Animal Welfare Policies and their Effect on Livestock Productivity and Trade
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47941/ijlp.1967Keywords:
Livestock Productivity, Public Awareness, Sustainability Frameworks, Ethical Treatment, Compliance, Policy SupportAbstract
Purpose: This study sought to explore animal welfare policies and their effect on livestock productivity and trade.
Methodology: The study adopted a desktop research methodology. Desk research refers to secondary data or that which can be collected without fieldwork. Desk research is basically involved in collecting data from existing resources hence it is often considered a low cost technique as compared to field research, as the main cost is involved in executive's time, telephone charges and directories. Thus, the study relied on already published studies, reports and statistics. This secondary data was easily accessed through the online journals and library.
Findings: The findings reveal that there exists a contextual and methodological gap relating to animal welfare policies and their effect on livestock productivity and trade. Preliminary empirical review revealed that implementing robust animal welfare policies significantly improved livestock productivity and enhanced marketability and trade. Improved welfare standards led to better animal health, reduced stress, and increased yields, translating to higher profitability for producers. Furthermore, products from high-welfare farms gained access to premium markets and fetched higher prices. However, the initial costs of adopting these standards and the need for more comprehensive studies on long-term economic impacts were identified as challenges. The study recommended policy support, financial incentives, and education to promote widespread adoption of high welfare practices
Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), Resource-Based View (RBV) and Stakeholder Theory may be used to anchor future studies on animal welfare policies. The study recommended integrating animal welfare into theoretical frameworks like Resource-Based View and Stakeholder Theory, emphasizing its strategic value and ethical importance. Practically, it suggested that livestock producers adopt comprehensive welfare practices to improve productivity and profitability. Policy recommendations included financial incentives and robust enforcement to support high welfare standards. It also highlighted the need for education and training programs for farmers and public awareness campaigns to drive demand for welfare-friendly products. Further research was advised to explore long-term economic impacts and the integration of welfare with sustainability frameworks.
Downloads
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Appleby, M. C., & Sandoe, P. (2018). Animal welfare: What is it and why does it matter? Veterinary and Animal Science, 5, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vas.2018.02.002
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
Blokhuis, H. J., Veissier, I., Miele, M., & Jones, B. (2013). The welfare quality project and beyond: Safeguarding farm animal well-being. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A — Animal Science, 62(4), 152-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064702.2013.849564
Broom, D. M. (2016). Animal welfare complementing or conflicting with other societal aims. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 181, 121-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2016.05.002
Cramer, L., Thornton, P. K., & Loboguerrero, A. M. (2017). Adaptation to climate change in smallholder agriculture: Research priorities to support rural livelihoods in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Climate and Development, 9(1), 68-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2015.1034231
DEFRA. (2020). Agriculture in the United Kingdom 2019. Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/agriculture-in-the-united-kingdom-2019
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65-91. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9503271992
Ethiopian Ministry of Trade. (2020). Annual export report. Retrieved from http://www.mot.gov.et/reports
European Commission. (2019). Animal welfare market. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/food-farming-fisheries/animal_welfare/market_en.pdf
FAO. (2019). FAO animal welfare policy. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/ca7209en/CA7209EN.pdf
FAO. (2021). Livestock Primary. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QL
Filho, A. S., Miranda, D. D., & Maia, A. G. (2018). Climate change and agriculture: Adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices in Brazil. Climate Policy, 18(5), 636-651. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2017.1359196
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838020
Fraser, D., Mench, J. A., Millman, S. T., & Pajor, E. A. (2013). The welfare of animals in animal agriculture: Practices, research, and challenges. CAB International. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781780641587.0000
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman.
Fujimoto, T., Kato, T., & Hasegawa, T. (2019). Adoption of climate-resilient rice varieties and its impact on rice productivity and farmers’ income in Japan. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Studies, 8(3), 45-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaes.2018.11.005
Grandin, T. (2014). Animal welfare and society concerns finding the missing link. Meat Science, 98(3), 461-469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.05.011
Hemsworth, P. H., Mellor, D. J., Cronin, G. M., & Tilbrook, A. J. (2015). Scientific assessment of animal welfare. New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 63(1), 24-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2014.966167
Ingram, J., Mills, J., & Dibari, C. (2018). Integrating agri-environment schemes with climate change adaptation and mitigation: Lessons for policy design and implementation. Environmental Science & Policy, 87, 50-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.06.013
Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. (2020). Economic survey 2020. Retrieved from https://www.knbs.or.ke/?p=5621
Kimaru-Muchai, G., Mugwe, J., Mucheru-Muna, M., & Mugendi, D. (2020). Adoption and scaling up of climate-smart agriculture among smallholder farmers in Kenya. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 18(3), 233-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2020.1723646
MAFF. (2020). Statistical yearbook of agriculture, forestry and fisheries.### Conceptual Analysis of Animal Welfare Policies
Manning, R., Chaddad, F. R., & Harris, J. M. (2017). Animal welfare certification and international trade: Economic theory and evidence. Agricultural Economics, 48(2), 221-231. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12335
OIE. (2021). Terrestrial animal health code. World Organization for Animal Health. Retrieved from https://www.oie.int/en/what-we-do/standards/codes-and-manuals/terrestrial-code-online-access/
Sumner, D. A., Matthews, W. A., & Mench, J. A. (2020). Animal welfare and international trade: A regulatory approach. Food Policy, 91, 101832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101832
USDA. (2020). Animal welfare regulations. United States Department of Agriculture. Retrieved from https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalwelfare
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050207
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Blessings Nkatekho
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.