Next Article in Journal
Assessment of Cover Crop Management Strategies in Nebraska, US
Next Article in Special Issue
Addressing Animal Welfare through Collaborative Stakeholder Networks
Previous Article in Journal
The Influence of Chemical, Organic and Biological Fertilizers on Agrobiological and Antioxidant Properties of Syrian Cephalaria (Cephalaria Syriaca L.)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Behaviour and Skin Injuries of Piglets Originating from a Novel Group Farrowing System Before and After Weaning

Labelling as a Tool for Improving Animal Welfare—The Pig Case

Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, Blichers Alle 20, DK8830 Tjele, Denmark
Friedrich-Loeffler Institute, Institute of Animal Welfare and Husbandry, 29223 Celle, Germany
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2019, 9(6), 123;
Received: 14 May 2019 / Revised: 8 June 2019 / Accepted: 10 June 2019 / Published: 13 June 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Farm Animal Welfare)
Market-based promotion of animal welfare has become increasingly important in the EU. Retailers in several countries have implemented graded animal welfare labels for a variety of animal-based products. In this paper, we use labels for pork as a case study and investigate which aspects of animal welfare are promoted by pig welfare labels; we further discuss to what extent labels address the major welfare problems observed in European pig production. Consumers generally focus on aspects of animal welfare related to naturalness, such as outdoor access, straw, and duration of suckling period. Animal welfare labels often address these aspects in addition to other welfare aspects that are of interest to the consumer, such as space, mutilations, confinement, and access to roughage. Major welfare problems such as piglet mortality and weaner diarrhoea are not directly addressed by pig welfare labels. As pig welfare labels often require intact tails, it will also be relevant to address the risk of tail biting and tail lesions. Pig welfare labels, in general, do not use animal-based measures; rather, they are resource-based measures, while animal-based measures are more directly related to animal welfare. Animal-based measures are more difficult and expensive to use in a certification system than resource-based ones. In addition, animal-based measures may be more difficult to communicate to consumers. However, inclusion of animal-based measures would improve reproducibility of labels across production systems and provide documentation on actual levels of major animal welfare problems. View Full-Text
Keywords: animal welfare labelling; pig welfare animal welfare labelling; pig welfare
MDPI and ACS Style

Sørensen, J.T.; Schrader, L. Labelling as a Tool for Improving Animal Welfare—The Pig Case. Agriculture 2019, 9, 123.

AMA Style

Sørensen JT, Schrader L. Labelling as a Tool for Improving Animal Welfare—The Pig Case. Agriculture. 2019; 9(6):123.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sørensen, Jan T., and Lars Schrader. 2019. "Labelling as a Tool for Improving Animal Welfare—The Pig Case" Agriculture 9, no. 6: 123.

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Back to TopTop