Relatedly, I wonder how much welfare varies within production systems. For example, I am interested in knowing which of the following results in a greater increase in welfare. Layers going from:
A. Median furnished cages in the European Union (EU) to median cage-free aviaries in the EU. By median furnished cages in the EU, I mean ones with higher welfare per chicken-year than 50 % of the furnished cages in the EU.
B. 10th percentile furnished cages in the EU to 90th percentile furnished cages in the EU.
Do you have sense of how these compare? The question reminds me of your meta-analysis of hen mortality in different indoor housing systems. Median cage-free aviaries most likely have higher welfare than median furnished cages, and 90th percentile cage-free aviaries most likely have higher welfare than 90th percentile furnished cages. However, it might still be worth advocating for better management of animals within each system. It might be cheaper than moving to a better system, and capture a significant fraction of its benefits. Likewise, I wonder whether it may sometimes be worth advocating for replacing battery cages with furnished cages instead of cage-free aviaries, or for banning battery cages instead of all cages.
My general sense is that option A leads to a greater welfare increase. Not only based on what we measured, but also on recent evidence that pain is likely more intense and longer in cages (even furnished), as discussed here, as well as recent evidence of depressive-like states in cages (e.g., here).
So my answer is that even if furnished cages are less harmful than battery cages, I do not think that advocacy for ‘cages’ is worth pursuing.
Thanks, Cynthia. Is there enough data for you to make a quantitative comparison between A and B? If not, do you have plans to look further into this in the future? I wonder whether you think A increases welfare, for example, 1.5 or 5 times as much as B.
Hi Vasco, yes, this is something that will be part of the Welfare Footprint of the Egg. We’re now including the analyses of plausible scenarios within each system, including scenarios where best practices are used, as well as scenarios of complete failure, which will give you an idea of the variability you’re mentioning.
Hi Cynthia. Thanks for the clarifying comment.
Relatedly, I wonder how much welfare varies within production systems. For example, I am interested in knowing which of the following results in a greater increase in welfare. Layers going from:
A. Median furnished cages in the European Union (EU) to median cage-free aviaries in the EU. By median furnished cages in the EU, I mean ones with higher welfare per chicken-year than 50 % of the furnished cages in the EU.
B. 10th percentile furnished cages in the EU to 90th percentile furnished cages in the EU.
Do you have sense of how these compare? The question reminds me of your meta-analysis of hen mortality in different indoor housing systems. Median cage-free aviaries most likely have higher welfare than median furnished cages, and 90th percentile cage-free aviaries most likely have higher welfare than 90th percentile furnished cages. However, it might still be worth advocating for better management of animals within each system. It might be cheaper than moving to a better system, and capture a significant fraction of its benefits. Likewise, I wonder whether it may sometimes be worth advocating for replacing battery cages with furnished cages instead of cage-free aviaries, or for banning battery cages instead of all cages.
Hi Vasco, thank you for raising this.
My general sense is that option A leads to a greater welfare increase. Not only based on what we measured, but also on recent evidence that pain is likely more intense and longer in cages (even furnished), as discussed here, as well as recent evidence of depressive-like states in cages (e.g., here).
So my answer is that even if furnished cages are less harmful than battery cages, I do not think that advocacy for ‘cages’ is worth pursuing.
Thanks, Cynthia. Is there enough data for you to make a quantitative comparison between A and B? If not, do you have plans to look further into this in the future? I wonder whether you think A increases welfare, for example, 1.5 or 5 times as much as B.
Hi Vasco, yes, this is something that will be part of the Welfare Footprint of the Egg. We’re now including the analyses of plausible scenarios within each system, including scenarios where best practices are used, as well as scenarios of complete failure, which will give you an idea of the variability you’re mentioning.
Great to know.