Clear all

34 results found

reorder grid_view

Poultry welfare: Prof. Zulkifli Idrus in conversation with Clive Phillips

October 6, 2023

Clive Phillips was Australia's first Professor of Animal Welfare, at the University of Queensland, and has written widely on the welfare of farm, zoo and companion animals. In 2022 he conducted a series of recorded dialogues (Conversations With Clive) with senior animal welfare scientists and academic experts, including poultry welfare expert Prof. Zulkifli Idrus - at the University of Putra, Malaysia.These dialogues are aimed at upskilling organizations concerned with farm animal welfare, helping them gain a more nuanced understanding of welfare issues from academics with deep knowledge of animal agriculture systems and direct experience of practices. Relevant academic publications and references are included at the end of the recording.Key topics of the 40-minute conversation from August 2023: 1) Clive introduces Zulkifli Idrus. 2) Red Junglefowl are the ancestors of modern chicken breeds. 3) Tonic immobility tests show modern commercial chicken breeds are less fearful than Junglefowl. 4) Biggest problems to broiler (meat) chicken welfare - rapid growth, leg and skin problems. 5) Cardiovascular problems and sudden-death syndrome. 6) Skin problems - contact dermatitis with breast, foot-pad and upper leg (hock) injuries. 7) Feed restriction methods to manage rapid growth rate in hot climates. 8) Harvesting and transportation issues. 9) Nutritional supplements such as probiotics and prebiotics to improve gut health. 10) Heat stress mitigation and future challenges with climate change. 11) Welfare issues concerning stocking densities and litter quality. 12) Welfare of layer chickens and other poultry. 13) Final comments.

Designing a "good life" for livestock: Could gene editing improve farm animal welfare in low- and middle- income countries?

September 6, 2023

Gene editing's successful application to benefit farm animals' welfare is unlikely in the short to medium term, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), given the high costs and low rates of success to date in research settings.Reasons: 1. Gene editing is biased toward outcomes that can be easily measured and assessed. More complex traits associated with animal welfare such as behavior or condition are less likely to be targeted using gene editing.  2. Gene editing has been designed for use in vertically integrated production systems as livestock breeding is centralized and breeds themselves are highly standardised in these systems. Many LMICs lack vertically integrated production systems, have higher numbers of smallholder farmers, lack investment by companies and NGOs to promote these technologies, lack gene editing researchers, and have limited local support for biotechnology research and training.Potential downsides of gene editing: 1. Where the intensification of livestock production is growing, gene editing is likely to further accelerate intensification and disadvantage farmers relying on less intensive production systems. 2. Genetic diversity across traditional breeds is valuable and should be maintained. It is not clear how gene editing could affect this diversity.There may be specific applications that could lead to improvements in animal welfare in certain LMICs, for example: 1. Using gene editing to bias sex ratios could be particularly valuable in India, given the country's extensive dairy industry. 2. Sex selection in layer hens in Egypt, given hens there are raised in an increasingly vertically integrated production system. 3. Producing polled cattle and eliminating the need for mechanical dehorning as currently occurs in many locales.Many farm animal welfare issues in LMICs are less likely to be addressed through applications of gene editing as opposed to lower technological measures such as better access to veterinary services, better management practices, improved biosecurity, and poverty reduction.

Effective Behaviour Change Strategies to Promote Meat Reduction in Brazil

September 6, 2023

Brazil's dietary landscape has a great deal of regional diversity, with meat playing a crucial role across many dishes and set against the backdrop of a complex social structure. Patterns of meat consumption vary significantly across the country, influenced by regional traditions, social disparities, and economic factors. Any strategies to promote meat consumption reduction in Brazil will need to be region-specific and tailored to the specific audience. Behavioral science research, primarily from wealthier Western nations, has found that there are many barriers for individuals in reducing their meat eating, such as the lack of dietary knowledge, strong cultural and social norms supporting meat consumption, misperceptions about the health benefits of meat, and resistance to trying new foods. The research also points to several promising strategies to promote a more plant-based diet.This report describes the COM-B model that brings together many theories of behavior change. It proposes that for change to occur, one needs: 1) Capability to carry out the action - physical (being able to do it) and psychological (having the right knowledge and knowing how to do it). 2) Opportunity to perform it - physical (having the right chance to do it ) and social (affected by what our peers think and say). 3) Motivation to do it - automatic (feeling like doing it) and reflective (deciding to do it).The report adapts the COM-B to provide practical advice on how to promote eating less meat for Brazil, giving examples applicable specifically to Brazil.Key lesson for frontline workers: One must define the precise behavior and specific audience to be influenced. Before taking any action, one should identify who (i.e., the specific population on whom one is going to focus), when one wants the reduction to occur (e.g., at home, away from home, only at dinner), how much of a reduction one wants to see. Do not go for "everyone in society".

Dairy cows welfare: Prof. John Webster in conversation with Clive Phillips

May 30, 2023

Clive Phillips was Australia's first Professor of Animal Welfare, at the University of Queensland, and has written widely on the welfare of farm, zoo and companion animals. In 2022-23 he conducted a series of recorded dialogues (Conversations With Clive) with senior animal welfare scientists and academic experts, including dairy cows welfare expert Prof. John Webster - Emeritus Professor at the University of Bristol.These dialogues are aimed at upskilling organizations concerned with farm animal welfare, helping them gain a more nuanced understanding of welfare issues from academics with deep knowledge of animal agriculture systems and direct experience of practices. Relevant academic publications and references are included at the end of the recording.Key topics of the 40-minutes conversation from April 2023: 1) Clive introduces John Webster. 2) Early research opportunities and interest in farm animal welfare. 3) The "5 Freedoms". 4) Metabolism, nutrition, and genetic selection of dairy cows. 5) Lameness. 6) Cold and heat stress. 7) Housing and grazing, and freedom of choice for cows. 8) Mastitis. 9) Electronic collars. 10) Calf/cow separation, calf pneumonia and corticosteriods. 11) Sexed semen and artificial insemination. 12) Final comments.

Dairy production in India: Animal welfare implications and public perceptions

March 8, 2023

TOPIC ONE: Dairy consumption in India. Key points: 1) India is the world's largest dairy consumer. 2) Fluid milk and ghee makes up 3/4 of all dairy products consumed. 3) India's growing population, affluence, demographic changes, and liberalized trade policies are expected to contribute to increased dairy demand.TOPIC TWO: Dairy production in India. Key points: 1) Launched in 1970, Operation Flood spread the cooperative dairy model throughout India and vastly increased dairy production. 2) Today, India is world's largest milk producer with more than 80 million farmers and 500 million cattle. 3) Both cattle and buffalo are raised for milk production but productivity per animal is very low. 4) Most dairy farms are very small, but large commercial dairies are increasing. 5) Most dairy goes through unorganized markets; organized sector consist of cooperatives and private companies.TOPIC THREE: How animal welfare is assessed on dairy farms, and the major dairy animal welfare challenges in India. Key points: 1) Size of a farm is not associated with welfare status of the animals on that farm. 2) Most animal welfare challenges faced by dairy animals in India relate to lack of basic animal care, poor/uncomfortable housing, tethering and abandonment. 3) As dairy production in India intensifies, animal welfare will likely improve, but new animal welfare issues will emerge.TOPIC FOUR: India's unique socio-cultural context and how this shapes public debate about dairy cattle welfare. Key points: 1) Cattle has sacred status. 2) India is home to the D'harmic religions which place high value on the principle of non-harm to animals (Ahimsa). 3) Cattle slaughter is banned or restricted in many states, leading farmers to abandon unproductive cattle. 4) Indians appear divided on the implications of intensified dairy farming for animal welfare.TOPIC FIVE: Recommendations for front-line persons interested in the animal welfare implications of the Indian dairy sector. 1) Prioritize public outreach to most receptive demographic (younger, educated, affluent, females, pet owners). 2) Conduct pilot studies to benchmark dairy animal welfare and actual consumer demand for animal-friendly products. 3) Organize symposia where farmers, dairy scientists, animal ethicists and religious authorities can discuss relationship between dairy farming, animal welfare, and religion in India. 4) Focus on animal welfare issues, not farm size/type.

Eek! What the chick: Addressing the issues of industrial poultry in Egypt

January 6, 2023

With the rise of a corporate agri-food system in Egypt since the 1980s, the country's industrial poultry production has increased dramatically. This report focuses on two main concerns with Egypt's corporate poultry industry.First issue: Endemic avian flu virus. It recurs in the country every flu season, killing millions upon millions of birds and some humans too. One of the authorities' key containment measures had been mass cullings of "household"/"cottage" chickens which were assumed to have spread the virus. But the assumption is false. The virus had actually moved from industrial facilities to households. Industrial firms not only were saved, they further consolidated as smaller farms were decimated by the mass cullings.Second issue: Government food subsidies. The poultry industry and red meat producers/importers have benefited from the food (non-bread) subsidy system. And a growing percentage of imported grains and other foods are used to feed animals and for food processing (i.e. industrial uses) rather than for direct human consumption only.To deal with these issues: 1. Take action to weaken the corporate poultry industry and its ability to pass on infected birds (and the virus) to other poultry operators through its value chain. Advocate for government restrictions on sale of birds from large-scale breeding facilities. 2. Do not end food subsidies (in spite of calls to do so). But instead replace the subsidy on poultry with a producer and consumer subsidy on fava beans - an indigenous, protein-rich plant food. This would diversify protein sources in Egyptian diets.

Cattle welfare: Prof. Temple Grandin in conversation with Clive Phillips

January 4, 2023

Clive Phillips was Australia's first Professor of Animal Welfare, at the University of Queensland, and has written widely on the welfare of farm, zoo and companion animals. In 2022 he conducted a series of recorded dialogues (Conversations With Clive) with senior animal welfare scientists and academic experts, including cattle welfare expert Temple Grandin - a faculty member with Animal Sciences in the College of Agricultural Sciences at Colorado State University.These dialogues are aimed at upskilling organizations concerned with farm animal welfare, helping them gain a more nuanced understanding of welfare issues from academics with deep knowledge of animal agriculture systems and direct experience of practices. Relevant academic publications and references are included at the end of the recording.Key topics of the 45-minutes conversation from November 2022: 1) What's important for cattle. 2) Feedlots. 3) Rangeland and pasture systems. 4) Semi-intensive systems. 5) Transport. 6) Slaughter. 7) Calving. 8) Pain relief. 9) Stewardship of the land. 10) The future.

Pig welfare: Prof. Donald Broom in conversation with Clive Phillips

January 4, 2023

Clive Phillips was Australia's first Professor of Animal Welfare, at the University of Queensland, and has written widely on the welfare of farm, zoo and companion animals. In 2022 he conducted a series of recorded dialogues (Conversations With Clive) with senior animal welfare scientists and academic experts, including pig welfare expert Donald Broom - Colleen Macleod Professor of Animal Welfare (Emeritus) in the Centre for Animal Welfare and Anthrozoology within the Department of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Cambridge.These dialogues are aimed at upskilling organizations concerned with farm animal welfare, helping them gain a more nuanced understanding of welfare issues from academics with deep knowledge of animal agriculture systems and direct experience of practices. Relevant academic publications and references are included at the end of the recording.Key topics of the 38-minutes conversation from April 2022: 1) Pigs are bright, social animals. 2) Pigs' living condition and confinement is currently the worst pig welfare problem. 3) Changes in pig rearing practices. 4) Farrowing crates and alternatives. 5) Free range outdoor pigs. 6) Slaughtering many animals during disease outbreaks. 7) Problems with rearing piglets (castrations, tail-docking, etc.) 8) Consumers want pigs to be less confined. 9) Transporting pigs. 10) The future.

Sheep welfare: Prof. Cathy Dwyer in conversation with Clive Phillips

December 27, 2022

Clive Phillips was Australia's first Professor of Animal Welfare, at the University of Queensland, and has written widely on the welfare of farm, zoo and companion animals. In 2022 he conducted a series of recorded dialogues (Conversations With Clive) with senior animal welfare scientists and academic experts, including sheep welfare expert Cathy Dwyer - Professor in Animal Behaviour and Welfare at the University of Edinburgh, and Director of the Jeanne Marchig International Centre for Animal Welfare Education (JMICAWE).These dialogues are aimed at upskilling organizations concerned with farm animal welfare, helping them gain a more nuanced understanding of welfare issues from academics with deep knowledge of animal agriculture systems and direct experience of practices. Relevant academic publications and references are included at the end of the recording.Key topics of the 35-minutes conversation from March 2022: 1) Smallholder sheep farming is important for livelihoods in lower and middle-income countries. 2) Are extensive systems free from welfare problems? 3) Are sheep looked after better in advanced countries? 4) Fewer new sheep farmers. 5) Fly strike. 6) Tail docking. 7) Shearing is major welfare challenge. 8) Castration of male lambs. 9) Long distance live transport's many problems. 10) Looking ahead: Sheep's multiple roles from wool, milk, to land conservation. 11) Sheep farming in the UK.

Selling industrial "gallina criolla" products in Guatemala: Implications for consumers, producers, heritage, and biodiversity

December 27, 2022

The term gallina criolla used in this report refers to chickens that are the heritage of the peasant and indigenous peoples of Guatemala. The report differentiates gallina criolla from industrial chicken to make clear the distinction between the two extremes of chicken production in Guatemala and to highlight the problematic use of certain words and images in food marketing in the country.Many Guatemalans have transitioned from occasionally eating gallina criolla (produced with agroecological practices) to regularly consuming broiler chickens from industrial farms. This change has not been random. It has been promoted by politicians as well as poultry businesses.But the chicken industry's main competitor in Guatemala has always been and continues to be gallina criolla. Many Guatemalans, especially indigenous and peasant people, continue to consume gallina criolla. As a result, global food companies have begun offering their own industrial product lines of "gallina criolla" fresh chicken, consommes, and instant soups.This report details these new corporate marketing tactics of competing with gallina criolla. It explains and illustrates how recent company efforts to sell industrial "gallina criolla" products using words and images associated with the production systems of indigenous and peasant peoples are misleading because these products contain only industrial chicken. By claiming to be "gallina criolla," the commercial products may misleadingly convince consumers to eat unalike industrial substitutes. The case of industrial "gallina criolla" products in Guatemala is one example of how global food businesses expand into local markets around the world.The report ends by detailing how people in other countries have resisted similar corporate appropriation of existing agrarian and cultural symbols to sell unalike industrial products. Possible actions that could be taken in Guatemala include the brands voluntarily revising their marketing practices, consumers boycotting the products, or legal defenders challenging the companies in courts using the country's misleading advertising laws. 

The role of major retailers and supermarkets in the transition from industrial animal agriculture to alternative proteins in low- and middle-income countries: The case of Brazil

December 15, 2022

This report analyzes how supermarkets in Brazil promote plant-based "meat" compared with animal-based products. It also compares plant-based products coming from companies that also offer meat (i.e. meat processing companies) with products from companies that only manufacture plant-based products (plant-based "exclusive" firms).The findings are as follows: 1. Plant-based meat is less widely available in supermarkets than animal meat. 2. Plant-based meat is significantly more expensive than animal meat. 3. Animal products are more often promoted through price reduction and multi-buy offers than their plant-based analogues. 4. Products from plant-based exclusive firms have higher prices, more fragmented availability, and lower discounts compared with plant-based products from meat processor companies. To discourage the production and consumption of meat in Brazil (a country that is the world's top producer and consumer of industrial meat), and encourage the transition to alternative protein products, one should:1. Increase the availability of plant-based products in supermarkets. 2. Lower plant-based meat prices. 3.Increase the presence of smaller and purely plant-based companies in retail outlets. 4. Reduce the promotion of animal meat products. To achieve the above outcomes, one should: 1. Reach out to retailers (e.g. to propose that they make alternative protein products more visible and available). 2. Invest in research (e.g. to find alternative protein sources that have cheaper ingredients). 3. Raise consumer awareness of the benefits of plant-based products and the importance of plant-based exclusive firms. 4. Empower smaller and plant-based exclusive firms. 5. Reach out to policymakers (e.g. for financial support for plant-based meat research, for transferring subsidies away from animal meat, for strengthening alternative protein sector's entrepreneurial ecosystem).

The politics of milk: Examining claims about dairy in China

November 30, 2022

This report focuses on three key claims driving the huge growth in recent decades in the production and consumption of dairy products in China – a country that historically had low level of interest in these products.These claims are problematic because they "change the subject" and deflect criticism. They steer attention away from the fact that most of the benefits from increased production and consumption of industrialized dairy products in China flow to a tiny minority. They close off encouragements to develop food systems that are more diverse, more regionally self-sufficient, and less highly processed.These claims are made frequently by dairy industry executives, government officials, investors, and even civil society organizations. They are also widely repeated in mainstream and alternative media sources.Claim 1: Dairy is cheap. Implications: Food calories need to be affordable; one should promote calorie-dense foods and reduce their prices. Problem: Hidden costs (government subsidies, negative social and ecological impacts) are left out and not included in retail prices.Claim 2: Dairy is nutritious. Implications: Specific nutrients, particularly protein, are needed for human health and should be promoted. Problem: The claim leaves out negative health impacts of increased consumption of dairy products particularly in ultraprocessed form, and the fact that deficiency of protein is relatively uncommon in China.Claim 3: Rising consumer incomes are increasing demand for dairy. Implications: Domestic production and imports should be increased to meet this demand. Problem: The claim leaves out the substantial role of marketing efforts for shaping and reshaping purchasing behaviors to benefit the largest firms and their investors.