4. Traditionally legislators have
focussed mainly on resources
• Legislation is a minimum level
• Systems with a too high risk of poor welfare are
banned
• More difficult to legislate for good welfare, as there
are many possible variations
5. Welfare is a characteristic of the
individual animal
The input-based approach
to welfare assessment
We need a sensible
combination of both
The outcome-based approach
to welfare assessment
types of measures
7. INPUT OUTCOME
Resources
available
(resource- based Response of
measures)
animal
(Animal-based
measures)
Management
practices Indicate the
(management - animal’s welfare
based measures)
(welfare indicator)
(welfare indicator)
Hazards Consequences
8.
9. We are familiar with resource and
management-based measures, but
which outcome-based measure
should be chosen? And how do we
choose them?
10. It depends on the reason for the
assessment
• Farm management and advice
• The ones that are useful and/or
save money
11. It depends on the reason for the
assessment
• Farm management and advice
• The ones that are useful and/or
save money
• Breeding company
• To reduce a problem
12. It depends on the reason for the
assessment
• Farm management and advice
• The ones that are useful and/or
save money
• Breeding company
• To reduce a problem
• Certification scheme
• A balanced selection of
different measures
13. An example of a welfare
outcome indicator
• Pododermatitis / foot-pad dermatitis / “ammonia burns”.
• A type of contact dermatitis:
• Discoloration of the skin,
• Hyperkeratosis,
• Erosions, and later ulcers, develop.
• Found in broiler chickens and turkeys
• Collaboration between Swedish
authority and broiler industry
• Linked to legislation and affects
stocking density (ie economy)
14. INPUT OUTCOME
Water
Air
Food pad
Feed dermatitis
15. INPUT OUTCOME
Water
Air
Food pad
Feed dermatitis
3-point scale
0
Prevalence of severe foot-pad
dermatitis in Swedish broilers
1994-2005
12
10
1
Percentage (%)
benchmarking
8
6
4
2
2 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Year after start of programme
20. Welfare Quality project
Comfort around
• Number stopping
resting
• Number turning back
ho Goo
us d Ease of
in movement
g
No painful management
o od h procedures
G al t
he Photos: A. Velarde, T. Grandin
No disease
No injuries
21. European Food Safety Authority
working on use of animal-based
measures
A ‘toolbox’
Welfare outcome indicators should be selected to
address the specific objectives of the assessment
23. Science-based measures
• According to their ‘essential characteristics’
• Validity
• Known specificity
• Known reliability
• Robustness
• There may be several measures giving information
on the same welfare outcome that vary in cost,
feasibility, skill needed to take them etc
24. • EFSA (2012) The use of animal-based measures
to assess the welfare of dairy cattle.
• EFSA (2012) The use of animal-based measures
to assess the welfare of pigs
25. Benchmarking and setting thresholds
Core measures (always recorded – standardised)
Desirable measures (depending on purpose
of assessment)
Interesting measures (to be developed further)
Development of outcome-based measures should be an ongoing process
26. Outcome-based welfare
indicators
• Science-based, common-sense approach to
assessing welfare
• Measures placed in the ‘tool box’ according to well
established principles (valid, reliable, etc)
• Measures are selected from it according to the
purpose of the assessment.
