Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark; Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark.
Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark.
Poult Sci. 2022 May;101(5):101806. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2022.101806. Epub 2022 Feb 25.
Two kinds of initiatives exist to ensure welfare in broiler production: welfare legislation, where all broiler production in a country or region must comply with legally defined welfare standards; and market driven initiatives, where part of the production must meet specific welfare standards and is sold with a particular label, typically at a price premium, or as part of minimum welfare standards defined by a retailer, a fast-food chain or the like. While the effects of national legislation may be undermined by price competition from lower welfare imported products, the effects of market driven initiatives may be limited by lack of willingness from consumers to pay the extra cost. To investigate how this works out in practice, we compared broiler welfare requirements in 5 European countries, Denmark, Germany, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Sweden, in 2018, by means of the Benchmark method. A number of welfare dimensions, covering the input features typically modified in broiler welfare initiatives, were defined. A total of 27 academic welfare experts (response rate 75%) valued the different levels within each dimension on a 0 to 10 scale, and then weighted the relative contribution of each dimension to overall welfare on a 1 to 5 scale. By combining these values and weights with an inventory of existing welfare initiatives, the additional welfare generated by each initiative was calculated. Together with information on national coverage of each initiative, the Benchmark score for each country's production and consumption of chicken meat was calculated. Sweden achieved a much higher Benchmark for national production due to higher legal standards than any of the four other countries. The Netherlands, on the other hand, achieved a Benchmark for national consumption of chicken at the same level as that found in Sweden, because market driven initiatives complemented more welfare-limited Dutch legislation. So, despite some uncertainties in the Benchmark method, it appears that market driven initiatives can have a strong impact on improving broiler welfare, building on those standards achieved by animal welfare legislation.
一种是福利立法,要求一个国家或地区的所有肉鸡生产都必须符合法律规定的福利标准;另一种是市场驱动的举措,要求部分生产必须符合特定的福利标准,并贴上特定标签进行销售,通常以溢价出售,或者作为零售商、快餐连锁店等定义的最低福利标准的一部分。虽然国家立法的影响可能会被来自福利水平较低的进口产品的价格竞争所削弱,但市场驱动的举措的效果可能会受到消费者不愿意支付额外费用的限制。为了研究这在实践中是如何运作的,我们在 2018 年使用基准方法比较了丹麦、德国、英国、荷兰和瑞典这 5 个欧洲国家的肉鸡福利要求。定义了一些福利维度,涵盖了肉鸡福利举措中通常会修改的输入特征。共有 27 名福利方面的学术专家(响应率为 75%)对每个维度的不同级别进行了 0 到 10 的评分,然后对每个维度对整体福利的相对贡献进行了 1 到 5 的加权。通过将这些值和权重与现有的福利举措清单相结合,计算出每个举措所产生的额外福利。再加上关于每个举措在全国范围内的覆盖信息,就可以计算出每个国家的鸡肉生产和消费的基准得分。由于法律标准较高,瑞典在国家生产方面的基准得分远远高于其他四个国家。另一方面,荷兰在国家消费方面的基准得分与瑞典相同,因为市场驱动的举措补充了福利水平较低的荷兰立法。因此,尽管基准方法存在一些不确定性,但市场驱动的举措似乎可以对提高肉鸡福利产生重大影响,在动物福利立法所取得的标准基础上更进一步。