Individuazione e implementazione di indicatori di benessere animale: aspetti tecnici e impatto economico

Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano and Albenzio, Marzia and Ciliberti, Maria Giovanna and Di Gioia, Leonardo and Lamonaca, Emilia and Tappi, Marco and Caroprese, Mariangela (2020): Individuazione e implementazione di indicatori di benessere animale: aspetti tecnici e impatto economico. Forthcoming in: Italian Review of Agricultural Economics No. Issue 2

Abstract

The planning of a policy intervention aims at optimizing the decision-making process, resources allocation, outcomes of the intervention. The development of an integrated approach may contribute to achieve an effective and efficient planning. The article develops a protocol based on the adoption qualitative and quantitative methods, to support policymaker in planning intervention measures. The developed protocol is tested on a case study: the planning of measure 14 –Animal welfare– in the Rural Development Programme 2014-2020 of the Apulia region. Indicators of animal welfare, scientifically valid and objectively miserable, emerged from the case study as additional commitments to implement in cattle and buffalo farms. An economic analysis of each indicators allowed to estimate a countervailing measure for additional costs associated with the achievement of higher standards of animal welfare.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• English Title: Identification and implementation of animal welfare indicators: technical aspects and economic impact
• Language: Italian
• Keywords: Benessere animale; Pianificazione; Programma di sviluppo rurale; Triangolazione metodologica.
• Subjects: P - Economic Systems > P2 - Socialist Systems and Transitional Economies > P25 - Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q1 - Agriculture > Q18 - Agricultural Policy ; Food Policy; R - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics > R5 - Regional Government Analysis > R58 - Regional Development Planning and Policy

References

Adams, A., Sasse, M.A. (2001). Privacy in multimedia communications: Protecting users, not just data. In: People and Computers XV—Interaction without Frontiers. London: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0353-0_4

Adams, A., Cox, A.L. (2008). Questionnaires, in-depth interviews and focus groups. In: Cairns, P., Cox, A.L., eds., Research Methods for Human Computer Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Disponibile al sito: http://oro.open.ac.uk/11909/1/9780521870122c02_p17-34.pdf (accesso: 27/01/2020)

Aitken, S.L., Corl, C.M., Sordillo, L.M. (2011). Immunopathology of mastitis: insights into disease recognition and resolution. Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia, 16(4): 291-304, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10911-011-9230-4

Bartussek, H., Leeb, C., Held, S. (2000). Animal Needs Index for Cattle (Ani 35 L/2000-cattle). Federal Research Institute for Agriculture in Alpine Regions BAL Gumpenstein, Irdning, Austria. Disponibile al sito: https://www.bartussek.at/pdf/anicattle.pdf (accesso: 27/01/2020)

Boyle, L.A., O’Driscoll, K. (2011). Animal welfare: an essential component in food safety and quality. In: Food Chain Integrity. Woodhead Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857090621.2.169

Britain, G., Brambell, F.W.R. (1965). Report of the technical committee to enquire into the welfare of animals kept under intensive livestock husbandry systems. HM Stationery Office. Disponibile al sito: https://edepot.wur.nl/134379 (accesso: 27/01/2020)

Broom D.M., Johnson K.G. (1993). Stress and Animal Welfare, 1st Edition. London: Chapman & Hall. Disponibile al sito: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-030-32153-6.pdf (accesso: 12/02/2020)

Clark, B., Stewart, G.B., Panzone, L.A., Kyriazakis, I., Frewer, L.J. (2017). Citizens, consumers and farm animal welfare: A meta-analysis of willingness-to-pay studies. Food Policy, 68: 112-127, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.01.006

Commissione Europea (2006). Rural Development 2007-2013 Handbook on Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework; Guidance document. Brussels: DG for Agriculture and Rural development, 2006.

Corbett, R.B. (1998). The use of somatic cell counts in mastitis manage-ment. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the National Mastitis Council, National Mastitis Council, Inc., Madison, WI, pp. 51-55.

Croyle, S.L., Belage, E., Khosa, D.K., LeBlanc, S.J., Haley, D.B., Kelton, D.F. (2019). Dairy farmers’ expectations and receptivity regarding animal welfare advice: A focus group study. Journal of Dairy Science, 102(8): 7385-7397, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2018-15821

Damm, M., Holm, C., Blaabjerg, M., Bro, M.N., Schwarz, D. (2017). Differential somatic cell count—A novel method for routine mastitis screening in the frame of Dairy Herd Improvement testing programs. Journal of Dairy Science, 100(6): 4926-4940, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2016-12409

Dash, S., Chakravarty, A.K., Singh, A., Upadhyay, A., Singh, M., Yousuf, S. (2016). Effect of heat stress on reproductive performances of dairy cattle and buffaloes: A review. Veterinary World, 9(3): 235, DOI: https://doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2016.235-244

Demartini, E., Gaviglio, A., Bertoni, D. (2015). Integrating agricultural sustainability into policy planning: A geo-referenced framework based on Rough Set theory. Environmental Science & Policy, 54: 226-239, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.07.006

Di Gioia, R. (2010). La tecnica Cati: dalla ricerca di mercato alla ricerca a buon mercato. Quaderni di Sociologia, (53): 89-105. Disponibile al sito: https://journals.openedition.org/qds/707 (accesso: 27/01/2020)

Dwyer, J. Hill, B. (2009). Rural (and regional) development policies in the EU and their evaluation. Paper presentato all’OECD workshop “Aiding the process of agricultural policy reform: evaluation of public policies for rural development”. Parigi, 15-16 giugno 2009.

EFSA (2009). Scientific Opinion on the overall effects of farming systems on dairy cow welfare and disease. EFSA Journal, 1143, 38 pp. Disponibile al sito: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1143r (accesso: 27/01/2020)

EFSA (2012a). Scientific Opinion on the welfare of cattle kept for beef production and the welfare in intensive calf farming systems. EFSA Journal, 10(5): 2669. Disponibile al sito: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2669 (accesso: 27/01/2020)

EFSA (2012b). Scientific Opinion on the use of animal-based measures to assess welfare of dairy cows. EFSA Journal, 10(1): 2554. Disponibile al sito: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2554 (accesso: 27/01/2020)

Farm Animal Welfare Council, FAWC, (1993), Report on priorities for research and development in farm animal welfare. MAFF, Tolworth, UK. Disponibile al sito: https://edepot.wur.nl/134980 (accesso: 27/01/2020)

Heald, W.C. 1995. Practical uses and limitations of somatic cellcounts. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the National Mastitis Council, National Mastitis Council, Inc., Madison, WI, pp. 23-32.

Ingenbleek, P.T., Immink, V.M., Spoolder, H.A., Bokma, M.H., Keeling, L.J. (2012). EU animal welfare policy: Developing a comprehensive policy framework. Food Policy, 37(6): 690-699, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.07.001

Kadzere, C.T., Murphy, M.R., Silanikove, N. Maltz, E. (2002). Heat stress in lactating dairy cows: A review. Livestock Production Science, 77: 59-91, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(01)00330-X

Kalantari, K., Barati, A.A., Asadi, A., Nazari, M.R. (2018). A Hybrid Method (ANP-SWOT) to Formulate and Choose Strategic Alternatives for Development of Rural Cooperatives in Iran. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 19(4): 757-769. Disponibile al sito: https://www.sid.ir/FileServer/JE/84820170502.pdf (accesso: 27/01/2020)

Kehrli, M.E., Shuster, D.E. (1994). Factors affecting milk somatic cells and their role in health of the bovine mammary gland. Journal of Dairy Science, 77: 619–627, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(94)76992-7

Kelly, A.L., Tiernan, D., O’Sullivan, C., Joyce, P. (2000). Correlation between bovine milk somatic cell count and polymorphonuclear leukocyte level for samples of bulk milk and milk from individual cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 83: 300–304, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(00)74878-8

Lara, L.J., Rostagno, M.H. (2018). Animal welfare and food safety in modern animal production. In Mench J., editor, Advances in Agricultural Animal Welfare. Woodhead Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-101215-4.00005-5

Mellor, D.J. (2016). Updating animal welfare thinking: Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” to “A Life worth Living”. Animals, 6: 21, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6030021

Menzies F.D., Bryson D.G., McCallion T., Matthews D.I. (1995). A study of mortality among suckler and dairy cows in Northern Ireland in 1992. Veterinary Record, 137(24): 615, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.137.21.531

Moberg, G.P., Mench, J.A. (eds.). (2000). The biology of animal stress: basic principles and implications for animal welfare. CABI.

Morgan, D.L., Krueger, R.A. (1993). When to use focus groups and why. In Morgan D.L., editor, Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art. London: Sage. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781483349008.n1

Napolitano, F., Girolami, A., Braghieri, A. (2010). Consumer liking and willingness to pay for high welfare animal-based products. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 21(11): 537-543, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2010.07.012

OECD (2009). Methods to monitor and evaluate the impacts of agricultural policies on rural development. Working Party on Agricultural Policies and Markets, TAD/CA/APM/WP (2009) 2/FINAL, Parigi, 2009.

Oviedo-Boyso, J., Valdez-Alarcón, J.J., Cajero-Juárez, M., Ochoa-Zarzosa, A., López-Meza, J.E., Bravo-Patiño, A., Baiza-bal-Aguirre, V.M. (2007). Innate immune response of bovine mammary gland to pathogenic bacteria responsible for mastitis. Journal of Infection, 54: 399-409, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2006.06.010

Paape, M.J., Wergin, W.P., Guidry, A.J.,Pearson, R.E. (1979). Leukocytes—Second line of defense against invading mastitis pathogens. Journal of Dairy Science, 62: 135-153, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(79)83215-4

Saad, A.M. (1987). Flow cytometric measurement of bovine milk neu-trophil phagocytosis. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, 28: 333–342.

Patton, M.Q. (2005). Qualitative Research. Encyclopedia of Statistics in Behavioral Science. Disponibile al sito: https://doi.org/10.1002/0470013192.bsa514

Rete Rurale Nazionale 2014-2020 (2016). PSR 2014-2020. Il sostegno per la competitività nei PSR 2014-20: Analisi delle focus area 2A e 3A. Dicembre 2016. Disponibile al sito: https://www.reterurale.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeAttachment.php/L/IT/D/4%252F7%252F5%252FD.e9c1b833a009d98a9931/P/BLOB%3AID%3D16494/E/pdf (accesso: 24 gennaio 2020).

Santeramo, F.G., Lamonaca, E., Tappi, M., Di Gioia, L. (2019). Considerations on the Environmental and Social Sustainability of Animal-based Policies. Sustainability, 11(8): 2316, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082316

Santeramo, F. G., Lamonaca, E., Tappi, M., & Di Gioia, L. (2020). On the Environmental Impacts of Voluntary Animal-based Policies in the EU: Technical and Political Considerations. Environmental Science and Policy. Forthcoming.

Webster, J. (2016). Animal Welfare: Freedoms, Dominions and “A Life Worth Living”. Animals, 6: 35, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6060035

Winckler, C., Capdeville, J., Gebresenbet, G., Hörning, B., Roiha, U., Tosi, M., Waiblinger, S. (2003). Selection of parameters for on-farm welfare-assessment protocols in cattle and buffalo. Animal Welfare, 12(4): 619-624. Disponibile al sito: https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ufaw/aw/2003/00000012/00000004/art00026 (accesso: 27/01/2020)