Search

Updated animal law is ‘right’ for many economic, environmental, and societal reasons. While nonregulatory initiatives and programs are valuable as ancillary means of securing those benefits, law enforcement has a vital role in ensuring compliance by all stakeholders, and maintenance of standards that protect existing and future interests. Law’s vital role highlights the necessity of keeping it up to date. The contemporary science of the Five Domains validates that animals are capable of feeling and experiencing positive and negative states. The Five Domains is also the scientific authority for evolving animal legislation beyond what the Five Freedoms did over half a century ago. Legislatively defining animal sentience in a manner that creates positive animal welfare law is a keystone reform that has already been implemented in Australia. Victoria’s industry, public, and animals are at a critical legislative crossroads, and Victoria’s 2020 legal reform will either deliver meaningful change leadership or result in decades more of ‘business as usual’. To avoid implementing legislation that is outdated before it is even enacted, this paper demonstrates how a legislative definition of sentience which states: ‘sentience means that animals experience negative and positive [physical, mental and emotional] states’, is consistent with the contemporary science of the Five Domains and delivers benefits to all animal welfare stakeholders. For the body of the animal welfare legislation to be consistent with this up-to-date and scientifically authoritative definition of ‘sentience’, this paper further identifies amendments to be incorporated in the body of animal welfare legislation which provide further clarity and certainty to elevate standards of animal welfare and duplicate existing leadership practices that ‘go beyond simply not being cruel to them’.

The five freedoms offer a framework for discussion of lameness and its impact on the welfare of cows. Altered feeding behavior is a cause of reduced body condition, smaller digital cushion, and lameness. Providing a comfortable environment is critical to recovery and welfare. Pain associated with injury or disease of feet or legs is manifested by lameness. Pain management is an important part of therapy. In cases of severe lameness, euthanasia may be preferred. Lameness interferes with an animal's ability to exhibit natural behaviors by altering lying time, social interaction, ovarian activity and estrus intensity, and rumination behavior.

Information and Communication Technology for Development (ICT4D) projects have shown a great promises in recent years. However, simply materializing of ICT4D projects is not enough for minimizing the prevalent digital divide in rural areas in developing countries. For the success of an Information and Communication Technology (ICT) intervention, it is important to consider the capabilities of users, who are responsible for converting ICT resources into outcome. While most of the ICT-related studies are focused on the adoption of actual technologies and influences of different internal and external factors on intervention outcomes, very few studies are focused on evaluating intervention outcomes and redesigning intervention strategies. In this study, I opted for using a conceptual framework following the Capability Approach that simultaneously identifies the influence factors for intervention outcome as well as evaluates the outcome based on Noble Laureate Amartya Sen’s five freedoms concept. A qualitative technique has been chosen to conduct the study. As part of the impact evaluation of an ICT4D intervention, a project known as Union Digital Centres (UDCs) in Bangladesh was selected. A total of ten themes are identified indicating that the outcome of the intervention is contributing to socio-economic and human development. However, the study has revealed that lack of capabilities of users (e.g. prior knowledge and financial inability) bar the UDC programs to fulfill their goals at highest level. This study would practically help the UDC policy makers to adjust the UDC intervention design by addressing the shortcomings of the users to yield higher UDC program outcome. Additionally, this study theoretically contributes in ICT adoption literature by showing that there is a mutual influence between users’ capabilities and ICT-related project outcomes. Finally, using specific case study (ICT4D project in Bangladesh), this study contextualizes Amartya Sen’s five freedoms concept in the ICT-specific context.

In the UK, it has been suggested that abattoirs are ideal locations to assess the welfare of sheep as most are slaughtered at abattoirs either as finished lambs or cull ewes. Data from abattoirs could provide benchmarks for welfare indicators at a national level, as well as demonstrating how these change over time. Additionally, feedback could be provided to farmers and regulatory authorities to help improve welfare and identify high or low standards for quality assurance or risk-based inspections. A systematic review of the scientific literature was conducted, which identified 48 animal-based indicators of sheep welfare that were categorised by the Five Freedoms. Their validity as measures of welfare and feasibility for use in abattoirs were evaluated as potential measures of prior sheep welfare on the farm of origin, at market, or during transportation to the abattoir.\ud \ud A total of 19 indicators were considered valid, of which nine were considered theoretically feasible for assessing sheep welfare at abattoirs; these were body cleanliness, carcass bruising, diarrhoea, skin lesions, skin irritation, castration, ear notching, tail docking and animals recorded as ‘obviously sick’. Further investigation of these indicators is required to test their reliability and repeatability in abattoirs. Novel welfare indicators are needed to assess short-term hunger and thirst, prior normal behaviour and long-term fear and distress.

The aim of this paper is to review existing literature concerning the impact of lameness and claw lesions on welfare, health and production of sows. When using the five freedoms, a common method to conceptualize animal welfare, to assess the impact of lameness, it appears that lameness as a single disease, may affect all of the freedoms. There is a wide variability with respect to the impact of claw lesions on welfare of sows, because only a proportion of animals are affected. Lameness affects welfare due to physically reduced locomotion ability, pain or general discomfort and sickness behavior. Cross-sectional studies show that the within-herd prevalence of sow lameness is quite high and may range from 8.8% to 16.9%. There are several reasons for lameness and claw lesions and they are very difficult to be identified during herd-level clinical examinations. Therefore, many researchers have studied the sows post-mortem and quite often found more than one lesion likely to cause lameness. Not all lesions are associated with lameness, but the location and severity of the lesions are important factors. Lameness can also affect the general health of the sow and predispose to loss of body condition, shoulder lesions and urogenital infections. Longevity of lame sows is decreased when compared with that of healthy-legged animals. Acutely and severely lame sows are removed immediately from the herd, and chronic, less severe lameness can affect the performance of sows and thus indirectly lead to culling. However, only few articles report about production or fertility figures of lame vs non-lame sows, except for ample data on longevity. In conclusion, lameness of sows is an important welfare and health problem and may also severely affect the profitability of sow herds.

One of the “Five Freedoms” proposed by the Farm Animal Welfare Council in Great Britain is that animals should be free to express normal behaviour. For various domesticated species, the study of still-existing wild ancestors has been one approach in the definition of normal. However, for domesticated cattle, no such wild ancestor exists, so the best that can be done is to study domesticated cattle in environments with little human interference. While several studies have been made of the behaviour of cattle under such conditions, no critical review of the literature has been published. This is the purpose of this paper. While it is surprising that no such review has been undertaken, given its usefulness in the study of the welfare of cattle, what is more surprising is that only 22 studies, published during the period 1927–2009, were considered for inclusion in the review. From the review, it can be concluded that cattle have quite an extensive repertoire of behaviour, comprising 40 identifiable categories and that, of all of the behaviours in their repertoire, grazing is the most common followed, generally, by ruminating and resting. In general, these three categories take up 90–95% of an animal's day. The review also showed that most grazing is performed during the hours of daylight, with very little grazing is observed at night. However, there were exceptions where considerable grazing was observed at night. Furthermore, the greater part of rumination occurred while animals were lying rather than standing and, although the information was scant, ruminating and resting tended to occur at night rather than during the day. Finally, cattle generally follow a diurnal rhythm characterised by peaks of grazing activity associated with sunrise and sunset.

Although most cat owners believe that cats have a need to roam outdoors and that this activity benefits their welfare, roaming also carries welfare risks for the cat. On the other hand, most cats have not been selectively bred to be "house cats" that live indoors 24 hours a day. Until recently, most domestic cats were allowed to roam freely, and they contributed to the large population of stray and feral cats. In turn many pet cats come from the stray and shelter population. A large proportion of domestic cats have not been selected for easy adaptation to live in confinement and in close contact with people, and socialization to people may also not have been complete in these cats. However, cats are adaptable to a wide range of environments and are generally not known to show clear behavioral signs of problems, such as stereotypic behavior. Problem behaviors of cats are often not abnormal behaviors per se but natural behaviors that need to be redirected to appropriate substrates. The most frequent behavior problems cited by cat owners are: inappropriate elimination, scratching, aggression, anxiety, eating problems, vocalizations, and excessive activity. Despite the frequent reporting of these behaviors, most cats will generally adapt to indoor housing provided there is sufficient space and that they are accustomed to these conditions from an early age. The Five Freedoms, developed to assess the welfare of farm animals in intensive systems, can be modified to assess the welfare of cats housed in confinement. Specific features of the environment that can enhance the welfare of cats in confinement are discussed.

The aims of this paper are first to review scientific and ethical considerations regarding the welfare of dogs in the US, UK, Czech Republic, Spain and Japan, as well as to examine research perspectives of people working within the field of applied ethology. As a guide, the Five Freedoms should be considered for dogs as with other species of animals [Brambell, F.W.R., 1965. Brambell, Report on the Technical Committee to Enquire into the Welfare of Livestock Kept Under Intensive Husbandry Systems, HMSO, London]. With pet dogs the use of drugs or shock therapy, neutering, caging, debarking and euthanasia for behaviour problems are all controversial not only among the general public but also among specialists in behavioural therapy. Breeding systems, evaluation of aptitudes, socialisation, training methods, and retired dogs’ lives are the major welfare concerns related to working dogs. Even within European countries, e.g. Spain, the Czech Republic, and the UK, there are different standards and attitudes towards dogs in each country. This suggests that scientific evidence and cultural consideration may be necessary to improving the welfare of companion animals. Different situations which exist between countries should be considered when seeking to establish international standards, however, these may also provide evidence for causes and inform possible modifications regarding canine behavioural issues. Sections contributed by authors from five countries discuss current issues and aim to produce a better understanding of local behaviour and welfare factors. It is concluded that there are still many welfare issues surrounding companion and working dogs internationally and further collaborative investigation is required in seeking to improve these.

Cats are a popular companion animal in the United States, the United Kingdom and most of western Europe. While a few studies on cat behaviour and interactions between cats and humans have been conducted in the home setting, most refer to cats housed in laboratories, catteries and shelters. Nevertheless, the findings from these studies can be extrapolated to the home environment. The Five Freedoms were developed as minimal standards of welfare for farm animals; it is proposed that five provisions, based on the Freedoms, can be used to assess the welfare of cats in the home. The provision of a suitable environment, with opportunities to express most normal behaviours and with protection from conditions likely to lead to fear and distress, requires the application of environmental enrichment techniques. Examples of physical, social, sensory, occupational and nutritional approaches to enrichment of the cat's home are presented. The majority of pet cats in the United Kingdom are allowed outdoors but in the United States between 50 and 60% are housed indoors. The advantages and disadvantages of allowing cats outdoor access or confining them indoors are discussed.

A hallmark of modern animal welfare legislation is the incorporation of positive duties of care based on principles broadly known as the ‘five freedoms’. The duties create a legal obligation on animal caregivers to provide for the needs of animals in their care, one of which is the "opportunity to display normal patterns of behaviour". The freedoms, including the opportunity to exhibit "normal" behaviour, are all premised on the inclusion of human involvement in animal care. Consequently it would be inconsistent for the judiciary to define “normal”, in a manner that excludes the human caregiver or interpret “normal” behaviour of domesticated animals solely by reference to the animals “wild” counterparts. Contemporary reality clearly indicates that the legislative definition of “normal” behaviour for the purposes of animal welfare law must be based on legal and scientific constructs that give significant weight and consideration to the animal’s ability to adapt, and to the individual animal’s past and present environment which includes the presence and role of the human caregiver.

Over the years the ECJ has consistently held that the five freedoms do not apply in "purely internal situations", that is, situations where all the facts are confined within one Member State and where there is no "cross-border element" and therefore no connection with EC law. This has led to what is known as "reverse discrimination". Reverse discrimination arises when nationals/products of a Member State are disadvantaged because they are subject to a national measure, while foreign (EU) nationals/products are protected from that national measure by virtue of EC law. In the Guimont judgment of 2000, the ECJ ruled that it will reply to preliminary questions about purely internal situations because a reply "might be useful" to the national court "if" its national law were to prohibit reverse discrimination. The purpose of this paper is to show that (a) the Guimont principle is (i) misguided and (ii) unnecessary, because it overlaps with the Dzodzi principle; and (b) reverse discrimination is a necessary evil.

Animal welfare is usually considered primarily in terms of the animal’s negative experiences. Four of the ‘Five Freedoms’ are freedoms from unpleasant experiences (hunger/thirst; discomfort; pain/injury/disease; fear/distress), and only one potentially addresses positive aspects of welfare (freedom to perform normal behaviour). A popular definition of animal welfare – ‘the animal’s state in relation to its ability to cope with its environment’ (Broom, 1986) – focuses on the animal’s ability to manage potentially unpleasant experiences.Until we understand positive affects better, we remain forced to focus on welfare indicators that suggest negative affects, because there is agreement that these do impact on welfare. However, because of the inverse correlation between many negative affects and the productivity of animals, systems of animal management have been developed that largely prevent animals experiencing high levels of negative affects. These carefully controlled environments, used especially for pig and poultry production and laboratory animals, attempt to prevent extremes of temperature, to control infectious diseases and to avoid major social challenges, effectively minimising negative affect. They do little to foster positive affect, and if this trend continues it will be increasingly important that we include positive affect in welfare assessment.© 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

In this contribution, the pig has been chosen as a typical example of a farm animal of which the wellbeing has been impaired by intensification of farm animal husbandry. Wellbeing principally refers to the individual animal. This does apply to pigs, but not, for instance, to chickens as these are generally only looked upon as a group. Other reasons for picking the pig are the large variety of housing systems and the large scale of behavioural and physical abnormalities, making this species a typical victim of intensive farming systems, closely confining sows in individual stalls. In the 1960s we were faced with three great problems: cannibalism, transport death due to stress and crushing of piglets; locomotion disturbances and reduced fertility were added. However, it was not until 1974 that welfare problems were openly discussed and only after 1980 could some practicable improvements be presented. Now, at the end of the 1980s, we are still facing a lot of problems regarding the welfare of pigs. There is the barren environment, the inability to groom themselves, the inability to prepare for farrowing in a proper way and the inability to practise the “five freedoms of movement” previously demanded by the Brambell Committee in 1965. Also, the number of diseases in pigs has increased considerably. Although we do know the reason for cannibalism, we restrict ourselves by reducing the symptoms; nearly all pigs in Europe have docked tails and clipped teeth! We have now arrived on the verge of introducing a new system in pig husbandry: group housing of sows. This development has been made possible by using computerized feeding systems with a transponder on each sow. At the moment, this system has not been properly sorted out. However, there are possibilities for improvements. Our ethical approach should be to regard it as our duty to solve the welfare problems of these new systems and not act as we did at the introduction of intensive farming systems; restricting ourselves to reducing the symptoms until the economic profits had been secured. The opportunities for really solving problems are still open, because of the interest of producers of computerized equipment and because of the interest of consumers who consider the method of production of animal products as a matter of quality. Both groups are prepared to pay for improvements. Research has a duty to respond to this challenge. Applied ethology, especially should use the knowledge obtained over the last 25 years for improving the husbandry systems which are introduced now. Thus the future for farm animals, in general, and for pigs, in particular, is more promising than it has ever been over the last three decades.