|
|
| Indicators for welfare assessment
|
 |
|
Criteria that should
be applicable to any assessment scheme are presented, based on existing
'best evidence' from the scientific literature, and supported by
scientifically robust logic. The principles of integration of
indicators into a coherent assessment scheme, as well as techniques for
benchmarking, are briefly discussed.
|
|
| Criteria of
the assessment protocol |
|
The
generic characteristics described below should be applied to any
practical protocol. |
|
- |
Practicality |
|
- |
Representativeness |
|
- |
Non-intrusiveness |
|
- |
Robustness |
| Science-based
assessment approaches |
|
There
has been a
growing need for practically-based farm assessment tools worldwide;
this can partly be attributed to increased public awareness of welfare,
which has led to the development of farm assurance schemes. The
application of scientific approaches is important as, by applying
relevant techniques, it can help reduce bias and increase the degree of
objective measurement.
|
|
Scientific
understanding of welfare is at a relatively early stage of
development.There is no
'Gold Standard' measure of welfare assessment, which can be used to
validate new measures or approaches. On the other hand, this
is a
dynamic field of study and there have been numerous developments and
advances in the past decennia. The following topics are discussed: |
|
- |
Validity and reliability |
|
- |
Comparison of approaches |
|
- |
Integration of measures |
On-farm
assessment methodology for use in New Zealand
|
|
This
section addresses some of the more logistical issues related to the
assessments. The points below illustrate
a number of the issues that were discussed by the project team. |
|
- |
Objectives
and approach |
|
- |
On-farm
assessment protocols |
|
|
> |
Farm details, background and management |
|
|
> |
Detailed assessment protocols |
|
|
> |
Deriving the overall outcomes |
|
- |
'Welfare
profiles' of farms |
| Indicators
for on-farm assessment of
welfare in New Zealand |
|
The
objective was to generate a list of indicators which weree discussed in
the stakeholder workshops to eventually give rise
to the actual proposed on-farm assessment protocols. Although
there is considerable variability between the philosophies, approaches
and implementation of
welfare assessment structures, the elements covered by
these are comparable to a high degree.
Generally, the regulatory documents make provision for minimum
standards;
they present the assessment indicators per element of husbandry or
management, discussing specific items per production group as required.
In contrast, the assurance approach of welfare organisations
is
formulated by the Five Freedoms framework, discussing each Freedom in
turn and how it should be assessed across the production unit. The
self-audit protocols have a strong emphasis
on recording of observations and practical, hands-on inspection. The
following elements are universally covered. |
|
- |
Feed
and water |
|
|
> |
Quantity, frequency and delivery |
|
|
> |
Monitoring by the producer |
|
- |
Housing
and shelter |
|
- |
Provision
of husbandry |
|
|
> |
General aspects of management |
|
|
> |
Elective procedures |
|
|
> |
Stockmanship |
|
- |
Disease
prevention and the alleviation of suffering |
|
|
> |
Inspection and monitoring |
|
|
> |
Provision of health care |
|
|
> |
Pre-transport selection
|
|
|
> |
Euthanasia |
|
- |
Quality
management |
|
|
> |
Quality assurance |
|
|
> |
Record-keeping requirements and procedures |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
