One welfare a framework to improve animal welfare and human well-being

Animal Health and Welfare, Human Well-being, Food Security and Sustainability 51

Another study in broilers in Great Britain showed that Campylobacter-

positive batches of caeca were associated with higher levels of rejection due

to infection and digital dermatitis (Bull et al., 2008). This could mean that

interventions to reduce Campylobacter levels can also have a positive effect

in reducing the prevalence of pododermatitis on target farms, and vice versa.

Illegal meat slaughter also connects to animal welfare and food

safety issues as it may lack relevant welfare food inspection safeguards.

Collaborations working on the illegal meat trade, welfare aspects and food

safety may help to improve intervention efficiency.

Case Study 12 – European Food Safety Authority work on animal welfare

(by Denise Candiani, European Food Safety Authority)

The European Food Safety Authority^1 (EFSA) is an agency established in 2002 by the

European Union (EU) under the General Food Law – Regulation 178/2002. It pro-

vides the EU Commission, Parliament and Member States with independent scientific

advice and communication on risks associated with the food chain. Animal welfare

is part of EFSA’s remit. The safety of the food chain is indirectly affected by the welfare

of farmed animals, owing to the close links between animal welfare, animal health

and food-borne diseases. EFSA’s activities in this field are carried out by a multidiscip-

linary Panel of experts on animal health and welfare (AHAW). The Panel generally

includes academic, government and industry members with expertize on the topic

under discussion. Its scientific opinions focus on methods to reduce unnecessary

pain, distress and suffering for animals and to increase welfare. The European

Commission has mandated the AHAW Panel to provide scientific advice on the

welfare of several farm animal categories including pigs, cattle, poultry and fish.

As an example of the work undertaken, in 2017 EFSA and the European

Medicines Agency jointly published a scientific opinion on the ‘measures to re-

duce the need to use antimicrobial agents in animal husbandry in the European

Union, and the resulting impacts on food safety’ (EFSA, 2017). The AHAW Panel

contributed to this opinion with a chapter focused on the prevention of disease

as a tool to reduce the use of antimicrobials. The need for antimicrobials can be

reduced through the application of good farm management and husbandry prac-

tices, in particular those aiming at:

• reducing the introduction and spread of microorganisms between farms or
  within a farm (primary and secondary prevention);


• increasing the resilience of the animals, namely their ability to cope with
  pathogens (tertiary prevention).

Tertiary prevention refers to practices that aim to improve animal welfare. It

includes appropriate housing, nutrition, stress reduction (by ensuring thermal

comfort, reducing stocking density, reducing mixing of unfamiliar animals, ensur-

ing proper weaning, avoiding feed restrictions, ensuring proper animal handling,

ensuring proper enrichment, ensuring proper conditions during transport), vac-

cination and genetic selection. The scientific opinion concludes that ‘collectively

and individually, these approaches can increase the ability of an animal’s im-

mune system to respond appropriately to an infectious challenge’ (EFSA, 2017).

(^1) EFSA: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/