XXIV

Worlds Poultry Congress 5 - 9

August - 2012 Salvador - Bahia - Brazil

Welfare quality
On

Humboldt-University of Berlin
Institute of Biology, Perinatal Adaptation
Philippstrasse 13, 10115 Berlin, Germany

Introduction

To inform the general public

During the last decades of the 20th century
major changes took place in European animal
production (cf Blokhuis et al., 1998). Animal
production became increasingly industrialised,
with quantity often taking precedence over quality.
Over the years, cultural, attitudinal and commercial
barriers hampered constructive communication
between farmers and the people who ultimately eat
what is produced. The activities of consumer groups
and animal protectionists and, more recently, the
effects of crises such as swine fever, BSE, footand-mouth disease and avian influenza have led to
people becoming increasingly aware that animal
production is more than just an industry. Issues
such as animal welfare, food quality, food safety
and the environment have assumed much greater
importance for the public (consumer concerns).
Farm animal welfare is now clearly an important
issue for ordinary people across Europe and there

The general interest in animal welfare is also

reflected in a widespread demand for information
across Europe. However, this demand varies
significantly across different countries and largely
reflects differences in primary production, processing
and distribution as well as governance structures
and public discourse. Moreover, information
demand often seems to reflect a general interest
rather than one that is apparent through purchase
choice (Kjaernes and Lavik, 2008).

To manage animal welfare on farm

Farmers realise that they are operating in a
market where they have to take peoples concerns
about the welfare of farm animals into account.
Moreover, there is also a broadening recognition that
conditions that harm animal welfare can negatively
affect production, damage specific quality aspects
and jeopardise profitability (Jones, 1998).
The feedback of detailed outcomes of welfare
assessments (indicators) to the farmer is a necessity
for on farm welfare management. Together
with expert advice on causal factors and possible
improvement strategies for identified welfare
problems, such information can support the farmers
efforts to further improve the welfare of the animals.

Harry J. Blokhuis

he term welfare quality is more and more

used in everyday language. For instance to
refer to the level of realised welfare of a group
of animals or the extent to which a husbandry
system provides animals with good welfare. It is used
to quantify in some way the level of animal welfare
on a scale from poor to good. Such quantification
of how animal production processes affect animal
welfare is essential for several reasons:
= To inform the general public
= To manage animal welfare on farm
= To provide input to animal welfare risk
assessment processes
= To allow certification of products and to
inform consumers
= To complement regulatory standards

is clear demand for higher animal welfare standards

(see Eurobarometer, 2005; 2007; Kjaernes and
Lavik, 2008).

Since production and trade are more and more

globalising (the world is increasingly flat (Friedman,
2006), farmers in Europe also worry about the costs
of welfare assessments, welfare improvements and
more stringent regulations. And they are anxious
about who will bear such costs (Bock, 2009). They
favour a common approach, a level playing field,
throughout Europe and preferably worldwide.

To provide input to animal welfare risk

assessment processes
Risk Assessment (RA) methodology in animal
production has been commonly used to describe
and quantify the risks of introduction of infections,
toxi-infections or residues of veterinary medicines,
or risks resulting from the import of live animals and
their products in the animal food chain (Mller-Graf
et al., 2008).
Area: Poultry Welfare and Environment August 06

XXIV
Although
systematic
approaches
and
methodologies of RA in animal welfare are not
commonly applied, RA is used and further developed
(e.g. Noordhuizen et al., 2000; Van Reenen et al.,
2001; Von Borel et al., 2001) but methodologies are
under development.
For instance the European Food Safety Authority
(EFSA) is working towards an animal welfare
risk assessment approach (Rib and Blokhuis,
2012) to allow the identification of priority areas
of intervention (risk management), selection
of inspection targets in official controls and
recommendations for future research.
To date there is a limited amount of quantitative
data on the adverse effects of hazards on animal
welfare, and RAs are therefore generally qualitative
or semi-quantitative and mainly based on expert
opinion. Quantification of how animal production
processes affect animal welfare is needed to perform
more quantitative and objective RAs.

Harry J. Blokhuis

To allow certification of products and to

inform consumers
A sociological study carried out in Europe
included an analysis of consumers reluctance to
purchase animal friendly products (Miele and Parisi
2000; Harper and Henson 2000). This study revealed
that an important reason is the lack of transparent,
reliable and easily understandable information
about the way in which animal-based food products
are actually produced.
It is more and more recognised by retailers and
other food chain actors that consumer concerns
for good animal welfare represent a business
opportunity that could be profitably incorporated in
their commercial strategies (Roe and Buller, 2008).
Particularly retailers use animal welfare more and
more as a component of product and supply chain
differentiation (c.f. Eurogroup for Animals, 2007;
European Commission 2002). Such differentiation
(and creation of markets) may be based on an overall
high welfare level or be related to specific welfare
aspects; it might or might not be bundled with
other product characteristics, e.g. environment,
global warming or sustainability.
In general, animal welfare is increasingly used
as an important attribute of an overall concept
of food quality (Blokhuis et al., 1998; Buller &
Cesar, 2007). To allow trustworthy certification,
labeling, marketing and recognition by consumers
standardized measures of animal welfare are
required.

Area: Poultry Welfare and Environment August 06

Worlds Poultry Congress 5 - 9

August - 2012 Salvador - Bahia - Brazil

To set regulatory standards

Legislation on animal welfare has a longstanding
tradition in many member states of the European
Union (Blokhuis et al., 2008; Bennett & Appleby,
2010). On EU level, the obligation to pay full regard
to the welfare of animals as sentient beings when
formulating and implementing the Communitys
policies, is now included in the Treaty on the
European Community.
Currently a range of EU Directives and
Regulations specify requirements, conditions and
practices to ensure good animal welfare for different
species. These include areas such as animal housing
and husbandry, transport and slaughter. This EU
legislation generally specifies the provision of
particular resources and practices (i.e. prescriptions).
This approach is important to guide decisions on
the banning of conditions/practices that are widely
considered to result in poor welfare, such as certain
housing systems (e.g. battery cages for laying
hens) or painful procedures. However, reliance on
a prescriptive input-based approach leads to
several difficulties when one seeks to promote good
welfare such as;
= More and more prescriptive details may lead
to complicated and inflexible legislation.
= It is often difficult (if not impossible) for
prescriptive measures to provide the same
protection of animal welfare under the very
different farming and climatic conditions that
prevail in the various member states.
= Input-based rules may prevent farmers from
choosing husbandry systems and practices
that fit their specific circumstances most.
= Detailed definition of systems and practices
may hamper innovation.
= It is very complicated (and very likely
impossible) to prescribe all relevant details of
management practices.
= Ensuring compliance with very detailed
legislation of husbandry conditions and
practices is virtually unachievable.
The recently published EU Strategy for the
protection and welfare of animals 2012-2015 also
underlines the relevance of outcome-based animal
welfare indicators to complement prescriptive
requirements (European Commission, 2011).
The above points are schematically represented
in Figure 1.

The welfare quality project

Ten years ago the term welfare quality did
not really exist and the current use illustrates the

XXIV

Worlds Poultry Congress 5 - 9

August - 2012 Salvador - Bahia - Brazil

Farmer

Management

Resources
Assessment
information

Legislative
controle

Animal welfare
Society

Measures

Trade

It was also recognised

that a large European effort
in the area of animal welfare
should also include research
designed to identify practical
ways of solving some of the
main welfare problems in
current animal production.
Therefore, Welfare Quality
initiated appropriate studies in
important areas like handling
stress, injurious behaviours,
lameness, temperament etc.

Product
information

Area: Poultry Welfare and Environment August 06

Harry J. Blokhuis

During
the
projects
lifetime the original ideas (c.f.
Blokhuis et al., 2003) evolved
Figure 1 - Diagrammatic representation of the use of animal welfare
and
the priorities were
assessment information systems (from Blokhuis et al., 2010).
slightly modified accordingly.
However, the general aims
remained the same and can be summarised as
impact of an EU funded project with that name:
follows:
Welfare Quality (WQ). The Welfare Quality project
was funded under the European 6th Framework
= to develop practical strategies/measures to
Programme for Research and Technological
improve animal welfare,
Development (FP6). The project started in 2004 and
= to develop a European standard for the
became the largest piece of integrated research
assessment of animal welfare,
work yet carried out in animal welfare in Europe.
= to develop a European animal welfare
It was a partnership of 40 institutions in Europe
information standard,
and, since 2006, four in Latin America. The partners
= to integrate and interrelate the most
are based in 13 European countries and four Latin
appropriate specialist expertise in the
American (Uruguay, Brazil, Chile and Mexico).
multidisciplinary field of animal welfare in
Although countries outside Europe are involved,
Europe.
obviously this EU funded project mainly focused on
the European situation.
Areas of concern
In an integrated effort Welfare Quality
The final results of the project were delivered
combined analyses of consumer/citizen perceptions
early 2010. Many articles have been published on
and attitudes with existing knowledge from animal
specific aspects of Welfare Quality (see www.
welfare science and thereby identified 12 areas of
welfarequality.net) including papers focusing on
concern that should be adequately covered in the
the implications of its outcomes (e.g. Blokhuis et
measurement systems (Keeling and Veissier, 2005).
al., 2010). This paper can only give a condensed
These are presented in Table 1 as criteria for good
overview of the approach and main achievements
animal welfare. Each criterion covers a separate
of the project.
aspect of good animal welfare and the list was
chosen to encompass all potential areas of concern
The Welfare Quality vision aimed to address
while at the same time keeping the total number
the drivers and developments mentioned in the
of criteria to a minimum. To further reduce the
above introduction and to respond to related
number of items and ease the understanding, we
diverse requirements. Transparency of the product
group them into four classes, called principles in the
quality chain and provision of guarantees in relation
table, corresponding to the questions:
to animal welfare can be considered major and
= Are the animals properly fed and supplied
overarching requirements. From the start, an
with water?
= Are the animals properly housed?
important goal was to deliver reliable, science= Are the animals healthy?
based, on-farm welfare assessment systems for
= Does the behaviour of the animals reflect
poultry, pigs and cattle as well as a standardised
optimised emotional states?
system to convey welfare measures into easy to
understand product information.

XXIV
Focus groups interviews with consumers were
carried out in seven study countries (Italy, France,
Hungary, UK, the Netherlands, Norway and
Sweden) (Miele and Evans, 2005). To investigate
how animal welfare concerns are relevant for
citizens whilst shopping for food and what kind of
information is considered relevant for assessing the
animal friendliness of the products available on the
market. The results showed that the participants in
the focus group discussions reacted favourably to
the experts list of criteria in the table above. Most
participants identified more commonalities than
differences between their understanding and the
scientific approach to what is important in defining
the welfare of animals.

Harry J. Blokhuis

Welfare assessment
At the start of Welfare Quality, most welfare
assessment systems in use were largely based on
observations of the environment, i.e., design measures
presumed to affect animal welfare. However, the
relation between specific design measures and
the animals welfare status are not always clearly
understood. Moreover, as stipulated above, input
based legislation may lead to several difficulties.
Therefore, the Welfare Quality project aimed to
develop sets of measures that are animal based i.e.
measuring at the animal itself. Such measures reflect
the effects of the environment/resources as well as
variations in the way the farming system is managed
(role of the farmer) (see Figure 1).

August - 2012 Salvador - Bahia - Brazil

and feasibility and selected for inclusion in the

assessment system. The assessment systems for
laying hens, broilers, dairy cows, beef cattle,
calves, fattening pigs and sows were then tested
at numerous European Farms and described in
protocols (Welfare Quality, 2009a, b, c).

Combination of measures
The outcomes of the welfare measures are used
to create a score for each of 12 welfare criteria
defined within Welfare Quality to cover different
key aspects of animal welfare. Criteria scores are
then used to calculate a score for each of four
welfare principles: good feeding, good health,
good housing and appropriate behaviour. These
are then combined to produce an overall welfare
assessment of the animal unit in the form of an
assignment of one of four categories to that facility
(e.g. not classifiable, acceptable, enhanced
and excellent). The different steps in this process
are illustrated in Figure 2. The outputs from the
four stages have different informational content,
relevance and value and thus various potential uses.
The possible users of the information at the different
stages are also indicated in the figure.

Cosultation

Different activities were developed within the

project to consults citizens, consumers, farmers
and various other stakeholders. Thus, citizen and
farmer juries were organised in three EU countries
to discuss: how the various aspects of welfare
Welfare Quality scientist identified (mainly)
are measured; how the results are combined to
animal based measures to address all of the above
evaluate farms and how the scheme might best be
mentioned criteria. For each of the different species
implemented to realise improvements in European
measures were analysed for validity, repeatability
farm animal welfare. Welfare Quality outcomes
were also presented at
three large stakeholder
Table 1 - Welfare principles and criteria (from Keeling and Veissier, 2005).
conferences (Brussels in
2005, Berlin in 2007 and
Principles
Welfare criteria
Uppsala in 2009, see www.
1
Absence of prolonged hunger
welfarequality.net)
which
Good feeding
2
Absence of prolonged thirst
were attended by farmers
associations,
certification
3
Comfort around resting
bodies,
retailers,
NGOs,
4
Thermal comfort
Good housing
scientists, members of the
5
Ease of Movement
EU Parliament and the EU
6
Absence of injuries
Commission, national policy
makers, the media, etc.
7
Absence of disease
Good health

Appropriate
behaviour

Worlds Poultry Congress 5 - 9

Absence of pain induced by management procedures

Expression of social behaviours

10

Expression of other behaviours

11

Good human-animal relationship

12

Positive emotional state

Area: Poultry Welfare and Environment August 06

Feedback from these

groups was taken into
consideration when the
assessment
protocols
were refined. Intensive
discussions between animal

~30
12
On-farm measures,
Scores
scores in each
provided to
measure provided
farmer
to farmer
Advice to farmers

August - 2012 Salvador - Bahia - Brazil

Principles

Criteria

Worlds Poultry Congress 5 - 9

Measures

XXIV

4
Main
dimensions
describing
welfare

Overall assessment

1
Synthesised summary
information attached
to a product

Infortmation to customers,
consumeers

Regarding acceptance
of the system, harmonizing
the efforts of brands,
companies,
and
certification organizations
was
identified
as
particularly relevant in
a recent scenario study
(Ingenbleek et al., 2011).
This study also pointed out
that some organisation to
coordinate the interests of
different stakeholders may
help implementation.

To respond to this
demand, a group of former
partners of the Welfare
Quality
established
a formal collaboration in the Welfare Quality
Network (see www.welfarequalitynetwork.net).
This Network focuses on research and scientific
exchange to contribute to the further development
of the Welfare Quality animal welfare assessment
systems. The Welfare Quality Network also aims to
provide relevant knowledge and services to support
actors in animal production chains who would like
to implement or use the Welfare Quality animal
welfare assessment systems.

Figure 2 - Schematic overview of the integration of welfare measures into an

overall assessment (from Ingenbleek et al., 2011).

and social scientists facilitated the integration of the

concerns and welfare priorities of citizens and other
stakeholders with a scientific approach to animal
welfare. The consultation process is described in
more details by Miele et al., (2011).

Welfare improvement strategies

Ongoing work
The importance of retaining the partnership
and expertise established in the Welfare Quality
project has been highlighted in numerous
official communications (e.g. Report from the
EU Commission (IP/09/1610); Report of the
Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development
(2009/2202(INI)); speeches by Commissioner
Vassiliou (DG Sanco) and Dr Hall (DG Research)
during the final conference of the WQ project in
October 2009).

The activities of the Network focus on the

following main areas:
= Management of the system and support
instruments (including training in their use by
Network partners)
= Maintenance
and upgrading of the
assessment system
= Promoting stakeholder involvement
= Prioritizing and facilitating research

Harry J. Blokhuis

In the conception phase of Welfare Quality it

was recognised that a large European effort in the
area of animal welfare should also include research
designed to identify practical ways of solving some
of the main welfare problems in current animal
production. Therefore, we initiated appropriate
studies in important areas like handling stress,
injurious behaviours, lameness, temperament etc.
and some very relevant and interesting results
are already emerging. The practical improvement
strategies that these studies are generating will
provide valuable support to farmers and the animal
industry in their efforts to improve animal welfare.
Since these studies are an integrated part of the
Welfare Quality approach they will also inform and
be guided by the assessment information emanating
from the welfare assessment system (see diagram
above).

Even if Welfare Quality was the largest ever

collaborative project in animal welfare science, it is
clear it could not have covered all the questions and
every detail. So, it is not surprising that there are
still unanswered questions and discussion points.
However, during its lifetime the Welfare Quality
project has generated a multitude of results
including an innovative way of assessing animal
welfare in an integrative way, several concrete
strategies to improve animal welfare, many insights
into the concerns, initiatives and conditions for
involvement of consumers, retailers and farmers
as well as support mechanisms to enable uptake
and implementation of our results by the relevant
stakeholders and market actors.

Area: Poultry Welfare and Environment August 06

XXIV
Keeping up the momentum now requires the
active involvement of many actors. In this context,
the main drivers are: citizens, production chains, the
European Union and scientists (Blokhuis, 2009).

Acknowledgements
This text was produced as part of the Welfare
Quality research project which has been cofinanced by the European Commission, within the
sixth Framework Programme, contract no. FOODCT-2004-506508. The text represents the authors
views and does not necessarily represent a position
of the Commission who will not be liable for the use
made of such information. The author acknowledges
all contributors to the Welfare Quality project who
carried out the research and produced the results on
which main parts of this text is based.

Harry J. Blokhuis

BLOKHUIS, H.J. (2009) Welfare Qualitys drivers and

vision. In: BUTTERWORTH, A., BLOKHUIS, H., JONES,
B. and VEISSIER I. (Eds.) Proceedings of delivering
animal welfare and quality: Transparency in the food
production chain, 8-9- October, Uppsala, Sweden.
BLOKHUIS, H.J., HOPSTER, H., GEVERINK, N.A., KORTE,
S.M. and VAN REENEN, C.G. (1998) Studies of stress in
farm animals. Comparative Hematology International
8:94-101.
BLOKHUIS, H.J., JONES, R.B., GEERS, R., MIELE, M. and
VEISSIER, I. (2003) Measuring and monitoring animal
welfare: transparency in the food product quality
chain. Animal Welfare 12:445-455.
BLOKHUIS, H.J., KEELING, L.J., GAVINELLI, A. and
SERRATOSA, J. (2008) Animal welfares impact on
the food chain. Trends in Food Science & Technology
19:75-83.
BLOKHUIS, H.J.I. VEISSIER, MIELE M. and JONES R.B.
(2010) The Welfare Quality project and beyond:
safeguarding farm animal well-being. Acta
Agriculturae Scandinavica A, Animal Science 60:129140.
BOCK, B. (2009) Farmers perspectives. In: BUTTERWORTH,
A. BLOKHUIS, H. JONES, B. and VEISSIER I. (Eds.)
Proceedings of delivering animal welfare and quality:
Transparency in the food production chain, 8-9
October, Uppsala, Sweden.
BULLER, H. and CESAR, C. (2007) Eating well, eating fare:
Farm animal welfare in France. International Journal of
Sociology Food and Agriculture 15:45-58.

towards the welfare of farmed animals. European

Commission, Brussels.
EUROBAROMETER, (2007) Attitudes of EU citizens
towards Animal Welfare. European Commission,
Brussels.
EUROGROUP FOR ANIMALS, (2007) European retailers
and animal welfare. Briefing October, Brussels:
Eurogroup.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, (2002) Animal welfare
legislation on farmed animals in third countries and
the implications for the EU. COM 2002 626 final,
CEC, Brussels.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, (2011) Communication from
the Commission to the European Parliament, the
Council and the Economic and Social Committee on
the European Union Strategy for the protection and
welfare of animals 2012-2015. SANCO/13054/2011
Rev.2, Brussels.

GRANDIN, T. (2010) Improving animal welfare A

practical approach. CABI, Wallingford, UK.

BENNETT, R. and APPLEBY, M. (2010) Animal welfare policy

in the European Union. In: OSKAM, A., MEESTER, G.
and SILVIS H. (Eds.), EU policy for agriculture food
and rural areas, Wageningen Academic Publishers,
Wageningen, the Netherlands.

(2005)

August - 2012 Salvador - Bahia - Brazil

FRIEDMAN, L.F. (2006) The world is flat. Penguin books,

London, England.

References

EUROBAROMETER,

Worlds Poultry Congress 5 - 9

Attitudes

of

Area: Poultry Welfare and Environment August 06

consumers

HARPER, G.C. and HENSON, S.J. (2000) Consumer values

and farm animal welfare the Comparative Report.
The University of Reading. United Kingdom. EU FAIR
CT98-3678.
INGENBLEEK, P.T.M., BLOKHUIS, H.J., BUTTERWORTH A.
and KEELING L.J., (2011) A scenario analysis on the
implementation of a farm animal welfare assessment
system. Animal Welfare 20:613-621.
JONES, R.B., (1998) Fear and distress. In: APPLEBY M. C.
and HUGHES B. O. (Eds.) Animal welfare. Wallingford,
CT: CAB International.
KEELING, L. and VEISSIER, I. (2005) Developing a
monitoring system to assess welfare quality in cattle,
pigs and chickens. In: BUTTERWORTH A. (Ed.), Science
and society improving animal welfare. Welfare
Quality conference proceedings, 17/18 November,
Brussels, Belgium.
KJAERNES, U. and LAVIK, R., (2008) Opinions on animal
welfare and food consumption in seven European
countries. In: KJAERNES, U., BOCK, B.B., ROE E.
and ROEX J. (Eds.) Consumption, distribution and
production of farm animal welfare Opinions and
practices within the supply chain. Welfare Quality
Reports No. 7, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
MIELE, M. and PARISI, V. (2000) Atteggiamento dei
consumatori e politiche di qualit della carne in Italia e
in Europa negli anni novanta, Milano: Franco Angeli.
MIELE, M. and EVANS, A., (2005) European consumers
views about farm animal welfare. In: BUTTERWORTH
A. (Ed.), Science and society improving animal welfare.
Welfare Quality conference proceedings 17/18
November, Brussels.
MIELE, M., VEISSIER, I., and EVANS, A. (2011) Animal
welfare: Establishing a dialogue between science and
society. Animal Welfare 20:103-117.
MLLER-GRAF, C., CANDIANI, C., BARBIERI, S., RIB, O.,

XXIV

Worlds Poultry Congress 5 - 9

August - 2012 Salvador - Bahia - Brazil

AFONSO, A., AIASSA, E., HAVE, P., CORREIA, S., DE

MASSIS, F., GRUDNIK T. and SERRATOSA, J. (2008)
Risk assessment in animal welfare EFSA approach.
AATEX 14, Special Issue, March 31.
NOORDHUIZEN, J.P.T.M., KREMER W.D.J. and JORRITSMA,
H. (2000) Quality (health) risk assessment through
HACCP application on dairy farms. In: BLOKHUIS, H.
J. EKKEL D.D. and WECHSLER B. (Eds.), Improving
health and welfare in animal production. Wageningen
Pers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
RIB, ORIOL and HARRY BLOKHUIS (2012) Risk
assessment methodology and identification of
animal-based indicators to assess animal welfare at
farm level. In: JAKOBSSON C. (Ed.), Ecosystem health
and sustainable agriculture 1. Sustainable agriculture.
The Baltic University Programme, Uppsala University,
Uppsala, Sweden.
ROE, E. and BULLER, H. (2008) Marketing farm animal
welfare. Welfare Quality factsheet. Wageningen, the
Netherlands: Welfare Quality.
VAN REENEN, C.G., T.H. MEUWISSEN, H. HOPSTER, K.
OLDENBROEK, T.H. KRUIP and BLOKHUIS, H.J. (2001)
Transgenesis may affect farm animal welfare: a case
for systematic risk assessment. Journal Animal Science
79:1763-1779.

Harry J. Blokhuis

VON BORELL, E., BOCKISCHB, F.J., BSCHERC, W.,

HOYD, S., KRIETERE, J., MLLERF, C., PARVIZIG, N.,
RICHTERH, T., RUDOVSKYC, A., SUNDRUMI A. and
VAN DEN WEGHE, H. (2001) Critical control points
for on-farm assessment of pig housing. Livestock
Production Science 72:177-184.
WELFARE QUALITY (2009a) Welfare Quality assessment
protocol for pigs. Welfare Quality, Consortium,
Lelystad, Netherlands.
WELFARE QUALITY (2009b) Welfare Quality assessment
protocol for poultry. Welfare Quality, Consortium,
Lelystad, Netherlands.
WELFARE QUALITY (2009c) Welfare Quality assessment
protocol for cattle. Welfare Quality, Consortium,
Lelystad, Netherlands.

Area: Poultry Welfare and Environment August 06