首页> 外文期刊>Animals >The Effect of Steps to Promote Higher Levels of Farm Animal Welfare across the EU. Societal versus Animal Scientists’ Perceptions of Animal Welfare
【24h】

The Effect of Steps to Promote Higher Levels of Farm Animal Welfare across the EU. Societal versus Animal Scientists’ Perceptions of Animal Welfare

机译:在欧盟范围内采取措施提高农场动物福利水平的影响。社会与动物科学家对动物福利的看法

获取原文
           

摘要

Simple Summary We studied different EU production standards and initiatives to determine whether there is still room or not for further animal welfare improvement, and which should be the best way to achieve it. Many of the adopted measures in these standards and initiatives are scientifically supported, but other aspects that are equally important for animal welfare are not included in any of them. Animal welfare improvement should consider, for each country, those aspects actually benefiting animals, but also the social expectations within each country. Economic constraints might explain the gap between what society demands, and what farm animals actually need. Abstract Information about animal welfare standards and initiatives from eight European countries was collected, grouped, and compared to EU welfare standards to detect those aspects beyond minimum welfare levels demanded by EU welfare legislation. Literature was reviewed to determine the scientific relevance of standards and initiatives, and those aspects going beyond minimum EU standards. Standards and initiatives were assessed to determine their strengths and weaknesses regarding animal welfare. Attitudes of stakeholders in the improvement of animal welfare were determined through a Policy Delphi exercise. Social perception of animal welfare, economic implications of upraising welfare levels, and differences between countries were considered. Literature review revealed that on-farm space allowance, climate control, and environmental enrichment are relevant for all animal categories. Experts’ assessment revealed that on-farm prevention of thermal stress, air quality, and races and passageways’ design were not sufficiently included. Stakeholders considered that housing conditions are particularly relevant regarding animal welfare, and that animal-based and farm-level indicators are fundamental to monitor the progress of animal welfare. The most notable differences between what society offers and what farm animals are likely to need are related to transportation and space availability, with economic constraints being the most plausible explanation.
机译:简单总结我们研究了不同的欧盟生产标准和计划,以确定是否还有进一步改善动物福利的余地,而这应该是实现这一目标的最佳方法。这些标准和倡议中许多已采取的措施得到了科学支持,但是对动物福利同等重要的其他方面并未包含在其中。对于每个国家来说,动物福利的改善都应考虑到实际上使动物受益的方面,还应考虑每个国家的社会期望。经济上的限制可能解释了社会需求与农场动物实际需求之间的差距。摘要收集,归类了来自八个欧洲国家的动物福利标准和倡议的信息,并将其与欧盟福利标准进行比较,以检测超出欧盟福利法规要求的最低福利水平的那些方面。对文献进行了审查,以确定标准和计划的科学意义,以及超出最低欧盟标准的那些方面。对标准和倡议进行了评估,以确定它们在动物福利方面的优势和劣势。利益相关者对改善动物福利的态度是通过“德尔菲政策”活动确定的。考虑了社会对动物福利的看法,提高福利水平的经济意义以及国家之间的差异。文献综述显示,农场的空间津贴,气候控制和环境丰富与所有动物类别都有关系。专家评估显示,在农场中预防热应激,空气质量以及种族和通道的设计还不够充分。利益相关者认为,住房条件与动物福利特别相关,基于动物和农场的指标对于监测动物福利的进展至关重要。社会提供的物品和可能需要的牲畜之间最显着的差异与运输和空间的可用性有关,其中最可能的解释是经济限制。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号