Applications for Methods of On-Farm Welfare Assessment

Main, David C J; Jp, Kent; Wemelsfelder, Françoise; Ofner, E; Tuyttens, F

doi:10.1017/s0962728600026129

Cited by 83 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The duration of protective behavior that one individual displays compared to the typical duration of protective behavior that individuals of that species display in response to a range of stimuli and / or stimuli of that kind, i.e. a species-level focus, for example, using group-level measures of welfare (see Main et al, 2003).…”

Section: Conceptual Issues Associated With Interspecies Welfare Compa...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A theoretical approach to improving interspecies welfare comparisons

Gaffney¹,

Lavery²,

Schiestl³

et al. 2023

Front. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of animals bred, raised, and slaughtered each year is on the rise, resulting in increasing impacts to welfare. Farmed animals are also becoming more diverse, ranging from pigs to bees. The diversity and number of species farmed invite questions about how best to allocate currently limited resources towards safeguarding and improving welfare. This is of the utmost concern to animal welfare funders and effective altruism advocates, who are responsible for targeting the areas most likely to cause harm. For example, is tail docking worse for pigs than beak trimming is for chickens in terms of their pain, suffering, and general experience? Or are the welfare impacts equal? Answering these questions requires making an interspecies welfare comparison; a judgment about how good or bad different species fare relative to one another. Here, we outline and discuss an empirical methodology that aims to improve our ability to make interspecies welfare comparisons by investigating welfare range, which refers to how good or bad animals can fare. Beginning with a theory of welfare, we operationalize that theory by identifying metrics that are defensible proxies for measuring welfare, including cognitive, affective, behavioral, and neuro-biological measures. Differential weights are assigned to those proxies that reflect their evidential value for the determinants of welfare, such as the Delphi structured deliberation method with a panel of experts. The evidence should then be reviewed and its quality scored to ascertain whether particular taxa may possess the proxies in question to construct a taxon-level welfare range profile. Finally, using a Monte Carlo simulation, an overall estimate of comparative welfare range relative to a hypothetical index species can be generated. Interspecies welfare comparisons will help facilitate empirically informed decision-making to streamline the allocation of resources and ultimately better prioritize and improve animal welfare.

show abstract

Section: Conceptual Issues Associated With Interspecies Welfare Compa...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A theoretical approach to improving interspecies welfare comparisons

Gaffney¹,

Lavery²,

Schiestl³

et al. 2023

Front. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A conscientização do consumidor e preocupação com o bem-estar dos animais de produção forneceram o ímpeto para impulsionar o fornecimento de produtos de sistemas de criação com elevado bem-estar, assegurando padrões bem-estar aos animais de produção e exigências de rotulagem de bemestar nos alimentos, incrementando o valor do produto final (Blokhuis et al, 2008;Buller et al, 2018;Main et al, 2003).…”

Section: O Bem-estar Na Ovinoculturaunclassified

Bem-estar na ovinocultura en Brasil: Revisión

Schram¹,

Moya²

2023

Pubvet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

O Brasil é um grande exportador de produtos de origem animal, e devido as grandes exigências do mercado internacional, o país está tendo que se adaptar a novas formas de produção, mas não apenas para exportação, como também para a comercialização interna do país. Os produtos provenientes da ovinocultura vêm ganhando espaço tanto no mercado interno, quanto externo, e com isso a atenção para os produtores dessa espécie também, pois os consumidores estão em busca de alimentos cada vez mais “limpos” e dentro das normas de bem-estar animal. O presente trabalho traz uma revisão bibliográfica sobre o bem-estar animal dentro da ovinocultura no Brasil, mostrando as principais formas de obtê-lo dentro dos sistemas de criação dessa espécie.

show abstract

“…Several protocols for a proper animal welfare assessment have been developed and validated [4][5][6]. They could be used to measure welfare, develop quality certifications, identify possible risk factors, and give evidence for developing new animal welfare legislation [7]. The Welfare Quality ® , Animal Welfare Indicator (AWIN), and the five domain protocols exist for the welfare assessment of different species [6,[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

GLAD Scale for Ranking Welfare of Horses on Arrival after Transport to Slaughterhouses

Padalino

Benedetti

Felici

et al. 2023

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To date, there is no official method for measuring horse welfare after transport. This study aimed to develop a scale to classify horses into four categories: good shape; light affected; affected; down (GLAD) based on their welfare impairment measured at unloading. To this end, 15 animal-based measures (ABMs), previously recorded from 1019 horses, were scored. Weight and severity scores provided by welfare experts, alongside the number of welfare principles highlighted by the ABM, were assigned to each ABM. The welfare impairment (S) of each horse was then calculated as the weighted sum of the severity scores of the 15 ABMs. Three thresholds were also set to define the four GLAD categories; the ABM “down” (i.e., horses unable to stand and walk on arrival, also considered by the law as the indicator of the worst welfare) was used as the higher threshold, Sdown, (category D); the intermediate threshold, S2, was defined by the ABM “injuries”, assumed to represent highly impaired welfare (category A); the threshold, S1, was defined assuming that significant welfare impairment starts from 20% of S2 (L category). Horses with an S value below S1 were considered physically and mentally fit (G category). Out of 1019, 43% of horses fell into category G, 48% into L, 9% into A, and 0.3% into D. Our scale could be useful for veterinarians to decide whether a horse can be slaughtered immediately (G), needs rest (L), needs attention (A), or euthanasia (D), but further validation is needed.

show abstract

Applications for Methods of On-Farm Welfare Assessment

Cited by 83 publications

References 7 publications

A theoretical approach to improving interspecies welfare comparisons

A theoretical approach to improving interspecies welfare comparisons

Bem-estar na ovinocultura en Brasil: Revisión

GLAD Scale for Ranking Welfare of Horses on Arrival after Transport to Slaughterhouses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About