Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-15T06:25:27.543Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quality of life means welfare: how is it related to other concepts and assessed?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

DM Broom
DM Broom*
Affiliation:
Centre for Animal Welfare and Anthrozoology, Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ES, UK
*
Correspondence: dmb16@cam.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Our view of which individuals should be the subjects of our moral actions is expanding to include more people and more species. Animal welfare is the subject of rapidly increasing concern in most countries in the world, and this concern is resulting in changes in the ways in which animal users keep and treat animals. Ethical decisions about whether the killing of an animal is justifiable should be considered separately from those about how poor welfare can be and still be acceptable. The term ‘euthanasia’ should be restricted to killing an animal for its own benefit. Quality of life (QoL) in humans is generally taken to include: physical condition and any impairment of this resulting from injury or disease; capacity to function; perception of functioning; and satisfaction with functioning in relation to what is believed possible. If the welfare of an individual is its state as regards its attempts to cope with its environment, then welfare is essentially the same as QoL. Both include the state of the individual's coping systems, including those responding to pathology, various behavioural and physiological responses, and cognitive processes associated with suffering or pleasure. Hence, both welfare and QoL include health and the extent of positive and negative feelings. Many papers referring to animal welfare include objective quantification whilst few papers referring to QoL do so. Some human studies assess QoL by the less objective method of questions asked of subjects. Neither QoL nor welfare should be assessed using solely subjective measures. Assessment of welfare must take account of the wide variety of coping systems and coping strategies used. A range of measures including those of behaviour, physiology, brain function, immune system function, and damage is needed. The ease or difficulty of coping should be interpreted within the framework of the abilities of the animal. Animals with more sophisticated cognitive functioning may have the best abilities to cope with problems. The scheme presented here for assessing welfare over time facilitates ethical decisions regarding whether welfare is good or whether it is unacceptably poor.

Keywords

animal welfareeuthanasiafeelingshealthquality of lifestress
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 16 , Issue S1: Quality of Life: the heart of the matter: Proceedings of the UFAW/BVA Ethics Committee International Symposium, The Royal Society, London, 13-14 September 2006. , May 2007 , pp. 45 - 53
Copyright
© 2007 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

Appleby, MC 1997 Life in a variable world: behaviour, welfare and environmental design. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 54: 1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arey, DS 1992 Straw and food as reinforcers for prepartal sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 33: 217–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benus, I 1988 Aggression and coping. Differences in behavioural strategies between aggressive and non-aggressive male mice. PhD thesis, University of Groningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Brantas, GC 1980 The pre-laying behaviour of laying hens in cages with and without laying nests. In: Moss R (ed) The Laying Hen and its Environment. Current Topics in Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science 42: 129–132. Martinus Nijhoff: The Hague, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 1981 Biology of Behaviour. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 1983 The stress concept and ways of assessing the effects of stress in farm animals. Applied Animal Ethology 1: 79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 1986 Indicators of poor welfare. British Veterinary Journal 142: 524–526CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broom, DM 1987 Applications of neurobiological studies to farm animal welfare. In: Wiepkema PR and van Adrichem PWM (eds) Biology of Stress in Farm Animals: An Integrated Approach. Current Topics in Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science 42: 101–110. Martinus Nijhoff: The Hague, The NetherlandsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 1988 Relationship between welfare and disease susceptibility in farm animals. In: Gibson, TE (ed) Animal Disease: A Welfare Problem pp 22–29. British Veterinary Association Animal Welfare Foundation: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 1991a Animal welfare: concepts and measurement. Journal of Animal Science 69: 4167–4175CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broom, DM 1991b Assessing welfare and suffering. Behavioural Processes 25: 117–123CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broom, DM 1992 Current attempts to improve welfare and possible links with farm animal disease. In: Thrusfield MV (ed) Proceedings of the Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine 10: 10–12. The Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine: Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 1996 Animal welfare defined in terms of attempts to cope with the environment. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A — Animal Science (Suppl) 27: 22–28Google Scholar
Broom, DM 1997 Welfare evaluation. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 54: 21–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 1998 Welfare, stress and the evolution of feelings. Advances in the Study of Behavior 27: 371–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 1999a Animal welfare: the concept and the issues. In: Dolins, FL (ed) Attitudes to Animals: Views in Animal Welfare pp 129–142. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 1999b Welfare and how it is affected by regulation. In: Kunisch, M and Ekkel, H (eds) Regulation of Animal Production in Europe pp 51–57. KTBL: Darmstadt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 2000 Welfare assessment and problem areas during handling and transport. In: Grandin, T (ed) Livestock Handling and Transport (2nd Edition) pp 43–61. CABI: Wallingford, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 2001a Coping, stress and welfare. In: Broom, DM (ed) Coping with Challenge: Welfare in Animals Including Humans pp 1–9. Dahlem University Press: Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 2001b The use of the concept Animal Welfare in European conventions, regulations and directives. Food Chain 2001 pp 148–151. SLU Services: Uppsala, SwedenGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 2002 Does present legislation help animal welfare? Landbauforschung Völkenrode 227: 63–69Google Scholar
Broom, DM 2003 The Evolution of Morality and Religion. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 2006a Adaptation. Berliner und Münchener Tierärztliche Wochenschrift 119: 1–6Google ScholarPubMed
Broom, DM 2006b Behaviour and welfare in relation to pathology. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 97: 71–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 2006c The evolution of morality. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 100: 20–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM and Johnson, KG 2000 Stress and Animal Welfare. Kluwer: Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM and Kirkden, RD 2004 Welfare, stress, behavior, and pathophysiology. In: Dunlop, RH and Malbert, C-H (eds) Veterinary Pathophysiology pp 337–369. Blackwell: Ames, Iowa, USAGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM and Zanella, AJ 2004 Brain measures which tell us about animal welfare. Animal Welfare 13: S41–S45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, GM and Wiepkema, PR 1984 An analysis of stereotyped behaviours in tethered sows. Annales de Recherches Vétérinaires 15: 263–270Google ScholarPubMed
Dawkins, MS 1980 Animal Suffering: The Science of Animal Welfare. Chapman and Hall: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, MS 1990 From an animal's point of view: motivation, fitness, and animal welfare. Behavioural and Brain Sciences 13: 1–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, IJH and Petherick, JC 1991 The implications of cognitive processes for animal welfare. Journal of Animal Science 69: 5017–5022CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duncan, IJH, Beatty, ER, Hocking, PM and Duff, SRI 1991 Assessment of pain associated with degenerative hip disorders in adult male turkeys. Research in Veterinary Science 50: 200–203CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gentle, MJ 1986 Neuroma formation following partial beak amputation (beak-trimming) in the chicken. Research in Veterinary Science 41: 383–385Google ScholarPubMed
Hughes, BO and Duncan, IJH 1988a Behavioural needs: can they be explained in terms of motivational models? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 20: 352–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, BO and Duncan, IJH 1988b The notion of ethological ‘need’, models of motivation and animal welfare. Animal Behaviour 36: 1696–1707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutson, GD 1989 Operant tests of access to earth as a reinforcement for weaner piglets. Animal Production 48: 561–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglis, IR, Forkman, B and Lazarus, J 1997 Free food or earned food? A review and fuzzy model of contrafreeloading. Animal Behaviour 53: 1171–1191CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Irwin, M 2001 How are stress and depression interrelated? In: Broom DM (ed) Coping with Challenge: Welfare in Animals Including Humans pp 271–288. Dahlem University Press: Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Kirkden, RD, Edwards, JSS and Broom, DM 2003 A theoretical comparison of the consumer surplus and the elasticities of demand as measures of motivational strength. Animal Behaviour 65: 157–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knowles, TG and Broom, DM 1990 Limb bone strength and movement in laying hens from different housing systems. Veterinary Record 126: 354–356CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koolhaas, JM, Schuurmann, T and Fokema, DS 1983 Social behaviour of rats as a model for the psychophysiology of hypertension. In: Dembrowski, TM, Schmidt, TH and Blumchen, G (eds) Biobehavioural Bases of Coronary Heart Disease pp 391–400. Karger: Basel, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
Lutgendorf, SK 2001 Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness: good welfare in humans. In: Broom, DM (ed) Coping with Challenge: Welfare in Animals Including Humans pp 49–62. Dahlem University Press: Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Manser, CE, Elliott, H, Morris, TH and Broom, DM 1996 The use of a novel operant test to determine the strength of preference for flooring in laboratory rats. Laboratory Animals 30: 1–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marchant, JN and Broom, DM 1996 Effect of dry sow housing conditions on muscle weight and bone strength. Animal Science 62: 105–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McEwan, BS 2001 Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators: lessons learned from the immune system and brain. In: Broom, DM (ed) Coping with Challenge: Welfare in Animals Including Humans pp 229–248. Dahlem University Press: Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Mendl, M 2001 How do animals cope with social problems? In: Broom DM (ed) Coping with Challenge: Welfare in Animals Including Humans pp 211–228. Dahlem University Press: Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Mendl, M, Zanella, AJ and Broom, DM 1992 Physiological and reproductive correlates of behavioural strategies in female domestic pigs. Animal Behaviour 44: 1107–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moberg, GP 1985 Biological response to stress: key to assessment of animal well-being? In: Moberg GP (ed) Animal Stress pp 27–49. American Physiological Society: Bethesda, USACrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norgaard-Nielsen, G 1990 Bone strength of laying hens kept in an alternative system, compared with hens in cages and on deep litter. British Poultry Science 31: 81–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panksepp, J 1998 Affective Neuroscience: The Foundations of Human and Animal Emotions. Oxford University Press: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Sommerville, BA and Broom, DM 1998 Olfactory awareness. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 57: 269–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spruijt, BM, van den Bos, R and Pijlman, FTA 2001 A concept of welfare based on reward evaluating mechanisms in the brain: anticipatory behaviour as an indicator for the state of neuronal systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 72: 145–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toates, F and Jensen, P 1991 Ethological and psychological models of motivation: towards a synthesis. In: Meyer, JA and Wilson, S (eds) From Animals to Animats pp 194–205. MIT Press: Cambridge, USAGoogle Scholar
Vestergaard, K 1980 The regulation of dustbathing and other behaviour patterns in the laying hen: a Lorenzian approach. In: Moss R (ed) The Laying Hen and its Environment. Current Topics in Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science 8: 101–113. Martinus Nijhoff: The Hague, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
von Holst, D 1986 Vegetative and somatic components of tree shrews' behaviour. Journal of the Autonomic Nervous System (Suppl): 657-670Google Scholar