The objective of this study was to analyse and compare the interventions (sets of actions) towards improved antimicrobial use (AMU) in animal production. These were designed in Living Labs (LLs) organised in five countries of the ROADMAP project, with ex ante impact assessment (EAIA) to guide the process. LL participants designed very different types of interventions which targeted systematically farmers and veterinarians but less frequently other stakeholders, despite the ROADMAP ambition to involve the whole value chain in AMU transition scenarios. A variety of factors influenced which interventions were designed, such as the country's AMU levels, existence of AMU monitoring systems, the possibility for veterinarians to profit from antimicrobials sales, export-orientation of the animal production sector and political momentum. Other influential factors included the breadth of desired impacts that the LL participants wished to produce through the interventions they designed (limited to animal health aspects or encompassing other subjects such as animal welfare, consumer information or veterinary business models) and the LL process (choice of participants and facilitators). Overall, the approach succeeded in providing a holistic vision of the possible measures and the obstacles towards improved AMU and produced context-tailored interventions with high acceptability. However, they had limited results in terms of system rethinking. L'objectif de cette & eacute;tude & eacute;tait d'analyser et de comparer les interventions (ensembles d'actions) visant & agrave; am & eacute;liorer l'utilisation des antimicrobiens (UAM) dans l'& eacute;levage. Elles ont & eacute;t & eacute; formul & eacute;es dans des Living lab (LL) organis & eacute;s dans cinq pays du projet ROADMAP, avec une & eacute;valuation d'impact ex ante (EIEA) pour guider le processus. Les participants ont con & ccedil;u des interventions de types tr & egrave;s diff & eacute;rents qui avaient en commun de cibler syst & eacute;matiquement des & eacute;leveurs et des v & eacute;t & eacute;rinaires et moins souvent d'autres parties prenantes, malgr & eacute; l'ambition de ROADMAP d'impliquer l'ensemble de la cha & icirc;ne de valeur dans les sc & eacute;narios de transition de l'UAM. Une s & eacute;rie de facteurs influen & ccedil;ait les interventions con & ccedil;ues, tels que les niveaux d'UAM du pays, l'existence de syst & egrave;mes de surveillance de l'UAM, la possibilit & eacute; pour les v & eacute;t & eacute;rinaires de tirer profit des ventes d'antimicrobiens, l'orientation vers l'exportation du secteur de la production animale et la motivation politique. Parmi les autres facteurs influents, citons la vari & eacute;t & eacute; des impacts que les participants souhaitaient produire gr & acirc;ce aux interventions con & ccedil;ues (limit & eacute;s aux aspects de sant & eacute; animale ou englobant d'autres sujets tels que le bien-& ecirc;tre animal, l'information des consommateurs ou le mod & egrave;le & eacute;conomique des cliniques v & eacute;t & eacute;rinaires) et le processus du LL (choix des participants et des facilitateurs). En conclusion, cette approche a permis de fournir une vision holistique des leviers et des obstacles & agrave; l'am & eacute;lioration de l'UAM, et de formuler des interventions adapt & eacute;es au contexte et b & eacute;n & eacute;ficiant d'une grande acceptabilit & eacute;. Cependant, elle a eu des r & eacute;sultats limit & eacute;s en termes de remise en question du syst & egrave;me. Ziel dieser Studie war es, die Interventionen (Ma ss nahmenpakete) zur Verbesserung des Einsatzes antimikrobieller Mittel (EAM) in der Tierproduktion zu analysieren und zu vergleichen. Diese wurden in Living Labs (LLs) in f & uuml;nf L & auml;ndern des ROADMAP-Projekts entwickelt, wobei eine Ex-ante-Folgenabsch & auml;tzung (EAF) den Prozess leitete. Die Teilnehmer der LL entwarfen sehr unterschiedliche Arten von Ma ss nahmen, die sich systematisch an Landwirte und Tier & auml;rzte, aber weniger h & auml;ufig an andere Interessengruppen richteten, obwohl ROADMAP das Ziel verfolgte, die gesamte Wertsch & ouml;pfungskette in EAM-Umstellungsszenarien einzubeziehen. Eine Vielzahl von Faktoren beeinflusste die Gestaltung der Ma ss nahmen, wie z. B. die EAM-Werte des Landes, das Vorhandensein von EAM-& Uuml;berwachungssystemen, die M & ouml;glichkeit f & uuml;r Tier & auml;rzte, vom Verkauf antimikrobieller Mittel zu profitieren, die Exportorientierung des Tierproduktionssektors und das politische Momentum. Andere einflussreiche Faktoren waren die Breite der gew & uuml;nschten Auswirkungen, die die LL-Teilnehmer durch die von ihnen entworfenen Interventionen erzielen wollten (beschr & auml;nkt auf Tiergesundheitsaspekte oder andere Themen wie Tierschutz, Verbraucherinformation oder tier & auml;rztliche Gesch & auml;ftsmodelle umfassend) und der LL-Prozess (Auswahl der Teilnehmer und Moderatoren). Insgesamt gelang es mit diesem Ansatz, eine ganzheitliche Sicht auf die m & ouml;glichen Ma ss nahmen und die Hindernisse f & uuml;r eine verbesserte EM zu vermitteln und kontextbezogene Interventionen mit hoher Akzeptanz zu entwickeln. Sie hatten jedoch nur begrenzte Ergebnisse in Bezug auf ein Umdenken im System.

Prudent antimicrobial use (AMU) is paramount for future sustainable animal production, including in countries that are considered to have a relatively low and well-regulated AMU. Living Labs (LLs) are multistakeholder open innovation platforms that have the potential to let stakeholders explore common ground, create dialogues, and find solutions to jointly identified problems. This approach was therefore used as a core method to foster transitions toward a more prudent AMU in animal production in the H-2020 EU project ROADMAP. Two LLs focusing on pig farms and dairy cow and calf farms were established in Denmark. The two LLs worked in parallel and identified and addressed issues at the farm, sector, industry, legislation, governance, and societal levels, and took initiatives to innovate and experiment through common multistakeholder explorations at events and social laboratories. Both LLs expressed conflicting interests and perceptions around the concept of prudent AMU related to animal welfare and today’s production systems. Thus, the LLs in this context were spaces for negotiating difficult and sensitive issues in addition to being open-innovation platforms. Both LLs expressed skepticism around the connections between AMU in animal farming and the global threat of antimicrobial resistance to humans, although this skepticism was more dominant for the stakeholders of the pig sector. The feeling of being a global front-runner in prudent AMU, legislation, and transparent registration of AMU existed in both sectors, but both LLs identified possibilities and room for improvements. The need to keep reducing AMU was most consistently articulated in the dairy cattle LL. Overall, we concluded that the LL multistakeholder approach was renewing and fostered important insights and conversations between central stakeholders in the sectors. Actors in both sectors pointed to larger structures (e.g.sectors constrained by logistic conditions, and global markets setting the standards) as the main reasons for the current AMU. However, how the responsibilities for reducing Danish AMU further should be shared remained a sensitive topic. The LL approach brought stakeholders together in new ways and helped establish negotiations and confirm agreements and disagreements between actors.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a public health threat responsible for 700,000 deaths per year worldwide. Antimicrobial use (AMU) in livestock contributes to AMR in animal and public health. Therefore, it is essential to implement effective interventions towards better AMU in livestock. However, there is a lack of evidence to inform decision-makers of what works, how, for whom and why and how effective interventions can be adapted to different contexts. We conducted a scoping review and an impact pathway analysis to systematically map the research done in this area and to inform evidence-based and context-appropriate policies. We followed the PRISMA-ScR requirements and searched Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus databases to identify studies in English or French languages, in open access and published between 2000 and 2022. We selected thirty references addressing twenty-eight different interventions that were successful in changing AMU in livestock. We used an impact pathway logic model as an analytic framework to guide the technical aspects of the scoping review process and to identify the complex relationships between outputs, outcomes, impacts and contextual factors. A majority of interventions managed to improve AMU by changing herd and health management practices (ni=18). We identified intermediate outcomes including change in the veterinarian-farmer relationship (ni=7), in knowledge and perception (ni=6), and in motivation and confidence (ni=1). Twenty-two studies recorded positive impacts on animal health and welfare (ni=11), technical performances (ni=9), economic performances (ni=4) and AMR reduction (ni=4). Interventions implemented different strategies including herd and health management support (ni=20), norms and standards (ni=11), informational and educational measures (ni=10), economic support (ni=5). Studies were mainly in European countries and in pig and large ruminants farming. Most interventions targeted farmers or veterinarians but we identified other major and influential actors including authority and governmental organizations, academics and research, organization of producers or veterinarians, herd advisors and technicians, laboratories, and public opinion. Key success factors were knowledge and perception (ni=14), social factors (ni=13), intervention characteristics (ni=11), trajectory and ecosystem of change (ni=11), economic factors (ni=9), herd and health status (ni=8), data access and monitoring (ni=4). This review describes a paucity of impact assessment of interventions towards better AMU in livestock. There is no one-size-fits-all transition pathway but we inform decision-makers about the most successful interventions that work, how, for whom and why. The impact pathway analysis provided a holistic view of the successful change processes and the complex relationships between outputs, outcomes, impacts and contexts.

To contribute to the goal of 100 % use of organic and regional feed for monogastrics, this paper aims to describe and discuss: ● The protein requirement of monogastric animals (pigs and poultry), including different breeds, productions stages and rearing conditions ● Nutrient contents and potential feeding values of new protein feedstuffs ● Small-scale, on-farm equipment for feed processing ● Different feeding strategies When feeding pigs and poultry 100 % organic and regionally produced feed, securing enough protein and essential amino acids is a challenge. There are two strategies to follow and they can be combined. One is to utilize by-products, and explore new protein sources or refine already existing products. The other is to feed the animals less intensively and for this strategy slow-growing breeds will be useful due to a lower nutrient requirement. However, the possibilities for combinations of regionally grown feed, slow-growing breeds with different feeding strategies are many and they need to be explored.

The transition to 100% organic feed ingredients for organic livestock is expected to take effect from January 1st 2020 in Europe. In order to contribute to the goal of 100% use of organic and regional feed for monogastrics, this knowledge synthesis “Feeding monogastrics 100% organic and regionally produced feed“ aims to describe: • the protein need for organic monogastric animals (pigs, layers and broilers), including different breeds and rearing conditions • different protein feed resources, mostly new or not commonly used protein sources, their nutrient content, production prerequisites, and their potential feeding value • small-scale, on-farm equipment for feed processing • different feeding strategies. The knowledge synthesis should enable participants in Innovation groups (IG) and Thematic groups (TG) to choose feed materials, feeding strategies, breeds and perhaps even small-scale on-farm equipment for testing when aiming at 100% organic and regionally produced feed for monogastrics. In the knowledge synthesis it is concluded: When feeding pigs and poultry 100% organic and regionally produced feed, getting enough protein and specific amino acids is a challenge. There are two ways to go and they can be combined. One is to utilize by-products, for example waste from various productions, and explore new protein sources e.g. marine products or to refine already known products such as grass. The other way is to feed the animals less intensively and for this feeding strategy slow-growing breeds fit better. Some slowgrowing breeds are already known, some are rediscovered old breeds. The challenge with the slow-growing and less-yielding breeds is that the production is getting smaller and either the farmer will earn less or the prices of eggs and meat will increase. However, the possibilities for combinations of regionally grown feed, low-yielding breeds with different feeding strategies are many and they need to be explored. Finally, the knowledge synthesis identify needs for new knowledge on: • nutritional requirements of alternative breeds. Precise nutrient recommendations for organically produced pigs and poultry do not exist. • nutritional value of new protein sources for monogastric animals • various combinations of breeds, grazing and supplemental feed. Small-scale on-farm equipment to refine locally produced raw materials needs to be developed.

Organic monogastric agriculture is challenged because of a limited availability of regional and organic protein-rich ingredients to fulfill the amino acid requirements. The development of novel feed ingredients is therefore essential. The use of starfish (Asterias rubens), mussel (Mytilus edilus), insect, green and brown seaweed, and forage crop extracts exhibits different approaches to increase protein availability in a sustainable manner through improving the protein quality of existing ingredients, better use of under- or unutilized material, or development of circular bioeconomy. This review assessed limitations and opportunities of producing, processing, and using these novel ingredients in feed. The use of non-renewable resources and the effect on the environment of production and processing the feed ingredients are described. Protein concentration and amino acid quality of the feed ingredients are evaluated to understand their substitution potential compared with protein-rich soya bean and fishmeal. Feedstuffs' effect on digestibility and animal performance is summarized. With the exception of seaweed, all novel ingredients show potential to partly substitute fishmeal or soya bean fulfilling part of the protein requirement in organic monogastric production. However, improvements during production and processing can be made to enhance protein quality, sustainability of the novel ingredients, and nutrient utilization of novel feed ingredients.

In the last two decades, the market for organic food has shown steady vigorous growth in most parts of Europe and this growth is still accelerating. A key objective of organic farming is the closing of nutrient cycles, but it is di cult to achieve. To a large extent, feed and livestock production, in particular of pigs and poultry, are concentrated in different regions, and animal feed (especially proteins) has to be imported from regions far away. In addition, organic organic farmers have di culties in sourcing protein feed of organic quality. The lack of organic and regional feed threatens both the sustainability of organic agriculture as well as consumers’ con dence.