@start-1@Mara Miele
There are several mechanisms for implementing welfare improvements on farms. Dedicated legislation has been the main mechanism in Europe for a long time. But in recent years some market-led initiatives have emerged, especially in countries like the UK and the Netherlands, where specific assurance schemes have addressed the quality of life of animals. The European Commission seems to favour the latter mechanism and its Action Plan on Animal Welfare 20062010 has presented a plan for introducing an EU-wide animal welfare labelling scheme based on a harmonized standard.
At present, however, most of these market-led initiatives are not being communicated to consumers through product labels but are part of more general policies of Social Corporate Responsibility and brand reputation. Even when existing labels do address animal welfare, the claims are usually bundled with other quality or ethical aspects of food products. These initiatives of voluntary labelling have created a niche market for animal-friendly products, while for the majority of animals in Europe there has been no improvement in welfare beyond legal standards. This led us to ask why market mechanisms have created this small niche market and are not attracting the majority of EU consumers who, as clearly indicated by the recent Eurobarometer 2005 and 2006 surveys, are concerned about the welfare of farm animals.@end-1@@start-2@
Is there a lack of market transparency and clear product information of the welfare status? The large majority of respondents in Welfare Quality® focus groups and surveys indicated interest in more information on animal welfare practices but not necessarily in the form of product labels. Rather, in order to be able to act in different contexts, citizens’ answers pointed to the need to increase the general knowledge on modern animal farming systems and their consequences in term of quality of life of animals. While very positive to more market transparency achieved through a scientifically validated assessment and monitoring system, a large proportion of respondents also indicated that they would expect public institutions to ensure the acceptability and improvement of animal farming in Europe and resented the idea of products of dubious ethical status.
The findings of research on consumers’ views, retailer strategies and farmer initiatives led us to think whether additional mechanisms to voluntary labelling need to be considered. We discuss the complexity of EU citizens’ concerns, the heterogeneity of supply chains and the attitudes of market actors, reflecting on potential strategies for addressing these concerns in the forthcoming report on strategies (May 2008). More informa- tion: Mara Miele, mieleM@cardiff.ac.uk and Unni Kjærnes, unni.kjarnes@sifo.no @end-2@