Hi Alex. Thanks for the summary and additional points.
Furnished cages typical lifespans are considered to be 15-25 years.
I agree with this range. This assessment of the economic impact of phasing out furnished cages in Flanders analyses depreciation periods of 20 and 25 years in Figure 7, whose translation to English is below.
This report exploring the consequences of banning enriched cages in the Netherlands (here is an English translation) discusses āa depreciation period of 15 yearsā.
Beyond just the systems, the houses they are built in have lifespans of around 50 years.
I assume this is not a determinant factor. Otherwise, I would have expected economic assessments to consider a longer depreciation period than 15 to 25 years, and transition periods longer than this too. Across 10 bans in Europe, I got a time between the annoucement of the ban until it starts applying to all systems ranging from 4 to 28 years, with the mean being 12.2 years.
@JamesĆz šø points about advocacy cost and public support resonate with me. My understanding is where we have seen furnished/ālarger cages pop up, like in Europe, Canada, Australia, South Korea briefly in the US. This hasnāt been an advocate push. The push has been for cage-free and the industry has lobbied to have that lowered to furnished/ālarger cages.
I wonder whether some sympathy from animal advocates towards furnished cages relative to conventional cages was needed to get furnished cages. Without that sympathy, in cases where cage-free was not really on the table, the outcome could have been conventional instead furnished cages? If so, animal advocates could still advocate for cage-free, but make it clear that furnished cages are better than conventional cages.
@Mia Fernyhough point about any cage putting a cap on welfare improvement resonates. I see
Did you mean to add something else? The sentence above does not end with a dot.
@Joren Vuylsteke shared a chart of the change and I think by starting from 2009, it misses some of the shift to cage-free which was already happening in advance of that. I can share a chart in DM if anyone would like. ~50M was cage-free in 2003, ~75M in 2006. Countries like Germany leading this.
Eyeballing Figure 3 of this report from Compassion in World Farming (CIWF), the one below which Joren was referring to, there were around 80 M cage-free hens at the start of 2009 in the countries in the EU today, 60 M in barns, and 20 M in free-range. In addition, it looks like there were 220 M in cages, which implies a total of 300 M (= (220 + 80)*10^6), of which 26.7 % (= 80*10^6/ā(300*10^6)) were cage-free. The EU banned conventional cages 3 years later. It looks like around 10 % of laying hens in China are cage-free. So I wonder whether there are tractable ways of pushing for a ban on conventional cages there, or more states in India.
Overall, one of the strongest things points from my perspective is being aware that there are definitely waves of change in the systems that we can benefit on focussing on.
I assume this is not a determinant factor. Otherwise, I would have expected economic assessments to consider a longer depreciation period than 15 to 25 years, and transition periods longer than this too. Across 10 bans in Europe, I got a time between the annoucement of the ban until it starts applying to all systems ranging from 4 to 28 years, with the mean being 12.2 years.
Iāve been looking at this housing part more in the US and that high A-frame era of barns was then followed by āmanure beltā farms around the 00ā²s. I am of the understanding that many of the A-frame era barns no longer exist and are replaced by new cage-free barns. Whereas the āmanure beltā era farms are likely the ones still with cages in them. I see what you mean about the bans in Europe. Two things on that, 1. In all the cases youāre describing there was a shift from battery cages to enriched cages. So that is two eras of cages potentially in one overall housing unit. 2. I think there is also additional years in advance of a ban to be considered, markets, particularly now on cage-free in Europe have shifted significantly in advance of the bans announced and I think the same thing is happening in countries we will soon see bans from.
I wonder whether some sympathy from animal advocates towards furnished cages relative to conventional cages was needed to get furnished cages. Without that sympathy, in cases where cage-free was not really on the table, the outcome could have been conventional instead furnished cages? If so, animal advocates could still advocate for cage-free, but make it clear that furnished cages are better than conventional cages.
Iāve not seen that sympathy expressed. Not saying it isnāt or wasnāt there. I think this might be more a result of the power struggle.
Did you mean to add something else? The sentence above does not end with a dot.
Probably, but I forget what :-)
Eyeballing Figure 3 of this report from Compassion in World Farming (CIWF), the one below which Joren was referring to, there were around 80 M cage-free hens at the start of 2009 in the countries in the EU today, 60 M in barns, and 20 M in free-range. In addition, it looks like there were 220 M in cages, which implies a total of 300 M (= (220 + 80)*10^6), of which 26.7 % (= 80*10^6/ā(300*10^6)) were cage-free. The EU banned conventional cages 3 years later. It looks like around 10 % of laying hens in China are cage-free. So I wonder whether there are tractable ways of pushing for a ban on conventional cages there, or more states in India.
Yes, there are definitely opportunities to be found. I think part of that is identifying the waves and power. China went rather rapidly from non-intensive egg production cage-free. 90ā²s was the first wave of this, and then there was a bigger push to industralize and move to cages in the 00ā²s. Iām hopeful about work in China creating positive changes for laying hens.
1. In all the cases youāre describing there was a shift from battery cages to enriched cages. So that is two eras of cages potentially in one overall housing unit. 2. I think there is also additional years in advance of a ban to be considered, markets, particularly now on cage-free in Europe have shifted significantly in advance of the bans announced and I think the same thing is happening in countries we will soon see bans from.
Hi Alex. Thanks for the summary and additional points.
I agree with this range. This assessment of the economic impact of phasing out furnished cages in Flanders analyses depreciation periods of 20 and 25 years in Figure 7, whose translation to English is below.
This report exploring the consequences of banning enriched cages in the Netherlands (here is an English translation) discusses āa depreciation period of 15 yearsā.
I assume this is not a determinant factor. Otherwise, I would have expected economic assessments to consider a longer depreciation period than 15 to 25 years, and transition periods longer than this too. Across 10 bans in Europe, I got a time between the annoucement of the ban until it starts applying to all systems ranging from 4 to 28 years, with the mean being 12.2 years.
I wonder whether some sympathy from animal advocates towards furnished cages relative to conventional cages was needed to get furnished cages. Without that sympathy, in cases where cage-free was not really on the table, the outcome could have been conventional instead furnished cages? If so, animal advocates could still advocate for cage-free, but make it clear that furnished cages are better than conventional cages.
Did you mean to add something else? The sentence above does not end with a dot.
Eyeballing Figure 3 of this report from Compassion in World Farming (CIWF), the one below which Joren was referring to, there were around 80 M cage-free hens at the start of 2009 in the countries in the EU today, 60 M in barns, and 20 M in free-range. In addition, it looks like there were 220 M in cages, which implies a total of 300 M (= (220 + 80)*10^6), of which 26.7 % (= 80*10^6/ā(300*10^6)) were cage-free. The EU banned conventional cages 3 years later. It looks like around 10 % of laying hens in China are cage-free. So I wonder whether there are tractable ways of pushing for a ban on conventional cages there, or more states in India.
Agreed.
Iāve been looking at this housing part more in the US and that high A-frame era of barns was then followed by āmanure beltā farms around the 00ā²s. I am of the understanding that many of the A-frame era barns no longer exist and are replaced by new cage-free barns. Whereas the āmanure beltā era farms are likely the ones still with cages in them. I see what you mean about the bans in Europe. Two things on that, 1. In all the cases youāre describing there was a shift from battery cages to enriched cages. So that is two eras of cages potentially in one overall housing unit. 2. I think there is also additional years in advance of a ban to be considered, markets, particularly now on cage-free in Europe have shifted significantly in advance of the bans announced and I think the same thing is happening in countries we will soon see bans from.
Iāve not seen that sympathy expressed. Not saying it isnāt or wasnāt there. I think this might be more a result of the power struggle.
Probably, but I forget what :-)
Yes, there are definitely opportunities to be found. I think part of that is identifying the waves and power. China went rather rapidly from non-intensive egg production cage-free. 90ā²s was the first wave of this, and then there was a bigger push to industralize and move to cages in the 00ā²s. Iām hopeful about work in China creating positive changes for laying hens.
Makes sense.