Abstract
Several attempts to conceptualize farm animal welfare have been criticized for diverging reasons, among them often the failure to incorporate the public concern and opinion. This paper’s objective is to develop a conception of farm animal welfare that starts from the public’s perception and integrates the opinion of different stakeholder representatives, thus following a fork-to-farm approach. Four qualitative citizen focus group discussions were used to develop a quantitative questionnaire, which has been completed by a representative sample of Flemish citizens (n = 459). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were applied to develop a conception of farm animal welfare starting from an extended list of aspects that relate to animal production and associate with farm animal welfare in the public’s perception. In depth interviews with stakeholder representatives were used to match and adapt the structure of the animal welfare conception model. The resulting conception revealed seven dimensions grouped in two different levels. Three dimensions were animal-based: “Suffering and Stress,” “Ability to Engage in Natural Behavior,” and “Animal Health.” Four dimensions were resource-based: “Housing and Barn climate,” “Transport and Slaughter,” “Feed and Water,” and “Human-Animal Relationship.” This conception is distinct from earlier attempts since it is based on public perceptions; it addresses the opinion of different stakeholders, and it distinguishes empirically between animal-based and resource-based dimensions in the conceptualization of farm animal welfare. The relevancy of a popular definition is supported by the present demand oriented economy, in which animal welfare is a non-trade concern, and mainly left to the market where consumers still mainly act as individuals who calculate and weigh pros and cons.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Algers, B., & Jensen, P. (1991). Teat stimulation and milk-production during early lactation in sows—effects of continuous noise. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 71, 51–60.
Appleby, M. C. (1999a). Definitions of welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 65, 159–160.
Appleby, M. C. (1999b). Tower of babel: Variation in ethical approaches, concepts of welfare and attitudes to genetic manipulation. Animal Welfare, 8, 381–390.
Appleby, M. C., & Sandøe, P. (2002). Philosophical debate on the nature of well-being: Implications for animal welfare. Animal Welfare, 11, 283–294.
Bagozzi, R. P., Li, Y. L., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct-validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 421–458.
Bartussek, H. (1999). A review of the animal needs index (ani) for the assessment of animals’ well-being in the housing systems for Austrian proprietary products and legislation. Livestock Production Science, 61, 179–192.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
Boogaard, B. K., Oosting, S. J., & Bock, B. B. (2008). Defining sustainability as a socio-cultural concept: Citizen panels visiting dairy farms in the Netherlands. Livestock Science, 117, 24–33.
Botreau, R., Perny, P., & Veissier, I. (2008). Reports on the construction of welfare criteria fro different livestock species, Part 3: Criteria construction for all animal types on farm. Deliverable 2.8b, subtask 2.3.1.2, Welfare Quality® (EU FOOD-CT-2004-506508).
Broom, D. M. (1986). Indicators of poor welfare. British Veterinary Journal, 142, 524–526.
Broom, D. M. (1991). Animal-welfare—concepts and measurement. Journal of Animal Science, 69, 4167–4175.
Broom, D. M. (2001). Coping, stress and welfare. In D. M. Broom (Ed.), Coping with challenge: Welfare in animals including humans (pp. 1–9). Berlin: Dahlem University Press.
Broom, D. M. (2009). The history of the concept of animal welfare, of related concepts and of animal welfare science. International autumn conference: Interdisciplinary discussion about concepts of animal welfare. Germany: Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler.
Browne, M., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). CA: Sage, Newbury Park.
Buller, H. (2009). What can we tell consumers and retailers? Proceedings of Welfare Quality final stakeholder conference, (pp 43–46). Uppsala, Sweden.
Butterworth, A. (2009). Feeding support information back to management. Proceedings of Welfare Quality final stakeholder conference, (pp 33–37). Uppsala, Sweden.
Caporale, V., Alessandrini, B., Dalla Villa, P., & Del Papa, S. (2005). Global perspectives on animal welfare: Europe. Revue Scientifique et Technique-Office International des Epizooties, 24, 567–577.
Dawkins, M. S. (2006). A user’s guide to animal welfare science. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 21, 77–82.
Duncan, I. J. H. (1996). Animal welfare defined in terms of feelings. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section a-Animal Science, 29–35.
Duncan, I. J. H. (2005). Science-based assessment of animal welfare: Farm animals. Revue Scientifique et Technique-Office International des Epizooties, 24, 483–492.
Duncan, I. J. H., & Fraser, D. (1997). Understanding animal welfare. In M. Appleby & B. O. Hughes (Eds.), Animal welfare (pp. 19–31). Wallingford: CABI Publisher.
Edwards, J. D., & Schneider, H. P. (2005). The world veterinary association and animal welfare. Revue Scientifique et Technique-Office International des Epizooties, 24, 639–646.
European Commission. (2005). Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed animals. Spec Eur 229. http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/euro_barometer25_en.pdf. Accessed 26 February 2010.
Fisher, M. W. (2009). Defining animal welfare–does consistency matter? New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 57, 71–73.
Fraser, D. (1995). Science, values and animal welfare: Exploring the ‘inextricable connection’. Animal Welfare, 4, 103–117.
Fraser, D. (2001). The “New perception” of animal agriculture: Legless cows, featherless chickens, and a need for genuine analysis. Journal of Animal Science, 79, 634–641.
Fraser, D. (2004). Applying science to animal welfare standards. Proceedings of Global Conference on Animal Welfare: an OIE initiative. France: Paris.
Fraser, D. (2008). Understanding animal welfare. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, 50, S1.
Fraser, D., Weary, D. M., Pajor, E. A., & Milligan, B. N. (1997). A scientific conception of animal welfare that reflects ethical concerns. Animal Welfare, 6, 187–205.
Garnier, J. P., Klont, R., & Plastow, G. (2003). The potential impact of current animal research on the meat industry and consumer attitudes towards meat. Meat Science, 63, 79–88.
Grunert, K. G. (2006). Future trends and consumer lifestyles with regard to meat consumption. Meat Science, 74, 149–160.
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Haynes, R. P. (2008). Animal welfare: Competing conceptions and their ethical implications. Dordrecht: Springer Science + Business Media B.V.
Hewson, C. J. (2003a). What is animal welfare? Common definitions and their practical consequences—introduction. Canadian Veterinary Journal-Revue Veterinaire Canadienne, 44, 496–499.
Hewson, C. J. (2003b). Can we assess welfare? Canadian Veterinary Journal-Revue Veterinaire Canadienne, 44, 749–753.
Huber, A., & Fölsch, D. W. (1978). Akustische ethogramme von hühnern. Tierhaltung Band 5, Birkhäuser. Stuttgart: Basel.
Kiley-Worthington, M. (1989). Ecological, ethological and ethically sound environments for animals: Towards symbiosis. Journal of Agricultural Ethics, 2, 223–247.
Korthals, A. (2001). Ethical dilemmas in sustainable agriculture. International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 36, 813–820.
Lund, V., Coleman, G., Gunnarsson, S., Appleby, M. C., & Karkinen, K. (2006). Animal welfare science—working at the interface between the natural and social sciences. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 97, 37–49.
Malhotra, N. K., & Peterson, M. (2006). Basic marketing research: A decision-making approach. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education/Prentice Hall.
Mason, G., & Mendl, M. (1993). Why is there no simple way of measuring animal welfare? Animal Welfare, 2, 301–319.
McInerney, J. (1991). A socioeconomic perspective on animal-welfare. Outlook on Agriculture, 20, 51–56.
McInerney, J. (2004). Animal welfare, economics and policy: Report on a study undertaken for the farm and animal health economics. London: DEFRA, 68 pp.
NIS. (2002). Population census data January 1, 2003. Brussels: NIS, National Institute for Statistics.
Nordenfelt, L. (2006). Animal and human health and welfare: A comparative philosophical analysis. Oxford: CABI Publishing.
Rollin, B. E. (1981). Animal rights and human morality. Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books.
Rushen, J. (2003). Changing concepts of farm animal welfare: Bridging the gap between applied and basic research. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 81, 199–214.
Rushen, J., & Depassille, A. M. B. (1992). The scientific assessment of the impact of housing on animal-welfare—a critical-review. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 72, 721–743.
Sundrum, A. (2007). Conflicting areas in the ethical debate on animal health and welfare. In Proceedings of the 7th congress of the European Society for Agricultural and Food Ethics ‘Sustainable food production and ethics, (pp. 257–262). Vienna: Austria.
Tuyttens, F. A. M., Vanhonacker, F., Van Poucke, E., & Verbeke, W. (2010). Quantitative verification of the correspondence between the Welfare Quality® operational definition of farm animal welfare and the opinion of Flemish farmers, citizens and vegetarians. Livestock Science, 131, 108–114.
Van Tichelen, S. (2009). An NGO view. Proceedings of Welfare Quality final stakeholder conference (pp. 83–84). Uppsala, Sweden.
Vanhonacker, F. E. Van Poucke, F. A. M. Tuyttens, & Verbeke, W. (2010). Citizens’ views on farm animal welfare and related information provision: Exploratory insights from flanders, Belgium. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. doi:10.1007/s10806-010-9235-9.
Vanhonacker, F., Verbeke, W., Van Poucke, E., & Tuyttens, F. A. M. (2008). Do citizens and farmers interpret the concept of farm animal welfare differently? Livestock Science, 116, 126–136.
Verbeke, W. (2009). Stakeholder, citizen and consumer interests in farm animal welfare. Animal Welfare, 18, 325–333.
Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2006). Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer “Attitude—behavioral intention” gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19, 169–194.
Webster, J. (2005). The assessment and implementation of animal welfare: Theory into practice. Revue Scientifique et Technique-Office International des Epizooties, 24, 723–734.
Acknowledgments
The partial financing of this research by the Ministry of the Flemish Community through the project ALT/AMS/2005/1, and by IWT Flanders through the project 50679 is gratefully acknowledged. The authors would also like to thank Joke Ottevaere for her assistance in the in-depth interviews and an anonymous reviewer of an earlier version of this paper for helpful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
See Table 8.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vanhonacker, F., Verbeke, W., Van Poucke, E. et al. The Concept of Farm Animal Welfare: Citizen Perceptions and Stakeholder Opinion in Flanders, Belgium. J Agric Environ Ethics 25, 79–101 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-010-9299-6
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-010-9299-6