In the social debate about animal welfare we can identify three different views about how animals should be raised and how their welfare should be judged: (1) the view that animals should be raised under conditions that promote good biological functioning in the sense of health, growth and reproduction, (2) the view that animals should be raised in ways that minimise suffering and promote contentment, and (3) the view that animals should be allowed to lead relatively natural lives. When attempting to assess animal welfare, different scientists select different criteria, reflecting one or more of these value-dependent views. Even when ostensibly covering all three views, scientists may differ in what they treat as inherently important versus only instrumentally important, and their selection of variables may be further influenced by a desire to use measures that are scientifically respected and can be scored objectively. Value assumptions may also enter animal welfare assessment at the farm and group level (1) when empirical data provide insufficient guidance on important issues, (2) when we need to weigh conflicting interests of different animals, and (3) when we need to weigh conflicting evidence from different variables. Although value assumptions cannot be eliminated from animal welfare assessment, they can be made more explicit as the first step in creating animal welfare assessment tools. Different value assumptions could lead to different welfare assessment tools, each claiming validity within a given set of assumptions.

When individual vertebrates loose grip on their life conditions stress symptoms appear and their welfare becomes problematic. Present day research supports the view that stress can originate when an organism experiences a substantial reduction of predictability and/or controllability (PIC) of relevant events. Behavioural (conflict and disturbed behaviour) and physiological (neuro-endocrine and autonomic processes) aspects of a reduction of PIC are reviewed. The highly dynamic patterns of the homeostatic mechanisms activated during stress make it difficult to deduce any simple relationship between stress and welfare.

A list of relevant stress symptoms has been presented, all of which indicate some stage of serious welfare problems. Their occurrence should never be typical of animals living in a farm, laboratory or zoo housing system. However, if after all this is the case, such systems have to be corrected and replaced by more appropriate ones as soon as possible.

Male piglets are castrated primarily to prevent the unpleasant odours and flavours of entire male pig meat (boar-taint). Although castration can be legally performed without analgesia in the first seven days of life, available evidence shows that castration at any age is painful and may have a detrimental influence on health. Few anaesthetics or analgesics are licensed for use in piglets. The known methods for general and epidural anaesthesia cannot be run at the farm level for practical and/or legal reasons. Use of the local anaesthetic lidocaine is easy and allows the pain resulting from castration to be alleviated. Local destruction of testicular tissue by intra-testicular injection of chemical compounds (salts and acids) is an alternative to surgical castration but needs further investigation regarding welfare improvement and boar taint reduction. Immunocastration, by which castration is achieved using active immunisation (anti–GnRH immunisation) is an efficient alternative to surgical castration; however, there are no licensed vaccines in the EU and the consequences, in terms of pig welfare as well as its acceptability among EU consumers, need further evaluation.

Animal welfare is of increasing significance for European consumers and citizens. Previously, agricultural production focused mainly on supply, price and competition but consumers now expect their food to be produced and processed with greater respect for the welfare of the animals. Food quality is therefore determined by the welfare status of the animals from which it was produced as well as the nature and safety of the end product. Thus, practical welfare improvement strategies and reliable on-farm monitoring systems for assessing the animals’ welfare status and evaluating potential risks are urgently required to accommodate societal concerns and market demands. It is also of paramount importance to define the kind of information that consumers want about the final products and to develop effective strategies for communicating welfare standards to the public. Generating an intensified dialogue with all factions of society on welfare issues as well as appropriate labelling of animal products and farming systems that offer guarantees about welfare issues and production conditions will, in turn, promote transparency and the societal sustainability of European agriculture. Welfare is multidimensional. It cannot be measured directly but only inferred from external parameters. Therefore, the integration of the most appropriate specialist expertise in Europe is essential to develop, refine, standardise and intercalibrate welfare monitoring systems and to identify and validate remedial measures. We must establish a European standard for welfare assessment systems in order to facilitate intra-European trade and marketing. Only then can we harmonise labelling that is informative and relevant to all European consumers.

In conceptualizing animal welfare, it is useful to distinguish among three types of concepts. ‘Type 1” are single, measurable attributes. ‘Type 2’ are single attributes that cannot be measured directly but can be estimated by correctly combining various contributing attributes. ‘Type 3’ are concepts involving multiple attributes which are grouped together because they serve some common function, and whose relative importance cannot be established in an entirely objective way. Individuals who treat animal welfare as a type 1 concept may propose single, objective measures of welfare, such as longevity or levels of stress-related hormones; however, this approach rests on judgements, which are not purely objective, about the relative importance of different factors for an animal's quality of life. Studies of animal preferences and motivation are sometimes seen as an objective way to weight different attributes according to the animals’ own priorities, and thus allow animal welfare to be treated as a type 2 concept. However, numerous technical and fundamental difficulties limit our ability to do this. Animal welfare is best seen as a type 3 concept incorporating multiple attributes, with considerable consensus over certain general principles (eg that a high level of welfare implies freedom from suffering) but with value-related disagreement over how these principles should be applied. Because the various attributes cannot be combined in a purely objective way, science is limited in its ability to determine the ‘overall’ welfare of an animal and to compare welfare in disparate environments. Instead of attempting to ‘measure’ animal welfare, the role of science should be seen as identifying, rectifying and preventing welfare problems.

Human activities deprive wild animals of their life requisites by destroying or impoverishing their surroundings, causing suffering of individuals. Yet, the notion that animal welfare applies to wildlife has escaped many animal welfarists and conservationists. A well-accepted and applied ethical foundation for animal conservation that considers animal welfare is lacking. We address this by examining how worldviews of conservationists and animal welfarists are related. The clear conceptual link is that individuals within anthropogenically disturbed populations often endure suffering caused by humans. Accordingly, our objectives are to provide an overview of wildlife conservation, integrate ethical aspects of wildlife conservation and animal welfare, and encourage a ‘wildlife welfare’ ethic among conservationists. We describe the relationship between contemporary socioeconomic and environmental conditions and the impoverished status of North American wildlife. We then describe the ecological plight of large mammalian carnivores in North America. Finally, as a case study, we focus on the tenuous lives of grey wolves (Canis lupus) living in the midst of human-dominated landscapes. We conclude that the suffering wildlife endures because of humans is a collective responsibility that presents a moral imperative for animal welfarists and conservationists alike. Habitat destruction and impoverishment deprives species of life requisites, causing trauma, prolonged suffering, and eventually death. We suggest that a shared doctrine of animal welfare principles is needed, such as a modified version of the internationally recognised Five Freedoms. In essence, this would be an ethical affirmation for conservationists and animal welfarists.

A Delphi technique was used to gather the opinions of animal welfare experts on the most appropriate measures for welfare assessment of farm animals. The experts were asked to consider measures that were directed towards the animal (animal-based), rather than measurement of their environment. This systematic approach was designed to achieve a degree of consensus of opinion between a large number of experts. Two rounds of postal questionnaires were targeted at people with expertise in one or more of the species of interest. The respondents suggested measures based upon observations of health status, behaviour, and examination of records. These measures reflect the animal's welfare state — in other words, how the animal is coping within the environment and husbandry system in which it lives. The measures for cattle, pigs and laying hens were categorised into 22, 23 and 28 aspects, respectively, with the highest ranking of importance being given to observation of lameness in dairy cattle and pigs and to observation of feather condition in laying hens. This Delphi study was the basis for the development of a series of protocols to assess the welfare state of dairy cattle, pigs and laying hens.

A questionnaire survey of 385 UK-based university students was used to investigate whether there was an association between pet keeping in childhood and humane attitudes in young adulthood. Subjects gave detailed, retrospective reports of the pets they had kept during their childhoods, and a variety of attitude scales and open-ended questions were used to measure their current attitudes concerning the welfare of both animals and humans. Higher levels of childhood pet keeping were related to more positive attitudes towards pet animals and greater concerns about the welfare of non-pet animals and humans. Ethical food avoidance practices (eg vegetarianism); membership of animal welfare and environmental organizations were also found to be associated with pet keeping during childhood. Knowledge of the experiences that underlie existing variation in humane attitudes will greatly assist the development of more effective humane education programmes in the future.

Increasing litter size has long been a goal of pig (Sus scrofa domesticus) breeders and producers in many countries. Whilst this has economic and environmental benefits for the pig industry, there are also implications for pig welfare. Certain management interventions are used when litter size routinely exceeds the ability of individual sows to successfully rear all the piglets (ie viable piglets outnumber functional teats). Such interventions include: tooth reduction; split suckling; cross-fostering; use of nurse sow systems and early weaning, including split weaning; and use of artificial rearing systems. These practices raise welfare questions for both the piglets and sow and are described and discussed in this review. In addition, possible management approaches which might mitigate health and welfare issues associated with large litters are identified. These include early intervention to provide increased care for vulnerable neonates and improvements to farrowing accommodation to mitigate negative effects, particularly for nurse sows. An important concept is that management at all stages of the reproductive cycle, not simply in the farrowing accommodation, can impact on piglet outcomes. For example, poor stockhandling at earlier stages of the reproductive cycle can create fearful animals with increased likelihood of showing poor maternal behaviour. Benefits of good sow and litter management, including positive human-animal relationships, are discussed. Such practices apply to all production situations, not just those involving large litters. However, given that interventions for large litters involve increased handling of piglets and increased interaction with sows, there are likely to be even greater benefits for management of hyper-prolific herds.

Dogs can be held temporarily or permanently in kennels for a number of reasons, not necessarily for their own benefit. Although restrictive environments have been associated with poor welfare, priorities for research and change cannot be understood unless the various aspects of the kennel environment are appreciated separately. This review critically evaluates the experimental research regarding the physical, social, sensory, occupational, nutritional and psychological aspects of the kennel environment and their effects on canine welfare, with a view to providing a consolidated report on our current state of knowledge on this subject. However, the lack of within-dog, single manipulations and a focus on quantitative measures affects the ability to make valid conclusions about the welfare benefits of several aspects, including social housing, kennel size and location. Despite these criticisms, the evidence for the positive benefits of group housing is strong. There is also considerable evidence for the benefits of positive human contact particularly on sociability and stress responses in other situations. Surprisingly few studies have looked at other forms of enrichment and even less have considered the potential for the kennel to be over-stimulating in an auditory, olfactory and visual sense. Such topics are suggested as priorities for further research, in addition to ways of minimising aggression in group housing and the effect of establishment of predictability on adjustment to kennelling.

This paper discusses the current state of development of on-farm cattle welfare assessment systems with special regard to the approach of Welfare Quality® that focuses on animal-related measures. The central criteria validity, reliability and feasibility are considered with regard to selected welfare measures. All welfare measures incorporated into the Welfare Quality® protocol possess face validity, but for most of them construct or criterion validity as, eg shown for lameness, have not been demonstrated. Exemplarily the cases of qualitative behaviour assessment and measurement of avoidance distance towards humans or social licking are discussed. Reliability issues have often been neglected in the past and require more thorough investigation and discussion in the future, especially with respect to appropriate test statistics and limits of acceptability. Means of improving reliability are the refinement of definitions or recording methods and training. Consistency of results over time requires further attention, especially if farms are to be certified, based on infrequent recordings. Considering feasibility, time constraints are the main concern for assessment systems that focus seriously on animal-based measures; currently they require several hours of on-farm recordings, eg about 6 h for a herd of 60 dairy cows. The Welfare Quality® project has promoted knowledge and discussion about validity, reliability and feasibility issues. Many welfare measures applied in the Welfare Quality® on-farm assessment approach can be regarded sufficiently valid, reliable and feasible. However, there are still a considerable number of challenges. They should be tackled while using the present assessment system in order to constantly improve it.

The assessment and improvement of animal welfare are the tasks and joint responsibility of many stakeholders involved in the agro-food chain. This paper first looks at the supply side of the chain, and presents different stakeholder views on farm animal welfare, discussing the potential for market differentiation, communication and labelling related to farm animal welfare standards. From the demand side, the paper then examines the duality that exists between citizens’ attitudes and consumer behaviour in relation to animal welfare and livestock products, and identifies distinct segments of citizens and consumers. Although the importance that citizens claim to attach to animal welfare seems relatively strong, consumers’ interest in information about animal welfare is only moderate compared to other product attributes, and the market shares of products with a distinct animal welfare identity remain small. The paper concludes that while there seems to be substantial consensus between supply chain stakeholders, citizens and consumers about what is relevant for achieving an acceptable level of farm animal welfare, the differentiation and satisfaction potential of increased animal welfare per se as a stand-alone product attribute seems limited to particular niche market segments. It argues that improved farm animal welfare is more likely be realised and valued by consumers when it is integrated within a broader concept of quality, such as quality assurance or sustainability schemes.

Selection for brachycephalic (foreshortened muzzle) phenotypes in dogs is a major risk factor for brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome (BOAS). Clinical signs include respiratory distress, exercise intolerance, upper respiratory noise and collapse. Efforts to combat BOAS may be constrained by a perception that it is ‘normal’ in brachycephalic dogs. This study aimed to quantify owner-perception of the clinical signs of BOAS as a veterinary problem. A questionnaire-based study was carried out over five months on the owners of dogs referred to the Queen Mother Hospital for Animals (QMHA) for all clinical services, except for Emergency and Critical Care. Owners reported the frequency of respiratory difficulty and characteristics of respiratory noise in their dogs in four scenarios, summarised as an ‘owner-reported breathing’ (ORB) score. Owners then reported whether their dog currently has, or has a history of, ‘breathing problems’. Dogs (n = 285) representing 68 breeds were included, 31 of which were classed as ‘affected’ by BOAS either following diagnostics, or by fitting case criteria based on their ORB score, skull morphology and presence of stenotic nares. The median ORB score given by affected dogs’ owners was 20/40 (range 8-30). Over half (58%) of owners of affected dogs reported that their dog did not have a breathing problem. This marked disparity between owners’ reports of frequent, severe clinical signs and their perceived lack of a ‘breathing problem’ in their dogs is of concern. Without appreciation of the welfare implications of BOAS, affected but undiagnosed dogs may be negatively affected indefinitely through lack of treatment. Furthermore, affected dogs may continue to be selected in breeding programmes, perpetuating this disorder.

The assumption that animals are conscious and capable of experiencing negative sensations and emotions is at the core of most people's concerns about animal welfare. Investigation of this central assumption should be one goal of animal welfare science. We argue that theory and techniques from cognitive science offer promising ways forward. Evidence for the existence of conscious and non-conscious cognitive processing in humans has inspired scientists to search for comparable processes in animals. In studies of metacognition and blindsight, some species show behaviour that has functional parallels with human conscious cognitive processing. Although unable to definitively answer the question of whether the animals are conscious, these studies provide fresh insights, and some could be adapted for domestic animals. They mark a departure from the search for cognitive complexity as an indicator of consciousness, which is based on questionable assumptions linking the two. Accurate assessment of animal emotion is crucial in animal welfare research, and cognitive science offers novel approaches that address some limitations of current measures. Knowledge of the relationship between cognition and emotion in humans generates a priori frameworks for interpreting traditional physiological and behavioural indicators of animal emotion, and provides new measures (eg cognitive bias) that gauge positive as well as negative emotions. Conditioning paradigms can be used to enable animals to indicate their emotional state through operant responses. Although evidence for animal consciousness and emotion will necessarily be indirect, insights from cognitive science promise further advances in our understanding of this fundamentally important area in animal welfare science.

Human factors (attitudes, personality traits, self-esteem, job satisfaction) strongly determine our behaviour towards animals, animal production and animal welfare. Recent studies have emphasised positive human contacts as indicators of a stockperson's positive attitude towards animals and towards animal welfare in general. Stockmanship can be improved by careful selection of people and/or by training. However, little is known of the biological basis of the effect of stock handling procedures on the welfare of animals. The animal's perception of the stockperson (based both on emotional responses and cognitive aspects such as anticipation, recognition and categorisation), and the existence of sensitive periods in an animal's life, need to be explored in more depth, especially under farm conditions. We need to consider the complexity of human behaviour (eg husbandry practices, balance between positive and negative interactions, predictability, controllability) and its effect on animal welfare from the animal's point of view throughout its whole life. This paper identifies the importance of positive human contacts for both animals and stockpeople, and highlights the challenge to maintain such positive contacts despite the trend in modern agriculture to increase the number of animals per stockperson. This requires better knowledge of animal genetics, socialisation to humans during sensitive periods, and management of the social group. We emphasise the ethical importance of the human-animal relationship in the context of farm animal welfare and productivity.

From 2012 onwards, all laying hens in Europe will need to be housed either in furnished cages or non-cage systems (aviaries or floor-housing systems). In terms of animal welfare, furnished cages and non-cage systems both have advantages and disadvantages. Data on direct comparisons between the two, however, are limited. The aim of this study was to carry out an on-farm comparison of laying hens’ welfare in furnished cages and non-cage systems. To meet this aim, six flocks of laying hens in furnished cages and seven flocks in non-cage systems (all without an outdoor run) were visited when hens were around 60 weeks of age and a number of measures were collected: behavioural observations, fearfulness, plumage and body condition, incidence of bone breaks, bone strength, TGI-score (or Animal Needs Index), dust levels and mortality. In non-cage systems, birds were found to be more active and made greater use of resources (scratching area, perches) than in furnished cages. These birds also had stronger bones and were less fearful than birds in furnished cages. On the other hand, birds in furnished cages had lower mortality rates, lower incidence of bone fractures and lower airborne dust concentrations. When all the welfare indicators were integrated into an overall welfare score, there were no significant differences between systems. These results indicate that furnished cages and non-cage systems have both strong and weak points in terms of their impact on animal welfare.

Assessing the experience of pain in animals is a difficult task, yet one that is important in animal welfare research. Some approaches to pain assessment in animals are reviewed here. General qualities of pain scales and specific parameters suitable for clinical and experimental pain assessments are discussed. It is argued that pain assessment will progress through an integration of objective and subjective observations of behaviour coupled with multiple measures in various other areas. Such multidimensional pain scales allow an adequate characterisation of the complexity of an individual animal's pain experience to be made. This knowledge improves the recognition and treatment of pain and will allow informed moral debate on the acceptability of practices such as castration and tail-docking of lambs.

An experiment was conducted to compare the effect of two levels of house stocking density (34kg m 2 and 40kg m’2) on broiler welfare and behaviour. The trial monitored 121 900 birds housed in eight flocks under commercial conditions and used a range of behavioural and productivity measures to assess welfare.

At the higher stocking density: i) the daily mortality was greater for part of the rearing period; ii) the incidence of leg problems, contact dermatitis and carcase bruising increased; Hi) the birds’ resting behaviour was increasingly disturbed; iv) locomotion and ground pecking decreased; and v) lying and preening patterns were affected, probably due to increased disruption by other birds.

Aspects of welfare were adversely affected at the higher stocking density. Further research is required to determine how stocking density affects welfare under different commercial conditions.

As adult cats can often be difficult to re-home, they may spend long periods in rescue shelters where barren housing and inconsistent handling can reduce their welfare. In this study, 165 adult cats in an animal shelter in Vancouver, Canada, were assigned to four treatments. The Basic Single treatment reflected typical conditions in that particular shelter, with cats handled in an inconsistent manner by various staff and housed singly in relatively barren cages. Three alternative treatments involved more consistent, positive handling by only the experimenter and research assistants, plus three housing conditions: Enriched Single (individual cages with opportunities to perch and hide), Basic Communal (group housing with opportunity for each cat to have personal space), and Enriched Communal (group housing enriched to encourage play and cat – cat interaction). The Basic Single treatment had the lowest percentage adopted in 21 days (45% versus 69-76% for other treatment, and higher stress scores than other treatments. The three alternative treatments did not differ significantly on any measure. Cats euthanised for poor health showed higher stress levels when alive than other cats. In a questionnaire, most adopters cited certain behavioural/emotional traits (‘friendly’, ‘playful’, ‘happy’) as reasons for selecting cats; these were generally associated with lower stress scores. The results suggest that consistent handling combined with a range of improved housing options can improve the chances of adoption for adult cats, perhaps by reducing fear-related behaviours that make cats less attractive to adopters.

Farm animal welfare has become an important issue for the European public, especially in the last two decades when a number of crises (eg Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Avian Influenza) have affected farm animal populations. Public concern about this issue led the European Union to fund the Welfare Quality® project. This project aimed to develop a protocol for assessing animal welfare on farms and at slaughter plants, to identify the main animal welfare problems, and to address possible welfare improvement strategies. In fulfilling these aims, the Welfare Quality® project incorporated inputs from both science and society. This was crucial, as the public perception of what constitutes ‘animal welfare’ sometimes differs from animal science-based definitions. Furthermore, these differences are often interwoven with broader variations in ethical- and value-based understandings about human/non-human animal relationships. This paper presents the steps that we adopted to establish a dialogue between science and society during the construction of the Welfare Quality® assessment protocols. This dialogue involved numerous interactions between animal scientists, social scientists and members of the public. These interactions took several forms, including: meetings, conferences, workshops, websites, newsletters, interviews, focus groups, and citizen and farmers juries. Here, we address four key moments within this dialogue: the development of the initial list of twelve welfare criteria; the consumer focus groups; the development of the Welfare Quality® scoring system; and the citizen juries. In particular, we focus on the results of the focus groups and citizen juries. The focus groups were conducted in France, Italy, Sweden, The Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Norway, and Hungary and the citizen juries were carried out in Italy, the United Kingdom, and Norway. Drawing on this research, we highlight the similarities and differences between societal understandings of farm animal welfare and the views of scientific experts. Furthermore, and crucially, we outline how the animal scientists took account of societal opinion when developing their farm animal welfare assessment tools.