Taking Ethics into Account in Farm Animal Breeding: What can the Breeding Companies Achieve?

  • I. Anna S. OlssonEmail author
  • Christian Gamborg
  • Peter Sandøe


Animal welfare and the ethical issues it raises have been discussed intensively for a couple of decades. The emphasis has been on the direct effects of housing and husbandry, but more attention is now being given to problems originating in selective breeding. European attempts to adjust animal welfare legislation to deal with these problems have been largely unsuccessful, but the fact that selective breeding can introduce welfare problems continues to place an ethical responsibility on the animal breeding industry. Since breeding decisions are made centrally and, increasingly, internationally, strategic change is only likely to occur if it is embedded in an international agreement of some kind. The aim of this paper is to describe the key ethical issues facing animal breeding and assess the suggestion that the breeding industry itself can deal with ethical issues by means of an ethical code. Results from recent projects involving commercial breeding enterprises are presented.


animal production animal welfare biotechnology sustainability values 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Appleby, M. C., Cutler, N., Gazzard, J., Goddard, P., Milne, J. A., Morgan, C., Redfern,  A. 2003“What Price Cheap Food?”Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics16395408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Christensen, L. G. 1998“Future Market and Consumer-Orientated Breeding Goals”Acta Agriculturae Scandinavian, Section A, Animal Science, Supplement284553Google Scholar
  3. FAWC (Farm Animal Welfare Council)2004FAWC Report on the Welfare Implications of Animal Breeding and Breeding Technologies in Commercial AgricultureFAWCLondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Duncan, I. J. H., Fraser, D. 1997“Understanding Animal Welfare”Appleby, M. C.Hughes, B. O. eds. Animal WelfareCABIWallingford1931Google Scholar
  5. Gamborg, C., Sandøe, P. 2005“Sustainable Farm Animal Breeding: A Review”Livestock Production Science92221231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Havenstein, G. B, Ferket, P. R., Qureshi, M. A. 2003“Carcass Composition and Yield of 1957 Versus 2001 Broilers When Fed Representative 1957 and 2001 Broiler Diets”Poultry Science8215091518Google Scholar
  7. Kolar, R. and B. Rusche (2003), “Animal Welfare Aspects of Farm Animal Breeding and Reproduction: Chances for a Sustainable Future?” Final workshop of the SEFABAR project, Rome.Google Scholar
  8. Landsudvalget for Svin; Årsberetning 2003: Avl og Opformering (2004) <>.Google Scholar
  9. Lawrence, A. B., Conington, J., Simm, G. 2004“Breeding and Animal Welfare: Practical and Theoretical Advantages of Multi-trait Selection”Animal Welfare13S191S196Google Scholar
  10. Rauw, W. M., Kanis, E., Noordhuizen-Stassen, E. N., Grommers, F. E. 1998“Undesirable Side Effects of Selection for High Production Efficiency in Farm Animals: A Review”Livestock Production Science561533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Sandøe, P., Holtug, N. 1998“Ethical Aspects of Biotechnology”Acta Agriculturae Scandinavian, Section A, Animal Science, Supplement295158Google Scholar
  12. The National Committee for Pig Production; Annual Report 2004 (2004) < Report/Index.htm?ID=539>.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. Anna S. Olsson
    • 1
    Email author
  • Christian Gamborg
    • 1
  • Peter Sandøe
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Molecular and Cell BiologyPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations