To inspect, to motivate — or to do both? A dilemma for on-farm inspection of animal welfare

Abstract

The ultimate aim of this paper is to study and discuss a central dilemma within inspection of animal welfare. On the one hand, it may be argued that controllers should check only whether farmers comply or not with animal welfare regulation. Here, the key value is the rule of law, and that all offenders should be treated equally. On the other hand, it may be argued that an important component of inspections is to enter into dialogue with farmers. This may be based on a more forward-looking view aimed at motivating farmers to look after the welfare of the animals in their care. In European countries, authorities try to enforce animal welfare legislation through inspections followed up by penalties in instances where a lack of compliance is found. However, the fairness and efficiency, and ultimately the public acceptance of the system, critically depend on the performance of the individual inspector. This paper presents the results of an interview-study into how Danish animal welfare inspectors view their own role and tasks. In the main results, a theme of disagreement presented itself and revealed different attitudes in terms of the possibility of engaging in a dialogue with the farmers. The first theme focused on the preventive aspect. The second had its focus on compliance and on the avoidance of engaging in dialogue with the farmer regarding the reasons for the regulations. Moreover, a theme of agreement showed interpretation as unavoidable. We discuss how the points of view or strategies of the inspectors may affect the outcome of animal welfare inspections, both on a short- and long-term basis. We argue that this study can initiate a necessary and more open discussion of the aforementioned dilemma.

Veterinarians Experience Animal Welfare Control Work as Stressful

“…When performing inspections alone and making decisions independently on issues open for interpretation, the role of the working community as provider of support becomes highly relevant. The importance of support and the opportunity to meet and reflect on the experiences with colleagues has been recognized also by Anneberg et al (31) and Devitt et al (25). The importance of good cooperation with the police is important as the police are not only relevant in the process of animal welfare crime investigation but also for providing assistance during animal welfare inspections.…”

Use of welfare outcome information in three types of dairy farm inspection reports

“…A third possible interpretation might be that assessors might not be willing to record welfare problems to avoid confrontation. It was highlighted in the study of Anneberg et al [ 29 ] that some farmers do not appreciate it when the assessors ‘give them a lesson’ during inspections, and one of the assessors described the relationship between themselves and farmers as ‘a knife-edge balance’.…”

Improving Animal Health on Organic Dairy Farms: Stakeholder Views on Policy Options

“…This combination of legal and communicative instruments mimics the approach already being taken in Sweden, where the organic association KRAV requires farmers who are identified as having poor animal health status, using the "Animal Welfare Signals" (Signaler Djurvälfärd), to take additional actions, with the support of a local variant of the dairy management training organisation CowSignals ® [55]. Such an approach emphasises the important role of communication in motivating farmers to look after the welfare of the animals in their care [56].…”