Search

While user-centered design approaches stemming from the human-computer interaction (HCI) field have notably improved the welfare of companion, service, and zoo animals, their application in farm animal settings remains limited. This shortfall has catalyzed the emergence of animal-computer interaction (ACI), a discipline extending technology's reach to a multispecies user base involving both animals and humans. Despite significant strides in other sectors, the adaptation of HCI and ACI (collectively HACI) to farm animal welfare—particularly for dairy cows, swine, and poultry—lags behind. Our paper explores the potential of HACI within precision livestock farming (PLF) and artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance individual animal welfare and address the unique challenges within these settings. It underscores the necessity of transitioning from productivity-focused to animal-centered farming methods, advocating for a paradigm shift that emphasizes welfare as integral to sustainable farming practices. Emphasizing the 'One Welfare' approach, this discussion highlights how integrating animal-centered technologies not only benefits farm animal health, productivity, and overall well-being but also aligns with broader societal, environmental, and economic benefits, considering the pressures farmers face. This perspective is based on insights from a one-day workshop held on June 24, 2024, which focused on advancing HACI technologies for farm animal welfare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of European Policy Analysis is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

While user-centered design approaches stemming from the human-computer interaction (HCI) field have notably improved the welfare of companion, service, and zoo animals, their application in farm animal settings remains limited. This shortfall has catalyzed the emergence of animal-computer interaction (ACI), a discipline extending technology’s reach to a multispecies user base involving both animals and humans. Despite significant strides in other sectors, the adaptation of HCI and ACI (collectively HACI) to farm animal welfare—particularly for dairy cows, swine, and poultry—lags behind. Our paper explores the potential of HACI within precision livestock farming (PLF) and artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance individual animal welfare and address the unique challenges within these settings. It underscores the necessity of transitioning from productivity-focused to animal-centered farming methods, advocating for a paradigm shift that emphasizes welfare as integral to sustainable farming practices. Emphasizing the ‘One Welfare’ approach, this discussion highlights how integrating animal-centered technologies not only benefits farm animal health, productivity, and overall well-being but also aligns with broader societal, environmental, and economic benefits, considering the pressures farmers face. This perspective is based on insights from a one-day workshop held on June 24, 2024, which focused on advancing HACI technologies for farm animal welfare.

Abstract Individuals of the general public can perform both consumer and citizen roles in farm animal welfare, and attitudes toward farm animal welfare may differ between these roles. However, scant research is available regarding this distinction, especially in developing countries such as China. The present study aimed to explore consumer-citizen gaps in Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare across three dimensions and across demographic characteristics. A 36-item scale was designed, and completed by 5284 Chinese participants in a large-scale cross-sectional survey. Consumer-citizen gaps in attitudes toward farm animal welfare across three dimensions and demographic characteristics were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and effects of demographic characteristics on attitudes were further explored by linear regression analysis. A significant consumer-citizen gap was found in overall attitudes, although the consumer role was only slightly more positive than the citizen role. The consumer-citizen gap is driven by differences in both cognitive attitudes and behavioral attitudes. The gap is most pronounced in cognitive attitudes, where the consumer role is significantly more positive, and smaller in behavioral attitudes, where the citizen role is significantly more positive. The consumer-citizen gap varies significantly among different demographic groups, including gender, age, education, monthly household income, area of residence, and occupation. Additionally, education, monthly household income, and area of residence have significant effects on attitudes in the dual role, whereas gender only affect consumer-role attitudes significantly. The findings provide evidence that consumer-citizen gaps in Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare exist, and this distinction is mainly determined by demographic characteristics.

The restructuring of dairy farm production has resulted in enlarged unit sizes and production capacities on commercial farms in Finland. Concurrently, the livestock sector is facing high expectations and pressure to enhance farm animal welfare. Many dairy farms have invested in state-of-the-art technology, e.g. the proportion of milk milked by robots had risen 41% by 2019. Using a survey framework based on the constructs of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), our aim was to explore which factors may limit farmers’ willingness to adopt animal welfare-enhancing solutions. The decision to adopt a technology can be seen as a holistic issue that is affected by farmer attitudes, farm-specific constraints, and information provided by trusted sources. The financial situation of farms, appropriate technological devices, animal welfare, and human well-being should all be considered holistically. We utilize our exploratory survey sample as an indicator for discussing the current situation. The most critical constraints were related to financial issues, farmers’ personal coping challenges, and device operation problems in the barn environment. To promote the adoption of new technologies, farmers require technical and other support from trusted groups and evidence on the functionality of the technology. The insights from this exploratory study highlight the importance of available resources; the most important deficiencies related to available resources were financial and personal capacity to cope with duties.

Simple Summary: Farm animal welfare research conducted in China is relatively less accessed and unknown outside of the country, which might create the impression that farm animal welfare receives limited attention in China. This paper aims to offer a comprehensive review of the existing Chinese farm animal welfare literature. CiteSpace software was employed for the analysis and visualization of various aspects of the literature, including the quantity, species, authors, institutions, journals, and keywords. This process helped reveal the research trends, hotspots, and frontiers in the field. The findings from this bibliometric analysis strongly indicate that farm animal welfare is a subject of considerable interest and research activity in China. Farm animal welfare research conducted in China is not commonly accessed or known outside of China, which may lead to the assumption that farm animal welfare receives relatively little attention in China. Therefore, a bibliometric analysis was conducted on the existing Chinese farm animal welfare literature to provide robust evidence to refute this assumption. A total of 1312 peer-reviewed Chinese studies on farm animal welfare published between March 1992 and June 2023 were retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS) and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database. CiteSpace software was used to analyze and visualize the number, species, authors, institutions, journals, and keywords of the papers. In China, farm animal welfare research has gone through the processes of an early stage (1992–2001), rapid-growth stage (2002–2007), and mature stage (2008–present), and the scale of research continues to grow. Notably, swine and chickens have received priority attention in this area. A Matthew effect was observed for authors and institutions, with relatively little collaboration among authors and institutions. Most of the papers were published in a small number of journals, with an apparent agglomeration characteristic. The research hotspots, summarized as "feed and diet", "environmental impacts and control", "integrated rearing management", "injury and disease", "behavior and technologies for behavior monitoring", "genetic analysis", "welfare during transport and slaughter", "welfare-friendly animal product consumption", "attitudes toward farm animal welfare", and "healthy breeding". The keywords "computer vision", "recognition", "temperature", "precision livestock farming", "laying hen", and "behavior", represent the major research frontiers in the field, which could indicate potential areas of significant future research. The findings of the present bibliometric analysis confirm the fact that farm animal welfare is a field of interest in China. Farm animal welfare research in China tends to be pragmatic, with a strong emphasis on enhancing growth and production performance, as well as product quality, rather than solely concentrating on improving farm animal welfare. This paper provides insightful references that researchers can use to identify and understand the current status and future direction of the farm animal welfare field in China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increased urbanisation in recent decades has created a knowledge gap between farming and the Irish public. Mainstream media has begun filling this gap through reports on farm animal welfare (FAW) incidents that sometimes frame farming in a negative way. This negative framing can influence how farmers perceive the information communicated in these media stories and colour their experiences. Furthermore, perceived societal pressures may contribute to farmers feeling overwhelmed or negatively impact their mental health. In the context of FAW, the latter is particularly relevant as poor farmer mental health has been associated with poorer animal welfare. However, little is known about how the negative framing of FAW stories influence farmers’ perceptions and experiences. The aim of this study was to explore how negatively framed media stories about FAW incidents affect cattle farmers’ perceptions of animal welfare. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with seven Irish beef and dairy farmers using vignettes displaying negatively framed FAW incidents presented in the media. Five themes were identified: (1) job satisfaction and motivation, (2) impact on the human–animal relationship, (3) the importance of community, (4) negative portrayal of farmers and (5) need for FAW education. Findings suggest that negative framing of FAW in the media, as well as rural restructuring in Ireland, may negatively affect farmers’ motivation which could have indirect implications for the welfare of their animals.

ABSTRACT: The structural change toward larger (dairy) farms is often criticized because it supposedly has a negative effect on farm animal welfare. We investigated this criticism using cross-sectional survey data from 3,085 German dairy farms. Even though our sample was a convenience sample, it closely resembled the diverse structures of dairy farming in Germany and covered a wide range of dairy farm sizes (7 to 2,900 cows per farm, mean 122). We developed an animal welfare index (AWI) in close consultation with experts along the dairy value chain (e.g., farm animal welfare scientists, farmers, dairy representatives). Regression results showed that larger farms tended to achieve a better AWI than smaller farms in our data set. However, the effect size was small. Nevertheless, in contrast to the widespread assumption in public discussion, larger dairy herds are not necessarily associated with poorer animal welfare. In all herd size classes, we found a large variation of AWI between herds. Although this study focused on the effect of herd size, it is not the only factor affecting animal welfare levels on individual farms. Other variables that we included in the regression to describe the AWI indicate that the knowledge and skills of the farm manager and the amount of time that farms can devote to animals have a positive effect on the AWI. However, as with herd size, the effect size of other explanatory variables was small in absolute terms.

This article presents research carried out in Norway, among the population of livestock farmers. It analyses farmers' understanding of animal welfare, and how their different concerns about animal welfare varies across farmers' considerations about the role of the agricultural sector in Norwegian society and animal welfare regulations, material conditions at the farm level, farmers' opinion about animal rights activist groups, and in several individual characteristics. The empirical material was derived from a postal survey conducted in 2020 (n = 745); the analyses were conducted by structural equation modeling (SEM) which has its advantage in identifying latent attitudes. Informed by convention theory, the study shows that two conventions of animal welfare were most prominent among Norwegian livestock farmers. One emphasizing animals' basic health and feelings and a second animals' natural needs. These two conventions point to a potential split within the livestock farming population. Support for the convention basic health and feelings coincides with efficiency and effectiveness in Norwegian food production and farmers' contribution to feeding the Norwegian population. Support of the convention natural needs coincides with support for enhancing biodiversity and attractive landscapes as important additional values in Norwegian agriculture. The support for the convention of animals' needs to behave naturally was found to be lower than the basic health and feelings and this might slow down or hinder implementation of practices and future regulations aimed at enhancing the natural needs of farm animals, accommodation to public expectations of good animal welfare, and is potentially challenging the farmers' social license to farm animals. • Among livestock farmers in Norway, basic health, access to food and feelings were seen as equally and most important for animal welfare, and natural needs of lesser importance. • There is a split where animal welfare is concerned, and the point of disagreement is about how natural needs are safeguarded in the treatment of farms animals. • Views about animal welfare among farmers associate with their considerations about important roles for the agricultural sector in the Norwegian society, in general. • The technique of using latent variables is valuable for developing measures for farmers' view about broader concerns for animal welfare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Farm animal welfare is inextricably linked to, and limited by, the welfare potential of the production system. Welfare potential is determined by the method of production, with key housing features and the genetics of the animal being the primary defining factors. Housing systems with close confinement, or using animals selected for productivity to the detriment of welfare, such as fast-growing broilers, cannot deliver good welfare as the causes of poor welfare are an inherent part of the system. Good management, while not a determinant of the welfare potential, is essential for a system to achieve its potential. Viewing systems in terms of their welfare potential reduces the risk of making ongoing incremental changes to systems where welfare can never be high. It sets a framework for evaluating the inputs into a system which are key to ensure an acceptable level of welfare. This approach has practical relevance for certification schemes, as it allows for a tiered (“bad, better, best”) approach to food labelling based on method of production (e.g. intensive indoors, higher welfare indoors, free-range). Paired with robust welfare outcomes assessment and auditing, this can provide clear and simple information on the farming system to the consumers, while ensuring that the system delivers good welfare. There is an urgent need to move away from systems with a low welfare potential, as they can never deliver acceptable levels of welfare, and to support farmers in their transition towards systems with a higher welfare potential.

Simple Summary: The term 'natural behaviour' is widely used by food companies to advertise their animal welfare credentials but the public needs to be made aware that there is no necessary connecton between naturalness and good welfare. Some natural behaviour contributes to good welfare but others, such as being chased and caught by a predator, does not. Used on its own without supporting evidence, 'natural behaviour' lacks the most essential criterion for good welfare—whether it matters to the animals themselves. There are now tried and tested methods for establishing what animals value ranging from simple choice tests to what they find rewarding in learning tasks and are prepared to work to obtain. In addition, the growth of animal behaviour studies over the last 60 years has yielded a wealth of new information about what animals respond to, what motivates them, how their behaviour develops during their lifetimes and how the behaviour of modern farm animals differs from that of their wild ancestors. By using all this information as well as just relying on the shaky concept of 'natural behaviour', there are thus now opportunities for improving farm animal welfare that are both more evidence-based and more animal-centred. Despite the many scientific objections that have been raise to it, 'natural behaviour' is widely used as an indication of good welfare by the food industry. The supposed link between welfare and natural behaviour derives, however, from a now outdated view of animals becoming frustrated if they cannot perform their natural instinctive behaviour. On the 60th anniversary of its publication, Niko Tinbergens' Four Questions framework is used to show why there is no necessary link between natural behaviour and welfare and why, therefore, reliance on natural behaviour in commercial farming may not result in the claimed improvements in welfare. Used on its own without supporting evidence, 'natural behaviour' lacks the most essential criterion for good welfare—whether it matters to the animals themselves. There are now a number of well-established methods for demonstrating what animals value, including choice tests and, particularly, what animals will work and pay a cost to obtain. Some of the evidence on what animals value is already available in published papers but some will require collaborative research between scientists and commercial farming to find practical and commercially viable ways of providing animals with what they value. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A comprehensive understanding of current Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare and the relevant influencing factors is essential for improving farm animal welfare and promoting further development of animal husbandry. The attitudes of 3,726 respondents in China were investigated using paper and online questionnaires. Three components (affective, cognitive, and behavioral) of attitudes toward farm animal welfare were assessed using 18 items designed based on the literature review. Influential factors of attitudes toward farm animal welfare were explored via tobit regression. The results revealed that the Chinese public not only considers farm animals to be emotional and sentient but are also sympathetic toward farm animals that suffer inhumane treatment. Although they have limited knowledge about farm animal welfare, the public believes improving farm animal welfare is beneficial, especially for food safety and human health. The Chinese public prefers regulation policies to incentive policies for improving farm animal welfare. The main factors influencing attitudes toward farm animal welfare included gender, age, education, monthly household income, area of residence, farm animal raising experience, and attention to farm animal welfare events. The effect of these influencing factors on attitudes varied. These findings provide a basis for improving Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare. The implications of formulating and implementing effective policies to improve the Chinese public attitudes toward farm animal welfare were discussed [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores cross-cultural differences in consumers' attitudes toward farm animal welfare (FAW) in BRIC countries. Questionnaires administered in each country contained the following questions: (i) "It is important to me that animals used for food are well cared for", (ii) "The typical nationality thinks it is important that animals used for food are well cared for", (iii) "Low meat prices are more important than the well-being of animals used for food", and (iv) "The typical nationality thinks that low meat prices are more important than the well-being of animals used for food". Answers were given on a Likert scale (from total disagreement to total agreement). Data fit multinomial logistic models using "Country" and "Gender" as factors and "Age" as a covariate. The results showed that women had stronger pro-animal attitudes. Statements on the perception of FAW importance had an agreement tendency that increased with age, while the opposite was true for meat prices. Brazil showed the highest levels of individual pro-FAW attitudes, and the same trend in relation to meat prices. Russia showed a slightly lower pro-FAW attitude, but the perception of the compatriots' attitudes towards FAW showed the opposite. Russians in general disagree with low meat prices in exchange for the detriment of FAW. Indians were the least supportive of FAW and, together with the Chinese, were the least supportive of an increase in meat prices to improve FAW. The Chinese showed prominent levels of neutrality towards FAW. These results may contribute to the definition of food and trade policies and help to adjust the supply chain to consumers' socio-cultural and economic differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: There are four options for the management of cattle that experience a severe or acute injury on-farm: treatment, unless cattle are severely injured; on-farm emergency slaughter (OFES); casualty slaughter (CS), where the animal is transported to an abattoir, provided that a vet has certified it fit for transport; or euthanasia. OFES is designed to avoid severely injured animals being transported to the abattoir. An online survey was designed to determine the perceptions of beef and dairy farmers about the management of acutely injured cattle in Ireland. The survey included questions about the farmer (e.g., age, gender) and farm (e.g., herd size), number of acutely injured cattle in 2020, and the frequency of the four management options that were used. Questions on the farmers' knowledge and experience of, and the cost implications of OFES were included. Other questions related to recommendations to improve OFES. The results were based on responses from 94 farmers: 49 dairy and 45 beef farmers. Not all farmers answered all questions. Most farmers had a positive view of OFES. Negative views related to the poor availability of OFES and that it had a higher overall cost than CS. Increasing availability of OFES and a decreasing cost would help to reduce the number of acutely injured cattle that go for CS. Four management options for acutely injured cattle in Ireland exist: treatment, unless cattle are severely injured; on-farm emergency slaughter (OFES); casualty slaughter (CS) if the animal is certified fit for transport; or euthanasia. OFES is designed to prevent transport of welfare-compromised cattle. An online survey of farmers in Ireland was carried out between April and July 2021 and focused on events during 2020. A theoretical framework of capacity, willingness, and opportunity was used to explore farmers' perceptions. Responses from 94 farmers (49 dairy and 45 beef) were analysed; not all respondents answered all questions. Respondents indicated that the incidence of acutely injured cattle in Ireland is low. A majority reported not having an acutely injured animal for greater than 36 months. Most respondents had a positive attitude towards OFES for animal welfare reasons and were aware of relevant regulations and guidelines. Barriers to OFES included a lack of availability of OFES, and dairy farmers indicated that it had a similar financial impact as euthanasia. A parallel study with veterinarians indicated a higher incidence of acutely injured cattle in Ireland; the current results may be due to the demographic or the sensitivity of the topic. Nationwide electronic data capture on the cause of mortality could support improvements in the management of acutely injured cattle and enable surveillance of the proportion of these cattle undergoing OFES, euthanasia, or CS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature examining farmers' views of animal welfare is dominated by the study of cognitive and attitudinal factors. This overlooks how cultural processes can inform what farmers do and why they may be resistant to change when it comes to animal welfare. This paper applies the concept of the "good farmer" to explore how farmers' approaches to welfare are also informed by cultural processes and farmer identity. A more-than-representational lens was applied to an interview study of Scottish livestock farmers (n = 28). This illuminated a set of shared practices and principles idealised by farmers as indicative of good welfare and symbolic of a "good farmer": care of the animal's physical body, care of the animal's physical environment, health management, happy–content animals, stock-keeping skills, objective decision-making, and animal productivity. We explore these in light of the existing "good farmer" literature, discuss how such ideals may impact farmers' welfare-related behaviours, and how supply chain demands may contribute to their restructuring. • Farmer identity is underexplored in the study of farmers' animal welfare behaviours. • Good farmer ideals and identity interact with farmers' animal welfare-related actions. • Supply chain influences may restructure what it means to be a good farmer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nine pig farms were evaluated for the welfare quality in Korea using animal- and environment-based parameters (particularly air quality parameters) during the winter of 2013. The Welfare Quality® (WQ®) protocol consists of 12 criteria within four principles. The WQ® protocol classifies farms into four categories ranging from ‘excellent’ to ‘not classified’. Each of these criteria has specific measures for calculating scores. Calculations for the welfare scores were conducted online using the calculation model in the WQ® protocol. Environment-based parameters like microclimate (i.e., temperature, relative humidity, air speed, and particulate matter), bacteria (total airborne bacteria, airborne total coliform, and airborne total Escherichia coli), concentration of gases (carbon dioxide, ammonia, and hydrogen sulfide) were measured to investigate the relationship between animal- and environment-based parameters. Correlations between the results of animal- and environment-based parameters were estimated using spearman correlation coefficient. The overall assessments found that five out of nine farms were ‘acceptable’, and four farms were ‘enhanced’; no farm was ‘not classified’. The average score for the four principles across the nine farms, in decreasing order, were ‘good feeding’ (63.13 points) > ‘good housing’ (59.26 points) > ‘good health’ (33.47 points) > ‘appropriate behaviors’ (25.48 points). In the result of the environment aspect, the relative humidity of farms 2 (93.4%), 3 (100%), and 9 (98%) was much higher than the recommended maximum relative humidity of 80%, and four out of the nine farms had ammonia concentrations greater than 40 ppm. Ammonia had negative correlations with ‘positive social behaviors’ and positive emotional states: content, enjoying, sociable, playful, lively, happy and it had positive correlations with negative emotional states: aimless, distressed. The concentration of carbon dioxide had negative correlations with positive emotional states; calm, sociable, playful, happy and it had a positive correlation with negative emotional state; aimless. Our results indicate that the control of the environment for growing pigs can help improve their welfare, particularly via good air quality (carbon dioxide, ammonia, hydrogen sulfide).

The study was carried out on farmers and consumers from the Western Romania, using the questionnaires developed within the framework of WELANIMAL project in year 2009. The aim of this paper was to identify if there are any differences between the two social categories regarding the issues of farm animal welfare. A number of seven common questions were indentified in the questionnaires of farmers and consumers, and a comparative study between these categories was conducted. Farmers considered that dairy cows (70.1%), laying hens (46.8%) and pigs (24.7%) need their current welfare level to be improved, while consumers considered that the welfare status of all the farm animal species mentioned in the questionnaire needed to improved. Both farmers and consumers considered that sometimes or very rarely could find information about the rearing system on the labels of animal products. Farmers believed that EU legislation exists mostly for farm animal transportation (34.8%) and slaughtering (30.5%), while consumers considered that EU legislation exists for slaughtering (34.8%) and rearing conditions (32.8%). Both farmers and consumers considered that in Romania the animal welfare/protection receives not enough importance (61.3% and 77.4%, respectively), while in the EU this is better than in other parts of the world (46.7% and 50%, respectively). It was concluded that farmers and consumers have either similar of divergent views on specific issues of farm animal welfare.

This paper reviews the literature regarding the economics of the farm animal welfare. The following issues are addressed: productions costs and savings of the animal welfare regulations, benefits of improved animal welfare, and consumers’ willingness to pay for animal-friendly products.

The aim of the present study is to analyze virtual learning environments and to provide a framework for assuring quality in farm animal welfare curricula. The framework is constructed according to the experimental learning for a case study developed in the context of the Leonardo da Vinci Community Vocational Training Action Pilot Project entitled “WELFOOD-Promoting quality assurance in animal welfare-environment-food quality interaction studies through upgraded e-Learning”. WELFOOD addressed objectives such as improvement and competencies of the skills in vocational training to promote employability and facilitate integration and reintegration in terms of capabilities and knowledge, needed for improved technologies in animal husbandry and food industry.

Farm animal welfare research conducted in China is not commonly accessed or known outside of China, which may lead to the assumption that farm animal welfare receives relatively little attention in China. Therefore, a bibliometric analysis was conducted on the existing Chinese farm animal welfare literature to provide robust evidence to refute this assumption. A total of 1312 peer-reviewed Chinese studies on farm animal welfare published between March 1992 and June 2023 were retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS) and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database. CiteSpace software was used to analyze and visualize the number, species, authors, institutions, journals, and keywords of the papers. In China, farm animal welfare research has gone through the processes of an early stage (1992–2001), rapid-growth stage (2002–2007), and mature stage (2008–present), and the scale of research continues to grow. Notably, swine and chickens have received priority attention in this area. A Matthew effect was observed for authors and institutions, with relatively little collaboration among authors and institutions. Most of the papers were published in a small number of journals, with an apparent agglomeration characteristic. The research hotspots, summarized as “feed and diet”, “environmental impacts and control”, “integrated rearing management”, “injury and disease”, “behavior and technologies for behavior monitoring”, “genetic analysis”, “welfare during transport and slaughter”, “welfare-friendly animal product consumption”, “attitudes toward farm animal welfare”, and “healthy breeding”. The keywords “computer vision”, “recognition”, “temperature”, “precision livestock farming”, “laying hen”, and “behavior”, represent the major research frontiers in the field, which could indicate potential areas of significant future research. The findings of the present bibliometric analysis confirm the fact that farm animal welfare is a field of interest in China. Farm animal welfare research in China tends to be pragmatic, with a strong emphasis on enhancing growth and production performance, as well as product quality, rather than solely concentrating on improving farm animal welfare. This paper provides insightful references that researchers can use to identify and understand the current status and future direction of the farm animal welfare field in China.

Consumer concern about farmed animal welfare is growing but does not always translate into real-world purchasing behaviour of welfare-friendly animal products for human consumption. Possible reasons for this include unfamiliarity with farming practices and economic sensitivity. In contrast, the number and role of pets in the United States have grown measurably, and spending on pets is strong. The pet food market has many opportunity niches as pet owners navigate strong marketing trends and nutrition philosophies. We hypothesised that pet owners in the US would be willing to pay a premium for pet food containing welfare-friendly animal ingredients. Eight hundred and thirty-eight pet owners completed an online survey asking questions that measured their knowledge of and interest in farm animal welfare, and their willingness-to-pay for pet food labelled as farm animal welfare-friendly. Respondents overall displayed relatively low knowledge about farm animal welfare, but poor self-assessment of their own knowledge. They displayed interest in farm animal welfare and an overall positive mean willingness-to-pay (WTP) for welfare-friendly pet food. Younger respondents, women and cat owners displayed a higher WTP than older respondents, men and dog owners. Income level was not correlated to WTP. Creating pet food products that contain animal ingredients produced using welfare-friendly practices may enhance farm animal welfare via two primary avenues: by providing a sustainable and value-added outlet for the by-products of welfare-friendly human food products, and by providing an educational opportunity about farm animal production via pet food packaging and other advertising.

The structural change toward larger (dairy) farms is often criticized because it supposedly has a negative effect on farm animal welfare. We investigated this criticism using cross-sectional survey data from 3,085 German dairy farms. Even though our sample was a convenience sample, it closely resembled the diverse structures of dairy farming in Germany and covered a wide range of dairy farm sizes (7 to 2,900 cows per farm, mean 122). We developed an animal welfare index (AWI) in close consultation with experts along the dairy value chain (e.g., farm animal welfare scientists, farmers, dairy representatives). Regression results showed that larger farms tended to achieve a better AWI than smaller farms in our data set. However, the effect size was small. Nevertheless, in contrast to the widespread assumption in public discussion, larger dairy herds are not necessarily associated with poorer animal welfare. In all herd size classes, we found a large variation of AWI between herds. Although this study focused on the effect of herd size, it is not the only factor affecting animal welfare levels on individual farms. Other variables that we included in the regression to describe the AWI indicate that the knowledge and skills of the farm manager and the amount of time that farms can devote to animals have a positive effect on the AWI. However, as with herd size, the effect size of other explanatory variables was small in absolute terms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Societal concerns dictate the need for animal welfare standards and legislation. The public and livestock producers often differ on their views of livestock welfare, and failure to meet public expectations may threaten the "social license to operate" increasing the cost of production and hampering the success of the industry. This study examined public and producer attitudes toward common practices and animal welfare issues in the Australian red meat industry, knowledge of these practices, and public and producer trust in people working the red meat industry using an Australia-wide survey of both the general public (n = 501) and red meat producers (n = 200). Public participants were recruited using a random digit dialing telephone survey (Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing) while the red meat producers were randomly selected within a curated database of Australian red meat producers. After controlling for gender and age, there were marked differences (p < 0.01) between public and producer respondents in 20 of the 27 attitude, trust and knowledge variables studied. Producers reported more positive beliefs in the conditions provided for sheep and beef cattle during sea and land transport, the husbandry practices used in the red meat industry, and red meat attributes regarding human health, environmental impact, animal use and animal welfare. Both public and producers reported similar levels of trust in conventional and commercial media and had similar beliefs about animal rights, prevention of animal cruelty and balancing the welfare of people and animals. The results indicate a polarization between the public and livestock producers in their attitudes toward animal welfare, knowledge of husbandry practices and trust in livestock people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Non-cage farming is gradually becoming the mainstream mode of poultry farming worldwide, which has led to concerns regarding the welfare of laying hens in China. Under huge pressure for the supply of eggs, China, with relatively insufficient land resources, is highly dependent on cage systems, thus posing significant challenges related to animal welfare. In the context of this dilemma, China's abundant woodland resources provide a means to improve the welfare of laying hens, in particular, providing a wide living space for laying hens to express their natural behaviours, such as foraging and reproduction. At the same time, this profitable farming model has been welcomed and supported by farmers in some areas of China, and is gradually being promoted, which may provide a template and confidence for China and other countries to address the challenges of keeping hens in non-cage systems in order to improve animal welfare. The welfare of laying hens in cage systems is of increasing concern. Represented by the European Union's 'End the Cage Age' initiative, more and more countries have advocated cage-free farming. China, an important country for poultry farming and consumption in the world, is highly dependent on cage systems and lacks confidence in alternative (e.g., free-range) systems. In this context, using China's abundant woodland resources (including natural forests, plantations, and commercial forests) to facilitate the management of laying hens in a free-range environment may provide highly promising welfare improvement programs. On the basis of the Five Freedoms, we assess the welfare status of understory laying hen management systems with reference to the behavioural needs and preferences of laying hens and the EU standards for free-range and organic production (highest animal welfare standards in the world). The results show that the considered systems meet or even exceed these standards, in terms of key indicators such as outdoor and indoor stocking density, outdoor activity time, and food and drug use. Specifically, the systems provide sufficient organic food for laying hens without using antibiotics. They allow laying hens to avoid beak trimming, as well as to express nesting, foraging, perching, reproductive, dustbathing and other priority behaviours. The presence of roosters and higher use of woodland space allow the laying hens to achieve better feather and bone conditions, thus reducing stress and fear damage. Notably, the predation problem is not yet considered significant. Second, there is evidence that understory laying hen systems are profitable and have been welcomed and supported by farmers and governments in the southwest, south, and north of China. However, whether it can be scaled up is uncertain, and further research is needed. In addition, laying hens in this management system face various risks, such as foot injury, parasitism, and high dependence on consumer markets, which must be considered. Overall, agro-forestry, or accurately, understory poultry raising, provides opportunities and possibilities for free-range laying hens and welfare improvement in China and other countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Interest in animal welfare has increased due to the growing ethical sensitivity of consumers and the awareness of its impact on food security and safety. In addition, respecting a high standard of animal welfare helps in the prevention of transmissible infectious diseases and the control of antimicrobial resistance. As a response to these needs, in 2018, the Italian Ministry of Health introduced the ClassyFarm system, which categorizes the level of risk arising from farm animal welfare and provides a specific checklist. This paper investigates the relationship between animal welfare and productive parameters on beef cattle farms. Animal welfare was assessed using the ClassyFarm system checklist for beef cattle. Our results demonstrated the influence of animal welfare on productive performance, suggesting that respecting high animal welfare levels helps to reach the full growth potential of beef cattle. In 2018, the Italian Ministry of Health introduced the ClassyFarm system in order to categorize the level of risk related to animal welfare. The ClassyFarm checklist for beef cattle is divided into four areas: Areas A "Farm management and personnel"; B "Structures and equipment"; C "Animal-based measures"; and "Emergency plan and alert system". Answers contribute to the final Animal Welfare Score (AWS) and to the score of each area. The aim of this work was to assess the animal welfare level on 10 Tuscan beef cattle farms through the ClassyFarm checklist and to examine the relationship between the level of animal welfare on final weight (FW), carcass weight (CW), weight gain (WG), and average daily gain (ADG). The AWS was divided into four classes, and the scores for each area were divided into three classes. The analysis of variance was applied, and AWS class, sex, and breeding techniques (open and closed cycle) were included in the model. The AWS class and sex had a highly significant influence on all parameters, while the breeding technique did not significantly influence any parameter. Farms classified as excellent presented a higher FW (677.9 kg) than those classified as good and insufficient, and the same trend was found for the ADG. The classes obtained in Areas A and C had a highly significant influence on all the parameters investigated. The classes obtained in Area B significantly influenced FW and WG. In conclusion, the productive response of the animals seemed to benefit from the welfare conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Farm animal welfare gains importance in consumers' meat choices. • We measure and relate ethical orientation to pork and broiler meat choices. • Find ethical orientation to differentiate between meat choices for farm animal welfare. • Space attributes play most important role in terms for farm animal welfare. Consumers are becoming more and more conscious about their consumption choices, demanding more sustainable, healthy and fair options. Meat consumption especially is under scrutiny for environmental as well as ethical reasons. We develop a set of items to measure ethical orientation and apply it to consumers' choices of meat products with 3000 consumers across six European countries (Denmark, Germany, Spain, Poland, Netherlands, Italy). We find consumer preferences to be similar across countries, with two thirds of consumers showing a preference for animal welfare attributes, especially outdoor access. Consumer segments can be differentiated based on their degree of ethical orientation, environmental concern, level of trust in the food system and price sensitivity. Ethical orientation differentiates between consumers' self-reported welfare meat purchases. Our results contribute to the literature on consumer behavior regarding farm animal welfare across different meat product and countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Societal concerns dictate the need for animal welfare standards and legislation. The public and livestock producers often differ on their views of livestock welfare, and failure to meet public expectations may threaten the “social license to operate” increasing the cost of production and hampering the success of the industry. This study examined public and producer attitudes toward common practices and animal welfare issues in the Australian red meat industry, knowledge of these practices, and public and producer trust in people working the red meat industry using an Australia-wide survey of both the general public (n = 501) and red meat producers (n = 200). Public participants were recruited using a random digit dialing telephone survey (Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing) while the red meat producers were randomly selected within a curated database of Australian red meat producers. After controlling for gender and age, there were marked differences (p < 0.01) between public and producer respondents in 20 of the 27 attitude, trust and knowledge variables studied. Producers reported more positive beliefs in the conditions provided for sheep and beef cattle during sea and land transport, the husbandry practices used in the red meat industry, and red meat attributes regarding human health, environmental impact, animal use and animal welfare. Both public and producers reported similar levels of trust in conventional and commercial media and had similar beliefs about animal rights, prevention of animal cruelty and balancing the welfare of people and animals. The results indicate a polarization between the public and livestock producers in their attitudes toward animal welfare, knowledge of husbandry practices and trust in livestock people.

Research into the veterinary perception of animal welfare is becoming ever more relevant. Following previous studies on Croatian veterinary students’ attitudes and opinions towards farm animal and pet welfare, the present study assessed their attitudes towards sheep and goat welfare, focusing on the year of veterinary medicine study and area of student residence. The questionnaire survey involved students of all six years of the integrated undergraduate and graduate study programme at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia. First-year students filled out the questionnaire twice, before and after having attended the animal welfare subject. The questionnaire consisted of two sections. The first section included questions on student demographic and experiential characteristics, whereas the second section asked them to define the level of cognition, sentience and welfare compromise in sheep and goats through five-point Likert scale questions. Study results revealed that students agreed that sheep and goats have cognitive abilities and feelings, but they neither agreed nor disagreed about their welfare compromise. There was no significant difference in student responses according to years of study or between first-year student responses before and after having attended the animal welfare subject or according to areas of student residence. These results could suggest poor student interaction with small ruminants and, therefore, help expand the respective curriculum.

Despite the many scientific objections that have been raise to it, ‘natural behaviour’ is widely used as an indication of good welfare by the food industry. The supposed link between welfare and natural behaviour derives, however, from a now outdated view of animals becoming frustrated if they cannot perform their natural instinctive behaviour. On the 60th anniversary of its publication, Niko Tinbergens’ Four Questions framework is used to show why there is no necessary link between natural behaviour and welfare and why, therefore, reliance on natural behaviour in commercial farming may not result in the claimed improvements in welfare. Used on its own without supporting evidence, ‘natural behaviour’ lacks the most essential criterion for good welfare—whether it matters to the animals themselves. There are now a number of well-established methods for demonstrating what animals value, including choice tests and, particularly, what animals will work and pay a cost to obtain. Some of the evidence on what animals value is already available in published papers but some will require collaborative research between scientists and commercial farming to find practical and commercially viable ways of providing animals with what they value.

Four management options for acutely injured cattle in Ireland exist: treatment, unless cattle are severely injured; on-farm emergency slaughter (OFES); casualty slaughter (CS) if the animal is certified fit for transport; or euthanasia. OFES is designed to prevent transport of welfare-compromised cattle. An online survey of farmers in Ireland was carried out between April and July 2021 and focused on events during 2020. A theoretical framework of capacity, willingness, and opportunity was used to explore farmers’ perceptions. Responses from 94 farmers (49 dairy and 45 beef) were analysed; not all respondents answered all questions. Respondents indicated that the incidence of acutely injured cattle in Ireland is low. A majority reported not having an acutely injured animal for greater than 36 months. Most respondents had a positive attitude towards OFES for animal welfare reasons and were aware of relevant regulations and guidelines. Barriers to OFES included a lack of availability of OFES, and dairy farmers indicated that it had a similar financial impact as euthanasia. A parallel study with veterinarians indicated a higher incidence of acutely injured cattle in Ireland; the current results may be due to the demographic or the sensitivity of the topic. Nationwide electronic data capture on the cause of mortality could support improvements in the management of acutely injured cattle and enable surveillance of the proportion of these cattle undergoing OFES, euthanasia, or CS.

Farm animal welfare is becoming a subject of politicization strategies. The conflicting policy preferences are pronounced in the United States, with its large and highly intensified livestock sector. The lack of federal farm animal welfare regulations shifted politicization strategies of animal welfare advocates to the state level. By 2019 12 states had already passed legislation to protect animals in food production. This comparative study reveals that policy changes were initiated by new actor constellations entering the agricultural subsystem and were particularly successful when the institutional opportunity of public ballots existed. The role of political parties seems to be limited however. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To start milk production, dairy goats need to give birth at least once. While most female kids are reared to become the next generation of dairy goats, only a small proportion of male kids (buck kids) are reared with reproduction aims. The market for buck kid meat, especially within Northern European countries, is currently relatively small compared to the number of bucks born. Therefore, the purposes for buck kids are limited and a substantial proportion of buck kid meat is used for pet food. Due to the limited economic value of buck kids, farmers are faced with a dilemma. Although raising bucks costs more money than it yields, the birth of kids is a prerequisite for production of milk and should be seen as an investment for business-wise healthy dairy goat farming. In that perspective, dairy goat farmers have an ethical responsibility toward buck kids, as well. In this paper, we compare various scenarios of dealing with the issue of surplus male animals. We provide recommendations for the rearing of buck kids based on the sector‘s experience and current practice in the Netherlands. Reducing the number of surplus (male) offspring, e.g., by an optimized prolonged lactation management and/or by artificial insemination with sex-sorted semen, could alleviate the issue of low value buck kids. Killing surplus animals before or directly after birth, on the other hand, is met with increasing societal scrutiny. Initiatives to propagate a market for buck kid meat for human consumption are important to enable a suitable and sustainable production system. To maintain the health and welfare of goat kids, amongst other factors, sufficient and good quality colostrum, milk, and an appropriate diet as they grow older, needs to be provided. One option to assure the safeguarding of health and welfare of all goat kids are quality assurance schemes for milk production. These schemes make dairy farmers accountable for the health and welfare of all kids in the rearing period, including the provision of colostrum and adequate care for newborn buck kids. We conclude that the combination of reducing the number of surplus kids, increasing the demand for goat products, and quality assurance schemes that may help to safeguard the welfare of buck kids.

The welfare of laying hens in cage systems is of increasing concern. Represented by the European Union’s ‘End the Cage Age’ initiative, more and more countries have advocated cage-free farming. China, an important country for poultry farming and consumption in the world, is highly dependent on cage systems and lacks confidence in alternative (e.g., free-range) systems. In this context, using China’s abundant woodland resources (including natural forests, plantations, and commercial forests) to facilitate the management of laying hens in a free-range environment may provide highly promising welfare improvement programs. On the basis of the Five Freedoms, we assess the welfare status of understory laying hen management systems with reference to the behavioural needs and preferences of laying hens and the EU standards for free-range and organic production (highest animal welfare standards in the world). The results show that the considered systems meet or even exceed these standards, in terms of key indicators such as outdoor and indoor stocking density, outdoor activity time, and food and drug use. Specifically, the systems provide sufficient organic food for laying hens without using antibiotics. They allow laying hens to avoid beak trimming, as well as to express nesting, foraging, perching, reproductive, dustbathing and other priority behaviours. The presence of roosters and higher use of woodland space allow the laying hens to achieve better feather and bone conditions, thus reducing stress and fear damage. Notably, the predation problem is not yet considered significant. Second, there is evidence that understory laying hen systems are profitable and have been welcomed and supported by farmers and governments in the southwest, south, and north of China. However, whether it can be scaled up is uncertain, and further research is needed. In addition, laying hens in this management system face various risks, such as foot injury, parasitism, and high dependence on consumer markets, which must be considered. Overall, agro-forestry, or accurately, understory poultry raising, provides opportunities and possibilities for free-range laying hens and welfare improvement in China and other countries.

In 2018, the Italian Ministry of Health introduced the ClassyFarm system in order to categorize the level of risk related to animal welfare. The ClassyFarm checklist for beef cattle is divided into four areas: Areas A “Farm management and personnel”; B “Structures and equipment”; C “Animal-based measures”; and “Emergency plan and alert system”. Answers contribute to the final Animal Welfare Score (AWS) and to the score of each area. The aim of this work was to assess the animal welfare level on 10 Tuscan beef cattle farms through the ClassyFarm checklist and to examine the relationship between the level of animal welfare on final weight (FW), carcass weight (CW), weight gain (WG), and average daily gain (ADG). The AWS was divided into four classes, and the scores for each area were divided into three classes. The analysis of variance was applied, and AWS class, sex, and breeding techniques (open and closed cycle) were included in the model. The AWS class and sex had a highly significant influence on all parameters, while the breeding technique did not significantly influence any parameter. Farms classified as excellent presented a higher FW (677.9 kg) than those classified as good and insufficient, and the same trend was found for the ADG. The classes obtained in Areas A and C had a highly significant influence on all the parameters investigated. The classes obtained in Area B significantly influenced FW and WG. In conclusion, the productive response of the animals seemed to benefit from the welfare conditions.

Since January 2015, California has required that all shell eggs consumed in the state be produced cage free or by hens housed in enlarged cages defined under Assembly Bill 1437. This paper assesses the effects of California farm animal housing restrictions on egg prices and production practices inside and outside California, and on the volume of interstate trade. We find that the California regulation generated short‐ and long‐run egg price increases across the U.S. It has also bifurcated production methods outside California yielding more concentrated interstate trade. The largest share of the associated private costs was borne by out‐of‐state consumers. The balance between a state's power to regulate food production within its borders and the impacts on out‐of‐state producers and consumers has potential legal implications under the dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Wieś & Rolnictwo is the property of Instytut Rozwoju Wsi & Rolnictwa, Polska Akademia Nauk and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In 1855, as a result of decades of controversy, the Smithfield Livestock Market was relocated from the historic center of London to Islington in north London. Taking on board post-humanist critiques of anthropocentricism, this study reexamines the controversy surrounding the removal of Smithfield Market with a multi-species attentiveness and places the experience and entanglements of various animal groups center-stage. It argues that the relocation of the market stemmed from the multi-species nature of the Smithfield system, just as its solution pivoted upon multi-species considerations. By focusing on the actual encounterings between humans and other animals, such as between cattle, sheep, dogs, drovers, butchers, local residents, horses, etc., at each stage of the operation of the livestock supply system, it demonstrates first how these relations constituted the system as well as the experience of the animals within it. It next examines the factors that impacted on the material-semiotic workings of the system and led to the eventual re-assemblage of the market in Islington, including the actions of interest groups, the agency of nonhuman animals, as well as the discourses on free trade, public health, meat quality, urban planning, and cruelty to animals. This study does not see the removal and re-assemblage of the market as an outright attempt to "exclude" nonhuman animals from the metropolis, thereby ignoring their interests, as some studies suggest. Instead, it regards the removal controversy as a serious attempt on the part of Victorians to learn to cope with multi-species co-existence and respond to the needs of different human and nonhuman groups as they saw fit. It is hoped that this retelling of the story of the Smithfield removal may revitalize the complex historical reality of multi-species entanglements that people once lived in and confronted, and serve as a vital resource for enlarging our capacity to live in the times of multi-species urgency in the Anthropocene. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of New History / Xin Shixue is the property of Xin Shixue Zazhishe and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Farm animal welfare (FAW) has emerged in recent years as a potential material issue for the animal-derived food products industry. The issue is global in scope, given the large trade flows and multinational structure of many companies in the agribusiness industry, a critical sector of the Brazilian and international economy. This exploratory study is an attempt to map the agendas of companies in the industry and compare them with the agendas of the principal stakeholders for a better understanding of the risks and opportunities facing the intangible assets of companies with regard to FAW. The mapping was carried out by consulting websites and corporate sustainability reports. The overarching result of the study is to show that the industry as a whole is neglecting FAW as a material issue.