Elsevier

Livestock Science

Volume 247, May 2021, 104481
Livestock Science

Do Animal Welfare Schemes Promote Better Animal Health? An Empirical Investigation of German Pork Production

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2021.104481Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Relationship between farm efficiency and animal health as core dimension of animal welfare.

  • Sample of 483 German hog-finishing farmers; including participants in a major German animal welfare program (Initiative Tierwohl).

  • No trade-off between animal health and cost as well as technical efficiency.

  • Participating and non-participating farms can achieve high animal health scores and high economic performance simultaneously.

  • Program participants achieve higher animal health and efficiency scores.

Abstract

Animal welfare programs support lower production intensity and environmental enrichment to create additional value for animals and consumers, by facilitating farms to resolve the conflict between animal welfare and efficient farming. Yet, the success of such enrichments in improving animal welfare and thus the productive performance depends on farmers’ production process management. Complexity of animal welfare, and its unclear role for the hog finishing process’ performance, challenges the evaluation of animal welfare programs. Using unique farm-level data comprising cost accounting and production economic data, participation status in the German program “Initiative Tierwohl” and animal health scores collected at the abattoir, we investigate the relationship between farm performance, animal health and program participation. This study relies on relative farm performance measures of technical and cost efficiency, obtained by nonparametric data envelopment analysis. Statistical correlation analysis and distribution difference testing was supported by locally estimated scatterplot smoothing. The findings indicate the possibility for high farm performance with low prevalence rates of internal organ alterations, also for non-participants. Program participants, however, achieved better relative farm performance and higher levels of respiratory health scores. Based on the indications from abattoir data, no statistically significant relationship between animal health and farm performance, and no moderating role of the program could be found for the sampled farms. We conclude that low threshold programs, such as the “Initiative Tierwohl”, might provide an incentive for adjusting the environment and can thus contribute to increasing sustainability in pork production.

Introduction

Farm animal welfare represents one aspect of sustainable livestock production, which includes moral acceptance by consumers (see Gunnarsson et al., 2020 for an overview). Consumers are increasingly concerned about animal welfare and the sustainability of livestock farming (Grunert et al., 2018), with opposition to standard pig husbandry systems (Weible et al., 2016) and growing consumption of animal friendly products (Alonso et al., 2020; Risius and Hamm, 2017). Motivated by this increased societal demand for more sustainable livestock systems, regulatory changes to husbandry standards (Nalon and Briyne, 2019) and numerous farm animal welfare labels have emerged across Europe (Sørensen and Schrader, 2019). Labels initiated by the retail sector, such as “Beter Leven” (the Netherlands) or “Initiative Tierwohl” (Germany), the example of our study, have gained considerable market share: in 2020 about 25% of finishing pigs in Germany have been kept under the standards of this retailer initiative (Initiative Tierwohl, 2020b).

In these programs, farms are usually compensated for costly implementation of enrichment measures, such as the provision of additional space, roughage and playing material. The positive effects of environmental enrichment include improved immune function (e.g., Luo et al., 2020) and species-typical activities. The latter can reduce adverse behavior, e.g. aggression (Brandt et al., 2020), that would otherwise result in production losses (Harley et al., 2014), costs from sickness (Jensen et al., 2008) and tail biting (van de Weerd and Ison, 2019). Healthier animals can also improve growth rates (e.g., Carroll et al., 2018), carcass weight and backfat thickness (e.g., Faucitano et al., 2020). Following the conceptualization of animal welfare as a multidimensional construct (FAWC, 2009), environmental enrichment concerns freedom from discomfort and injuries, and the ability to display natural behavior. Successfully implemented environmental enrichment could thus increase animal welfare, economic sustainability of farms and by creating additional value for animals and consumers, increase social sustainability (Buijs and Muns, 2019).

Implementation of environmental enrichment requires process management reorganization. Besides increased production costs, enrichments can reduce turnover rates and farm output (e.g. Godyń et al., 2019). Also, implementing enrichment provides no guarantee for improved animal welfare (Johnsen et al., 2001; Sørensen and Schrader, 2019), and the contribution to improving animal welfare depends on the farmers’ production process management (e.g. Peden et al., 2019a). Likewise, skills, knowledge and motivation of stockpeople to care for the animals determine how animals experience welfare. That is, the housing system design provides the base, but the key to success is how well it operates (Hemsworth, 2018). Success of environmental enrichment will thus depend on whether farms can resolve the conflict between animal welfare and efficient farming (Dawkins, 2017). However, in this regard, the empirical evidence for successful enrichment in hog finishing is limited, with conflicting results (e.g., Henningsen et al., 2018).

This study aims to address this gap, first, by empirically investigating the relationship between hog finishing farms’ economic performance and animal health an important dimension of animal welfare. Given the uncertainties in cost savings and productivity gains from improved animal health, and the lower turnover rates, process reorganization and investment costs associated with implementing environmental enrichment, we hypothesize that, particularly for farms not enrolled in a funded-program, improved animal health is associated with lower economic performance (hypothesis 1). Second, taking the example of the German “Initiative Tierwohl”, this study investigates whether animal welfare programs can increase sustainability of hog finishing by creating additional value through improving animal health and economic performance: We hypothesize that “Initiative Tierwohl” participation is associated with improved animal health (hypothesis 2). Taking up the idea that environmental enrichment, as supported by the program, can increase animal health and increased health is associated with productivity gains in the hog finishing process, participants could further benefit from the program support to reorganize the production process and improve their economic performance. We thus hypothesize “Initiative Tierwohl” participation is associated with improved economic performance (hypothesis 3).

To test these hypotheses, we utilized a comprehensive data set, comprising cost accounting and production economic data, and abattoir inspection data from 483 commercial hog finishing farms, including 82 participants of the “Initiative Tierwohl”. The data cover a region in north-western Germany that is characterized by intense livestock farming. We measure farm performance by technical and cost efficiency using non-parametric Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and animal health by standardized health scores based on mandatory carcass inspections at the abattoir.

Section snippets

Research area and theoretical concepts

Animal welfare can be defined as a concept that frames how an animal perceives its situation (Broom, 1991). Most farm animal welfare regulations and programs conceptualize farm animal welfare as a multidimensional construct, with animals being free from 1) hunger and thirst; 2) discomfort; 3) pain, injury and disease; 4) an inability to express their natural behavior; and 5) fear and distress (FAWC, 2009). The interrelation between these dimensions make animal welfare complex and challenge

Study region, sampling and data sources

This analysis is based on a sample of farms participating in a professional advisory service for pork production, located in northern counties (Westfalen-Lippe2) of the German Federal State of North-Rhine Westphalia (NRW). The sampling period is the budget period of 2016 and 2017. The region is characterized by intensive livestock farming, and by hog finishing in particular. In 2017, about 28% of the German finishing pigs were kept in NRW (

Empirical approach

To measure farm performance, a nonparametric data envelopment analysis (DEA) was used to obtain estimates of technical and cost efficiency. To analyze the relationship between efficiency and animal health indicators (hypothesis 1), we start by illustrating the relations using nonparametric locally estimated scatterplot smoothing (LOESS) by participation status. For testing purposes, a statistical (parametric) correlation analysis was used, including truncated bootstrapped regression analysis.

Results

Table 3 presents the results of the DEA analysis, showing technical and cost efficiency scores for all sampled farms. Since we use output orientation, the technical efficiency scores indicate the degree to which the maximum potential output for a given input level has been achieved. Cost efficiency is based on input orientation and indicates a farms’ cost saving potential, relative to a cost minimizing point with an identical output level.

With respect to technical efficiency, we observed an

Discussion

No clear and statistically significant relationship was found between animal respiratory system and inner organ health and farm performance, in terms of technical and cost efficiency. Related to hypothesis 1, we cannot find evidence for a trade-off; that is, farms, especially non-participants, can achieve high economic performance at a comparably large range of animal health levels, including high economic performance at comparably low levels of animal health and vice versa. The range in animal

Conclusion

In this study, we demonstrate that the combination of abattoir inspection data with farms’ cost accounting and production economic data provides a suitable basis for assessing animal welfare programs. This assessment can serve as a basis for large scale and long-term monitoring of animal welfare measures. Using animal-based health scores, we conclude that farms that participate in a low-threshold animal welfare program achieve better respiratory health, at comparatively high levels of farm

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Reinhard Uehleke: Conceptualization, Methodology, Data curtion, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Project administration. Stefan Seifert: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Formal analysis, Software, Data curation, Validation, Visualization. Silke Hüttel: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Supervision, Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Funding acquisition.

Declaration of Competing Interest

None.

Acknowledgements

This research was partially funded within the BioSC FocusLab "Transform2Bio". The scientific activities of the Bioeconomy Science Center were financially supported by the Ministry of Culture and Science within the framework of the NRW Strategieprojekt BioSc (No. 313/323-400-002 13). We thank QS, ITW and a farmer association in North-West Germany for providing the data. We also thank participants at the 2019 Reecap conference, the Economics Seminar Series at SLU, the CPP Seminar at Loughborough

References (89)

  • D. Fraser et al.

    General principles for the welfare of animals in production systems: the underlying science and its application

    Vet. J.

    (2013)
  • É. Gocsik et al.

    Cost-efficiency of animal welfare in broiler production systems: A pilot study using the welfare quality® assessment protocol

    Agric. Syst.

    (2016)
  • T. Grandin

    On-farm conditions that compromise animal welfare that can be monitored at the slaughter plant

    Meat Sci

    (2017)
  • K.G. Grunert et al.

    Consumer interest in environmental impact, safety, health and animal welfare aspects of modern pig production: Results of a cross-national choice experiment

    Meat Sci

    (2018)
  • A. Haigh et al.

    An investigation into the effectiveness of compressed straw blocks in reducing abnormal behaviour in growing pigs

    Animal

    (2019)
  • H. Hansson et al.

    Dairy farmers' use and non-use values in animal welfare: determining the empirical content and structure with anchored best-worst scaling

    J Dairy Sci

    (2016)
  • D. Harvey et al.

    Reconsidering the political economy of farm animal welfare: an anatomy of market failure

    Food Policy

    (2013)
  • M. Heinonen et al.

    Sow mortality is associated with meat inspection findings

    Livest. Sci.

    (2018)
  • A. Horst et al.

    Challenges and opportunities of using meat inspection data to improve pig health traits by breeding: A review

    Livest. Sci.

    (2019)
  • T.B. Jensen et al.

    The association between disease and profitability in individual finishing boars at a test station

    Livest. Sci.

    (2008)
  • H.P. Lahrmann et al.

    The effect of long or chopped straw on pig behaviour

    Animal

    (2015)
  • L. Luo et al.

    Early and later life environmental enrichment affect specific antibody responses and blood leukocyte subpopulations in pigs

    Physiol. Behav.

    (2020)
  • D. Main et al.

    Best practice framework for animal welfare certification schemes

    Trends in Food Science & Technology

    (2014)
  • A.M. Maisano et al.

    Animal-based measures on fattening heavy pigs at the slaughterhouse and the association with animal welfare at the farm level: A preliminary study

    Animal

    (2020)
  • D. Murphy et al.

    Ema and efsa joint scientific opinion on measures to reduce the need to use antimicrobial agents in animal husbandry in the European Union, and the resulting impacts on food safety (ronafa)

    EFSA J

    (2017)
  • F. Pandolfi et al.

    The 'real welfare' scheme: Benchmarking welfare outcomes for commercially farmed pigs

    Animal

    (2017)
  • F.-X. Philippe et al.

    Ammonia emissions from pig houses: Influencing factors and mitigation techniques

    Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

    (2011)
  • A. Risius et al.

    The effect of information on beef husbandry systems on consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay

    Meat Sci

    (2017)
  • H.D. Schulte et al.

    Let the cows graze: an empirical investigation on the trade-off between efficiency and farm animal welfare in milk production

    Land Use Policy

    (2018)
  • L. Simar et al.

    Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes

    J. Econom.

    (2007)
  • H. Telkänranta et al.

    Fresh wood reduces tail and ear biting and increases exploratory behaviour in finishing pigs

    Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci.

    (2014)
  • H.A. van de Weerd et al.

    A review of environmental enrichment for pigs housed in intensive housing systems

    Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci.

    (2009)
  • A.L. vom Brocke et al.

    Tail lesions in fattening pigs: Relationships with postmortem meat inspection and influence of a tail biting management tool

    Animal

    (2019)
  • M.E. Alonso et al.

    Consumers' concerns and perceptions of farm animal welfare

    Animals

    (2020)
  • R.D. Banker et al.

    Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis

    Manage. Sci.

    (1984)
  • Bauer, T., Böhmfeld, J., Bönsch, S., Feller, B., Formowitz, B., Franke, G., Fritzsche, S., Grimm, E., Häuser, S., Jais,...
  • D.M. Broom

    Animal welfare: Concepts and measurement

    J. Anim. Sci.

    (1991)
  • S. Buijs et al.

    A review of the effects of non-straw enrichment on tail biting in pigs

    Animals

    (2019)
  • G.A. Carroll et al.

    The importance of the social sciences in reducing tail biting prevalence in pigs

    Animals

    (2019)
  • W.S. Cleveland

    Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing scatterplots

    J. Am. Stat. Assoc.

    (1979)
  • W.S. Cleveland et al.

    Locally weighted regression: An approach to regression analysis by local fitting

    J. Am. Stat. Assoc.

    (1988)
  • C. Correia-Gomes et al.

    Pig abattoir inspection data: Can it be used for surveillance purposes?

    PloS One

    (2016)
  • I. Czycholl et al.

    Test-retest reliability of the welfare quality® animal welfare assessment protocol for growing pigs

    Anim. Welfare

    (2016)
  • M.S. Dawkins

    Animal welfare and efficient farming: Is conflict inevitable?

    Anim. Prod. Sci.

    (2017)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text