Although scientists have been researching the impacts of organic agriculture on the environment and animal welfare for decades, the conclusions drawn by the scientific community remain controversial. Against this background, this paper provides a comprehensive assessment of the benefits of organic farming in both areas by analysing results of all relevant scientific comparative studies between organic and conventional farming that have dealt with this topic over the last thirty years. So far, this study is the largest one of its kind and the first one that adds the aspect of animal welfare to a comprehensive array of impact categories. The systematic review of the scientific literature from pairwise comparisons found that organic management showed clear advantages over conventional management in the fields of environmental protection and resource conservation, which can be mainly explained by the system approach pursued in organic farming. No clear conclusion was drawn regarding animal welfare indicating that farm-specific management factors are of greater importance than the production system (organic vs conventional). Consequently, organic farming may contribute to solving current environmental and resource challenges and is rightly considered a key approach for sustainable land use. The positive effects should be further strengthened by decreasing the yield gaps between organic and conventional farming, i.e. by improving yields based on organic principles as well as by altering their relevance through changes in consumption as feed for livestock and food for humans.

On-farm self-assessments are legally required since 2014. Livestock farmers have to check the welfare of their animals regularly and systematically by assessing animal welfare indicators ( 11 (8) TierSchG). This allows potential animal welfare problems to be identified at an early stage and improvement measures to be introduced. A standardized assessment of animal welfare indicators is a prerequisite for the comparability of the results of an on-farm self-assessment. The guidelines "Animal welfare indicators: practical guide- cattle/pigs/poultry", enable livestock farmers to systematically assess animal welfare on their farms, were investigated regarding their feasibility and reliability and amended based on the results. An online training course that enables livestock farmers and other interested parties to reliably assess animal welfare indicators, as well as an Excel (R) application that can be used for data collection and automated calculation of results at farm level, are available free of charge on the Internet. In consultation with numerous experts, reference values were elaborated in a multi-stage process by means of a Delphi survey, literature review and expert panels. Livestock farmers can use these to compare their results and assess whether there is a need for action to improve animal welfare on the farm.

CORRECTION article Front. Anim. Sci., 05 January 2023Sec. Animal Welfare and Policy Volume 3 - 2022 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2022.1102029

One approach to strengthening the involvement of farmers or stockpersons in the evaluation and improvement of animal welfare is the implementation of an on-farm self-assessment. A valid comparison of the results with reference values, between or within farms, requires that training of the farmers and reliability testing have taken place. We investigated two different training methods (online vs. live) with a total of 146 livestock farmers from farms with dairy cows and calves, beef cattle, sows and suckling piglets, weaners and fattening pigs, laying hens, broiler chickens, and turkeys from all over Germany. Online tests were conducted by assessing photos/videos of each indicator of the assessment scheme to estimate the inter-rater reliability (prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted kappa, PABAK). The farmers were requested to provide information on their professional background and rate their motivation to participate in the training and their subjective training success, meaning their confidence in assessing each indicator later on-farm. They evaluated the feasibility of the training and its impact on their views and attitudes. In general, farmers achieved at least substantial inter-rater reliability (PABAK ≥ 0.61) in 86.8% of all initial tests; 13.4% of the tests were repeated once or more times, resulting in a significant improvement of the agreement, with 90.9% of the tests reaching a PABAK ≥ 0.61. However, reliability was higher for indicators with a lower number of score levels. The subjective evaluation of training success was, on average, positive (score = 74.8 out of 100). No effects of the training method or the farmers’ professional background on the inter-rater reliability or the subjective training success were detected. Furthermore, for both methods, farmers moderately agreed that the training had sharpened their views on the animals, encouraged them to implement the assessment on their farm, and made it clear that self-assessment supports animal management. Although the reported costs and time investment for the online training were significantly lower, the effort required for both methods and the ease of integration into the workflow were ranked as similarly acceptable. Overall, both training methods appear feasible for the training of farmers/stockpersons on the assessment of animal-based indicators.

Animal welfare in livestock production is of great interest to consumers. The organic farming approach strives to ensure animal welfare based on preventive measures, but there are very few scientific studies that compare the actual differences in animal welfare between organic and conventional farms. Those studies that have been carried out frequently focus on specific aspects of animal welfare, mostly health issues. The aim of the present study, therefore, was to investigate the effects of the farming system on the welfare of dairy cows in a more holistic way. Although this study was carried out in just two federal states of Germany, the results could serve as a suitable model for the whole country. We used the Welfare Quality assessment protocol to measure welfare for dairy cattle (Welfare Quality®, 2009) and the results showed significant differences (P < 0.05) between organic and conventional farms, but there was also considerable variance between individual farms of the same farming system. Organic farms scored higher in all four Welfare Quality® principles: “Good Feeding”, “Good Housing”, “Good Health” and “Appropriate Behavior” compared to conventional farms. In particular, organic farms obtained higher scores with respect to Welfare Quality® measures of resting comfort, which contributes to a lower percentage of lameness; organic farms also implemented less painful methods for disbudding, or indeed carried out no disbudding, and provided access to pasture and outdoor exercise. However, organic farms still have room for improvement, especially with respect to animal health. Therefore, outcome‐based specifications should be included in the current (purely action-oriented) European regulation of organic production (EC, 2008; EU, 2018) to safeguard the health‐related aspects of animal welfare.

Farm animal welfare is a major concern to the European Union’s citizens, addressed in the Rural Development Programmes by a specific animal welfare support measure. Previous evaluation results reveal that the implemented action-oriented measures fail when it comes to improving animal health, an important dimension of animal welfare. Results-oriented measures could compensate for this deficiency, but little is known about their design. In order to improve the effectiveness of current animal welfare measures for dairy cows, we analysed the elements of such a measure in an interdisciplinary, application-oriented research project involving agricultural economists and livestock scientists. We have used a mixed methods approach including a written Delphi survey, group-discussions and on-farm data-collection to select suitable indicators, develop an approach for the identification of threshold values and to design a support measure. Results suggest that, in animal welfare support measures, action- as well as results-oriented elements are necessary to address all dimensions of animal welfare.

Dairy cow welfare in 19 organic and 15 conventional farms in distinct soil climate regions of Germany was examined using the Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for dairy cattle (WQ®). In comparison to other studies, this one is outstanding in that (a) the WQ® protocol was carried out twice per farm (in the winter period 2014/2015 and in the following summer period) and that (b) some parameters were measured directly on pasture, if pasture access was provided on the farm during the summer period. At the level of WQ® principles, significantly lower scores (Mann-Whitney U test, P<0.05) were found in the summer period for ‘Good Feeding’ (more very lean cows and insufficient water provision). Higher scores for ‘Good Housing’(reduced duration of lying down movements and more cleanliness of cows) were recorded in summer compared to the winter period. Furthermore, significantly higher mean scores were found in organic herds at the level of the WQ® principles in ‘Good Housing’ (in summer period), ‘Good Health’ and ‘Appropriate Behaviour’ (in both periods). For the underlying criteria and measures, the organic farms had, on average, higher scores for resting comfort (lying behaviour, not parameters of cleanliness) especially in summer, fewer lame animals (in both periods) and fewer animals with ocular discharge (especially in the summer period). Also, the better scores for ‘Absence of pain induced by management procedures’ which are related to disbudding of calves and the respective pain management on the farms influenced this result. Additionally, less agonistic behaviour (number of head butts) and a lower avoidance distance (in terms of more ‘cows that can be touched’) were observed in organic farms in both periods. The ranges of all values and scores of WQ® assessment were broad in both periods and farming systems. Generally, the results show that the impact of management factors individual to farms on animal welfare is high.

So far, agricultural policy measures for the promotion of animal welfare for dairy cows have been exclusively action-oriented. They relate to the housing system or the management and thus create good conditions for animal behaviour but are not able to address animal health issues. Therefore, a research project examined which indicators would be suitable for a results-oriented support measure and how such a measure would have to be designed to encompass all dimensions of animal welfare: animal health, behaviour and emotional state. In a multi-stage selection process involving both scientists and practitioners, ten indicators were identified as appropriate. Since these indicators only relate to animal health, a combined action- and results-oriented measure is recommended, in which the dimensions "behaviour" and "emotional state" are addressed via action-oriented guidelines while the dimension "health" is addressed by means of results-oriented indicators.

Tierwohl sowie eine tiergerechte Nutztierhaltung sind zentrale Themen des Biolandbaus. Doch ist okologische Nutztierhaltung besser als konventionelle? In Kontrolle, Pravention und Wissenstransfer muss der Okolandbau zukunftig Masstabe fur Tierwohl setzen.

This study aimed to identify organic dairy major farm types (MFTs) in seven European countries, describe these MFTs in an open research database and assess central characteristics of the MFTs. This was conducted in a three-step procedure including (1) Identification of organic MFTs in seven European countries: Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Denmark, Lithuania, Poland and Sweden, based on existing data from dairy databases and consultations with experts within the respective fields of knowledge; (2) Collection of data on farm characteristics, management procedures, production level and herd health from at least 10 farms per MFT and country and (3) Creating an open research database on MFT characteristics, description of essential characteristics of MFTs and assessment of similarities and differences between farms within and across MFTs. The results indicate variations in herd characteristics such as production level, herd size, farm size, housing system, milking system and cow health status between organic dairy farms in these seven European countries. It also indicates variations in management strategies such as feeding, animal health management and recruitment strategies across the organic dairy sector in Europe. These variations seem to be associated with differences between regions and countries in the conditions for organic dairy production, such as topography, land availability and regulations.

Organic farming systems are supposed to be welfare friendly and beneficial to health. However, there is only little information available about the situation in real life: Is organic more welfare friendly than conventional agriculture? Our systematic literature review showed that organic farming has potential to achieve good welfare states (e.g. regarding lameness). However, together with less than optimal management (e.g. regarding pasture parasites) it may not be beneficial. Outcome-based assessments should therefore be implemented in organic standards in order to consider and safeguard the health-related aspects of animal welfare.

Agrarpolitische Tierwohl-Fordermasnahmen fur Milchkuhe sind bislang ausschlieslich handlungsorientiert. Sie beziehen sich auf das Haltungsverfahren oder das Management und schaffen so zwar gute Voraussetzungen fur die Ausfuhrbarkeit des Normalverhaltens, sind aber nicht in der Lage, die Tiergesundheit zu adressieren. Daher wurde im Rahmen eines Forschungsvorhabens untersucht, welche Indikatoren sich fur eine ergebnisorientierte Fordermasnahme eignen wurden und wie eine solche Masnahme ausgestaltet sein musste, um alle Dimensionen des Tierwohls – Tiergesundheit, Verhalten und Emotionen – einbeziehen zu konnen. In einem mehrstufigen Auswahlprozess wurden unter Einbeziehung von WissenschaftlerInnen und PraktikerInnen 10 Indikatoren als geeignet identifiziert. Da diese ausschlieslich die Tiergesundheit erfassen, wird eine kombinierte handlungs- und ergebnisorientierte Masnahme empfohlen, bei der die Dimensionen „Verhalten“ und „Emotionen“ uber handlungsorientierte Vorgaben und die Dimension „Gesundheit“ uber ergebnisorientierte Indikatoren adressiert wird.

Gemas Tierschutzgesetz (§ 11 Absatz 8) mussen Nutztierhalter seit 2014 im Rahmen einer betrieblichen Eigenkontrolle uberprufen, ob sie ihre Herden tiergerecht halten. Diese betriebliche Eigenkontrolle wird zwar vom Gesetzgeber gefordert, detaillierte Ausfuhrungsbestimmungen gibt es jedoch nicht. Ebenfalls seit 2014 haben sich Wissenschaftler, Berater und Praktiker, koordiniert vom Kuratorium fur Technik und Bauwesen in der Landwirtschaft (KTBL), dieser Thematik angenommen. In zwei Fachgesprachen trugen sie in den Jahren 2014 und 2015 zunachst geeignete Tierschutzindikatoren fur bedeutende Tierschutzprobleme in den wichtigsten Produktionsrichtungen der Rinder-, Schweine- und Geflugelhaltung zusammen. Im Jahr 2016 wurden diese ausgewahlten Indikatoren als anschauliche Methodenanleitung fur die Praxis weiter ausgearbeitet. Ergebnis sind Praxisleitfaden fur die ausgewahlten Indikatoren mit Steckbriefaufbau, Fototabellen, stabiler Ringbindung im A4-Format und abwaschbaren Seitenoberflachen (KTBL-Tierschutzindikatoren-Leitfaden fur Rinder, Geflugel und Schweine). Tierhalter konnen sich mithilfe dieser Leitfaden regelmasig einen systematischen Uberblick uber die Tierwohlsituation in ihrem Betrieb verschaffen. Im laufenden Projekt „Eigenkontrolle Tiergerechtheit“ („EiKoTiGer“, koordiniert vom KTBL) wird die Praxistauglichkeit getestet; zudem wurden bereits Schulungsmaterialien und eine Onlineschulung sowie eine Excel®-basierte Anwendung zur Erhebung der Indikatoren entwickelt. Eine App fur Tablet oder Smartphone soll ebenfalls mit Abschluss des Projektes Ende 2020 vorliegen. Weitere Informationen hierzu: http://bit.ly/projekt_eikotiger9.

Organic milk production varies due to topographical and structural farm conditions, but very little information is available about this variation in Germany. The aim of this study was to identify typical major farm types (MFTs) of German organic dairy farms and to describe their farm, herd, and management characteristics. Based on data from 204 organic dairy farms from previous studies with representative samples, four MFTs were identified by cluster analysis. Cluster-criteria were herd size, milk yield, region, and housing system. Identified MFTs were (A) medium-scale herds with low-to-medium milk yield, (B) small-scale herds with low milk yield, (C) large-scale herds with high milk yield, and (D) medium-scale herds in Southern Germany with medium milk yield. Descriptive measures of herd management obtained from interviews with 10–11 farms per MFT showed that the MFTs typically differ in more variables than the cluster-criteria. For example, small-scale farms with low milk yield provided the highest and large-scale farms with high milk yield the lowest pasture access, while the amount of concentrate fed showed an inverse association. No significant differences were found regarding herd health indicators. The results showed that different management strategies can lead to similar results regarding herd health and longevity. However, achieving high milk yields in organic dairy herds also requires high input, not only in terms of feed with a high-energy density like maize or concentrates but also in terms of preventive health measures. Thus, for research and recommendations variation between different dairy farm types should be taken into account.

The Animal Welfare Act from 2014 requires that livestock keepers shall execute an on-farm self-assessment. They have to assess and monitor appropriate indicators in order to evaluate the welfare of their animals. However, the Animal Welfare Act does not contain any secondary legislation, so there is a lack of more precise provisions regarding details and scope of the self-assessment system. In order to identify appropriate indicators which address the most important animal welfare problems known from practice, KTBL organised expert group discussions. The sets of largely animal-based indicators for cattle, pigs and poultry selected by the experts were published in 2016 in descriptive manuals. This paper discusses the benefit of on-farm self-assessments and presents the manuals.

Dairy goat farming is a growing market in animal husbandry in Germany. Due to this expansion, farmers special advice on health, feeding and housing is growing as well. Thus a project was initiated to assess welfare and housing systems three times in three and a quarter year on 40 dairy goat farms in Germany. The main goal was to benchmark welfare concept on the same farms. In the first assessment, 1876 lactating goats in total were assessed on 40 farms. From a set of 22 animal based indicators in total, 8 showed a higher prevalence than 5 %: moderate and severe claw overgrowth, mild udder lesions, small udder scars, moderate udder asymmetry, swellings, head lesions, hairless patches and avoidance distance test. Interestingly, not more than 1.6 % of goats showed signs of mild and moderate lameness compared to 47.6 % of goats having moderate claw overgrowth. The concentration of CO2 varied between 476 ppm and 729 ppm and ammonia concentration ranged between 0.9 and 1.2 ppm, independently from air volume of the goat barns. The results of the first application of a welfare assessment protocol on German dairy goat farms could be used to benchmark input on farm- and study-group- level.

Grazing provides livestock better opportunities to act out their species-specific behavior compared to restrictive stable conditions. The aim of the present study was to examine the effects of daily grazing time on welfare of dairy cows in organic and conventional farms based on the Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for dairy cattle (WQ®). Therefore, we applied the WQ® on 32 dairy farms (classified in 3 groups: Group 0, minor/zero grazing, n = 14; Group 1, medium grazing, n = 10; Group 2, high grazing, n = 8). We assessed the status of animal welfare once in winter and once in summer. For statistical analyses we used mixed models for repeated measures, with group, season, and their interaction as fixed factors. At the WQ® criteria level, five out of nine examined criteria improved in farms with grazing between winter and summer. In contrast, the welfare situation in minor/zero grazing farms remained largely unchanged. At the level of WQ® measures, only the individual parameters “% of cows with hairless patches” and “% of lame cows” were affected positively by high grazing. Grazing offers a potential to enhance welfare of dairy cows during the summer season, while beneficial effects are not guaranteed when management does not satisfy the animals´ needs.