五域模型在动物福利食物链管理中的应用:机遇与制约

IF 2.1 Q1 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE Frontiers in animal science Pub Date : 2023-06-09 DOI:10.3389/fanim.2023.1042733
N. Beausoleil, J. Swanson, D. McKeegan, C. Croney, L. Keeling, T. Collins, A. Dalmau, P. Sandøe
{"title":"五域模型在动物福利食物链管理中的应用:机遇与制约","authors":"N. Beausoleil, J. Swanson, D. McKeegan, C. Croney, L. Keeling, T. Collins, A. Dalmau, P. Sandøe","doi":"10.3389/fanim.2023.1042733","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For businesses involved in animal production, ensuring high animal welfare standards has become the cornerstone of corporate social responsibility practices. Since animal welfare cannot be verified by consumers at the point of purchase, industry-led audits provide important assurance that animals used to produce food lived an acceptable quality of life and experienced a humane death. The Five Freedoms offer a simple tool to conceptualize the complex, multi-dimensional concept of animal welfare, and they have been widely adopted as a basic operational framework for compliance. However, the Five Freedoms are problematic in that they focus on the absence of negative welfare states, underemphasize the importance of positive experiences, are absolute, and represent a (mostly unattainable) ideal. The Five Domains model represents inter-related aspects of an animal’s welfare state, with four physical/functional domains used to infer likely mental experiences in the fifth domain. This model allows for consideration of both positive and negative affective experiences, recognizes degrees of welfare compromise, acknowledges that animals cannot be free from all negative experiences (and that indeed, some are essential for survival). Thus, the model better reflects current scientific understanding of animal welfare and – that ultimately, we are interested in how animals experience their lives. Nevertheless, caution is needed when inferring mental states, which can never be directly observed or measured, and hence the ultimate outcomes of the model’s application should be qualitative. Operationalization of the Five Domains offers several opportunities to improve the breadth and quality of welfare audits for production animals. The model can incorporate both resource/management- based and animal-based measures of welfare; the former reflect risks to animals’ welfare while the latter often provide direct information on the animal’s welfare state at the time of assessment. Existing welfare indicators may be linked to relevant mental states and evaluated accordingly, and new metrics may be scientifically identified. Importantly, the Five Domains structure demands scrutiny of the affective state consequences to animals of housing, handling, and husbandry procedures, and could improve the effectiveness of animal welfare training for auditors and stockpersons. Adoption of the Five Domains framework could facilitate improved communication about animal welfare in the food chain with customers and consumers.","PeriodicalId":73064,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in animal science","volume":"45 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Application of the Five Domains model to food chain management of animal welfare: opportunities and constraints\",\"authors\":\"N. Beausoleil, J. Swanson, D. McKeegan, C. Croney, L. Keeling, T. Collins, A. Dalmau, P. Sandøe\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fanim.2023.1042733\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"For businesses involved in animal production, ensuring high animal welfare standards has become the cornerstone of corporate social responsibility practices. Since animal welfare cannot be verified by consumers at the point of purchase, industry-led audits provide important assurance that animals used to produce food lived an acceptable quality of life and experienced a humane death. The Five Freedoms offer a simple tool to conceptualize the complex, multi-dimensional concept of animal welfare, and they have been widely adopted as a basic operational framework for compliance. However, the Five Freedoms are problematic in that they focus on the absence of negative welfare states, underemphasize the importance of positive experiences, are absolute, and represent a (mostly unattainable) ideal. The Five Domains model represents inter-related aspects of an animal’s welfare state, with four physical/functional domains used to infer likely mental experiences in the fifth domain. This model allows for consideration of both positive and negative affective experiences, recognizes degrees of welfare compromise, acknowledges that animals cannot be free from all negative experiences (and that indeed, some are essential for survival). Thus, the model better reflects current scientific understanding of animal welfare and – that ultimately, we are interested in how animals experience their lives. Nevertheless, caution is needed when inferring mental states, which can never be directly observed or measured, and hence the ultimate outcomes of the model’s application should be qualitative. Operationalization of the Five Domains offers several opportunities to improve the breadth and quality of welfare audits for production animals. The model can incorporate both resource/management- based and animal-based measures of welfare; the former reflect risks to animals’ welfare while the latter often provide direct information on the animal’s welfare state at the time of assessment. Existing welfare indicators may be linked to relevant mental states and evaluated accordingly, and new metrics may be scientifically identified. Importantly, the Five Domains structure demands scrutiny of the affective state consequences to animals of housing, handling, and husbandry procedures, and could improve the effectiveness of animal welfare training for auditors and stockpersons. Adoption of the Five Domains framework could facilitate improved communication about animal welfare in the food chain with customers and consumers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in animal science\",\"volume\":\"45 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in animal science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2023.1042733\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in animal science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2023.1042733","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

对于从事动物生产的企业来说,确保高动物福利标准已成为企业社会责任实践的基石。由于消费者在购买时无法核实动物福利,行业主导的审计提供了重要的保证,确保用于生产食品的动物生活质量可接受,并经历了人道的死亡。五大自由提供了一个简单的工具来概念化复杂的、多维度的动物福利概念,它们已被广泛用作遵守的基本操作框架。然而,五大自由是有问题的,因为它们关注的是没有消极的福利国家,低估了积极经验的重要性,是绝对的,代表了一种(大多无法实现的)理想。五个领域模型代表了动物福利状态的相互关联的方面,在第五个领域中有四个物理/功能领域用于推断可能的心理体验。该模型考虑了积极和消极的情感体验,承认福利妥协的程度,承认动物不可能摆脱所有负面体验(事实上,有些体验对生存至关重要)。因此,该模型更好地反映了当前对动物福利的科学理解,最终,我们对动物如何体验自己的生活感兴趣。然而,在推断心理状态时需要谨慎,因为心理状态永远无法直接观察或测量,因此模型应用的最终结果应该是定性的。五个领域的运作为提高生产动物福利审计的广度和质量提供了几个机会。该模型可以包含基于资源/管理和基于动物的福利措施;前者反映了动物福利的风险,而后者通常在评估时提供有关动物福利状况的直接信息。现有的福利指标可以与相关的心理状态联系起来,并进行相应的评估,新的指标可以被科学地确定。重要的是,“五个领域”结构要求仔细审查住房、处理和饲养程序对动物的情感状态后果,并可以提高审计员和饲养员动物福利培训的有效性。采用“五个领域”框架可以促进改善与客户和消费者关于食品链中动物福利的沟通。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Application of the Five Domains model to food chain management of animal welfare: opportunities and constraints
For businesses involved in animal production, ensuring high animal welfare standards has become the cornerstone of corporate social responsibility practices. Since animal welfare cannot be verified by consumers at the point of purchase, industry-led audits provide important assurance that animals used to produce food lived an acceptable quality of life and experienced a humane death. The Five Freedoms offer a simple tool to conceptualize the complex, multi-dimensional concept of animal welfare, and they have been widely adopted as a basic operational framework for compliance. However, the Five Freedoms are problematic in that they focus on the absence of negative welfare states, underemphasize the importance of positive experiences, are absolute, and represent a (mostly unattainable) ideal. The Five Domains model represents inter-related aspects of an animal’s welfare state, with four physical/functional domains used to infer likely mental experiences in the fifth domain. This model allows for consideration of both positive and negative affective experiences, recognizes degrees of welfare compromise, acknowledges that animals cannot be free from all negative experiences (and that indeed, some are essential for survival). Thus, the model better reflects current scientific understanding of animal welfare and – that ultimately, we are interested in how animals experience their lives. Nevertheless, caution is needed when inferring mental states, which can never be directly observed or measured, and hence the ultimate outcomes of the model’s application should be qualitative. Operationalization of the Five Domains offers several opportunities to improve the breadth and quality of welfare audits for production animals. The model can incorporate both resource/management- based and animal-based measures of welfare; the former reflect risks to animals’ welfare while the latter often provide direct information on the animal’s welfare state at the time of assessment. Existing welfare indicators may be linked to relevant mental states and evaluated accordingly, and new metrics may be scientifically identified. Importantly, the Five Domains structure demands scrutiny of the affective state consequences to animals of housing, handling, and husbandry procedures, and could improve the effectiveness of animal welfare training for auditors and stockpersons. Adoption of the Five Domains framework could facilitate improved communication about animal welfare in the food chain with customers and consumers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Arterial pCO2 prediction using saphenous pCO2 in healthy mechanically ventilated dogs A systematic review of genotype-by-climate interaction studies in cattle, pigs, and chicken Lucerne meal in the diet of indigenous chickens: a review Assessing body condition scores, weight gain dynamics, and fecal egg counts in feedlot and non-feedlot cattle within high throughput abattoirs of the Eastern Cape Province Comparative study between scan sampling behavioral observations and an automatic monitoring image system on a commercial fattening pig farm
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1