Meat - Facing the Dilemmas

Meat: the challengeAnimalsGood animal welfare must be our starting pointRuth LaytonA wise colleague once pointed out that“poverty is sustainable”. So is poor animalwelfare. As sustainability storms up thepolicy agenda, animals are all too often lefton the margins.Our job at the Food Animal Initiative(FAI) is to design, implement and promotesustainable food production systems basedon good animal welfare. We talk about the‘three Es’ for sustainable food productionsystems: they should be Ethical, look afterthe Environment and be Economicallyviable. By ethical we (and the Oxford EnglishDictionary) mean doing the right thing, andthat means the right thing for animals aswell as for people.This is no mean task, so let’s put it inperspective. In 2006, world-wide, 24million pigs, 884 million poultry, six millioncattle and 17 million sheep and goats wereslaughtered for human consumption – everyweek. That amounts to an annual globalmeat production of 276 million tonnes. Thisis expected to rise to 465 million tonnes by2050.Poverty is sustainable. Sois poor animal welfareGlobally, eight percent of meat productionis from grassland-based systems of beef andsheep (ruminants), compared to 46 percentfrom the landless or intensive productionof pigs and poultry. To cope with increaseddemand for meat and other livestockproducts, livestock production is rapidlyshifting from grassland-based systemstowards more intensive landless productionof pigs and poultry. Over the decade to2001/3, pig meat output rose by 30 percentat world level, with the increase accounted foralmost entirely by Asia. The total productionof poultry meat grew by around 75 percent,again with the greatest expansion in Asia.In contrast, over the same period, ruminantproduction rose by 12.5 percent. This shifttowards landless production is contrary towhat FAI views as the most sustainable wayforward for food production, which is a moveto mixed agriculture that allows animal andcrop production to benefit from each other.Our approach is based on understandingthe animal first and designing the systemaround this knowledge. We championanimals because their voice, though wellheardthrough animal welfare organisations,cannot be acted upon unless alternative highwelfare systems are provided and promoted.We encourage farmers, industry partnersand NGOs to understand what we call the‘sustainable potential’ of a system and toput their energy into developing systemswhich have good sustainable potential asthis makes business sense in the long term.This concept of sustainable potential is oftendifficult to embrace for large producerswhose livelihoods have evolved aroundsystems which have no sustainable potentialbut which are enjoying considerable currentsuccess.A system with sustainable potential hasto take care of people, animals and theenvironment whilst being economicallyviable. So, in animal welfare terms, suchsystems as the conventional battery cage orthe farrowing crate are not an option. Scienceprovides us with overwhelming evidence thatthese systems do not and will not provide forthe needs of the animals involved. Althoughthe major food buyers are increasingly awareof this evidence, the major driver for themove away from systems such as ‘crates andcages’ is that a significant proportion of theircustomers tell them they do not want foodfrom these systems.There are increasing examples of producersmoving to systems with better welfarepotential, such as free range eggs and porkproduced from outdoor systems (whichdo not use farrowing crates), and there isa growing demand for pork from pigs thathave not had their tails docked.If we measure some of the high animalwelfare-potential systems – free rangeegg production being a good example – interms of a specific welfare outcome such asmortality, the system would often compareless favourably than a cage system. However,with scientific knowledge and best practicehusbandry techniques, we can reachthe full high animal welfare-potential ofsystems such as free range. By contrast, theconfinement of a conventional cage meansthat birds will never be able to move about,investigate their environment and engage inactivities important to them.Once producers move tohigh-welfare systems theydon’t want to turn backThe burning question is whether highanimal welfare-potential systems also havesustainable potential in terms of economics,people and the environment? The shortanswer is that the proof of systems likefree range lies in their growing marketshare. Anecdotal evidence tells us that onceproducers make the move to these systems,they don’t want to turn back – the foodthey produce is as safe and often bettereating quality. The environmental debate, ofcourse, rages. Our work at FAI shows thatsuch systems are the most environmentallysustainable as they have the potential to beintegrated into mixed agricultural systemswhere animals and crops are grown side byside for the benefit of all.Ruth Layton is a veterinarysurgeon. She is a founder andDirector of the Food AnimalInitiative and currently sits on theFarm Animal Welfare Council,which advises governmenton matters relating toanimal welfareruth.layton@faifarms.co.ukwww.foodethicscouncil.org | Volume 2 Issue 4 | Winter 2007 07