Dawkins Marian Stamp
Department of Biology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3SZ, UK.
Animals (Basel). 2023 Mar 8;13(6):988. doi: 10.3390/ani13060988.
Despite the many scientific objections that have been raise to it, 'natural behaviour' is widely used as an indication of good welfare by the food industry. The supposed link between welfare and natural behaviour derives, however, from a now outdated view of animals becoming frustrated if they cannot perform their natural instinctive behaviour. On the 60th anniversary of its publication, Niko Tinbergens' Four Questions framework is used to show why there is no necessary link between natural behaviour and welfare and why, therefore, reliance on natural behaviour in commercial farming may not result in the claimed improvements in welfare. Used on its own without supporting evidence, 'natural behaviour' lacks the most essential criterion for good welfare- There are now a number of well-established methods for demonstrating what animals value, including choice tests and, particularly, what animals will work and pay a cost to obtain. Some of the evidence on what animals value is already available in published papers but some will require collaborative research between scientists and commercial farming to find practical and commercially viable ways of providing animals with what they value.
尽管已经有许多科学上的反对意见,但“自然行为”仍被食品行业广泛用作良好福利的指标。然而,福利与自然行为之间所谓的联系,源于一种现已过时的观点,即如果动物不能表现出其自然本能行为,就会变得沮丧。在尼科·廷伯根的《四问》框架发表60周年之际,本文用它来说明为什么自然行为与福利之间没有必然联系,以及为什么因此,在商业养殖中依赖自然行为可能不会带来所宣称的福利改善。如果没有支持性证据,仅使用“自然行为”缺乏衡量良好福利的最基本标准。现在有一些成熟的方法来证明动物重视什么,包括选择测试,特别是动物会为了获得某种东西而付出努力和代价。关于动物重视什么的一些证据已经发表在论文中,但有些证据需要科学家和商业养殖者合作研究,以找到切实可行且商业上可行的方法,为动物提供它们所重视的东西。