, U, Bock, B, Roe, E and Roex, J (eds) Welfare Quality® Reports No 7. Consumption, Distribution and Production of Farm Animal Welfare pp 129–249. Welfare Quality®: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Roex, J and Miele, M 2009 Farm Animal Welfare Concerns. Consumers, Retailers and Producers. Welfare Quality® Report No 1. Welfare Quality®: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Schmid, O and Kilchsperger, R 2011 Farm Animal Welfare legislation and standards in Europe and world-wide: a comparison with the EU regulatory framework. Proceedings of the Third Scientific Conference of ISOFAR ‘Organic is Life: Knowledge for Tomorrow’ pp 104–107. 26 Sept-1 Oct 2011, Manyangju, KoreaGoogle Scholar
Turoff, M 1970 Design of a policy Delphi. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2(2): 149–171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0040-1625(70)90161-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Tulder, R and van der Zwart, A 2006 International Business Society Management: Linking Corporate Responsibility and Globalisation. Routledge: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Vapnek, J and Chapman, M 2010 Legislation and regulatory options for animal welfare. FAO Legislative Study 104 p 92. (Available at fao.org)Google Scholar