Agrarian Economy 2025 Т. 18 № 3-4: 91-106

INTERNATIONAL CONCEPT OF ANIMAL HEALTH AND WELFARE: KEY ASPECTS FOR DISCUSSION

Kovtun O., Candidate of Agricultural Sciences (PhD), Senior Research Officer
ORCID ID: 0009-0002-9993-9837
Nevostruieva I., Candidate of Agricultural Sciences (PhD), Senior Research Officer
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-5797-5592
Smolianinova O., Candidate of Agricultural Sciences (PhD), Senior Research Officer
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-6848-5310
Stakhiv N., Candidate of Agricultural Sciences (PhD), Research Officer
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-4302-1229
Institute of Animal Biology of NAAS, Lviv

https://doi.org/10.31734/agrarecon2025.03-04.091

ANNOTATION

This study explores the concept and stages of development of the European Union’s policy framework on animal health and welfare. The research is based on an analytical review and synthesis of scientific literature, as well as international and national regulatory documents governing animal health and welfare policy. The findings demonstrate that within the EU, the concept of animal welfare is grounded in the principle of the “Five Freedoms” and is addressed through an intersectoral approach. At the same time, the EU promotes the importance of animal welfare and protection as an integral element of its overall sustainable development strategy. The study employs a qualitative analytical approach based on the examination of scientific publications, policy reports, and regulatory documents from the European Commission, the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), and national legislative sources. The analysis includes thematic synthesis of data concerning the evolution, principles, and implementation mechanisms of the EU’s animal health and welfare strategy. Indicators such as animal behavior, mortality, reproductive efficiency, and productivity were examined as key parameters of welfare assessment. Key welfare indicators analyzed include stereotypic behavior, mortality rate, and reproductive performance of farm animals. Prolonged deviations from standards of housing, care, and nutrition were found to lead to physiological exhaustion, disruption of metabolic processes, and suppression of immune functions. The study also reveals that local-level dissemination and adoption of international welfare standards among animal owners and keepers remain limited. The study’s novelty lies in establishing the relationship between welfare indicators and the productive and reproductive performance of farm animals. The practical value of the results lies in their potential use for designing new approaches to disseminating welfare knowledge and encouraging the integration of international standards in local livestock management practices.

KEYWORDS

EU integration, animal health, animal welfare, Five Freedoms concept

FULL TEXT

LINK

  1. Acharya, R. Y., Hemsworth, P. H., Coleman, G. J., & Kinder, J. E., 2022. The Animal-Human Interface in Farm Animal Production: Animal Fear, Stress, Reproduction and Welfare. Animals, 12 (4), pp. 487. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12040487
  2. Agnew, J. & Hendery, S., 2023. Global agricultural productivity report: every farmer, every tool. Virginia Tech College of Agriculture and Life Sciences [online] Available at: https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/ebec4836-70f0-4747-8045-fa36c33eeb12/content [Accessed November 24, 2024]
  3. Animal health and welfare as a public good: what do the public think? Agriculture and Human Values, 2024 / Clark, B., Proctor, A., Boaitey, A. et al. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-024-10585-0
  4. Animal Welfare, Health and the Fight against Climate Change: One Solution for Global Objectives, 2021 / Bozzo, G., Corrente, M., Testa, G. et al. Agriculture, 11, pp. 1248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11121248
  5. Appleby, M. C., Hughes, B. O., Mench, J. A., & Olsson, A., 2011. Animal welfare, 2-nd (edn.). Wallingford, England.
  6. Associations between on-farm welfare, milk production, and reproductive performance in dairy herds in Northwestern Spain, 2020 / Bugueiro, A. et al. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 24 (1), pp. 9–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2020.1750016
  7. Bareille, N., Beaudeau, F., Billon, S. et al., 2003. Effects of health disorders on feed intake and milk production in dairy cows. Livestock Production Science, 83 (1), pp. 53–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(03)00040-X
  8. Bazyvolyak, S. M., Prokopenko, N. P., & Melnyk, V. V., 2023. Functioning of poultry farming during martial law in Ukraine. Modern Poultry Farming, 3 (4), pp. 244–245.
  9. Brambell, F. W., 1965. Report of the Technical Committee to Enquire into the Welfare of animals kept under intensive livestock husbandry systems. London: H.M.S.O. [online] Available at: https://archive.org/details/b3217276x/page/n3/mode/2up [Accessed September 10, 2025].
  10. Broom, D. M., & Corke, M. J., 2002. Effects of disease on farm animal welfare. Acta. Vet. Brno, 71, p. 133–136.
  11. CAP: Confederacao de agricultores de Portugal, 2018. Manual do Bem-Estar Animal [online] Available at: https://www.dgadr.gov.pt/images/docs/formacao/manuais_bem_ estar_animal/ Manual_BEA.pdf [Accessed November 22, 2024].
  12. Ceballos, M. C., & Sant'Anna, A. C., 2018. Evolução da ciência do bem-estar animal: aspectos conceituais e metodológicos. Revista Acadêmica Ciência Animal. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7213/1981-4178.2018.161103
  13. Clark, B., Proctor, A., Boaitey, A. et al., 2024. Animal health and welfare as a public good: what do the public think? Agriculture and Human Values. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-024-10585-0
  14. Consumer attitudes towards farm animal welfare in Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia: A segmentation-based study, 2022 / Estévez-Moreno, L. X. et al. Meat Science, 187, pp. 108747. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.108747
  15. Costantino, A., Fabrizio, E., & Calvet, S., 2021. The Role of Climate Control in Monogastric Animal Farming: The Effects on Animal Welfare, Air Emissions, Productivity, Health, and Energy Use. Applied Sciences, 11, pp. 9549. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app11209549
  16. Dawkins, M. S., 2008. The Science of Animal Suffering. International Journal of Behavioural Biology: Ethology. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2008.01557.x
  17. Effects of health disorders on feed intake and milk production in dairy cows, 2003 / Bareille, N., Beaudeau, F., Billon, S. et al. Livestock Production Science, 83 (1), pp. 53–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(03)00040-X
  18. Effects of housing systems on behaviour and welfare of autochthonous laying hens and a commercial hybrid, 2024 / Fiorilla, E., Ozella, L., Sirri, F. et al. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 274, pp. 106247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106247
  19. Environmental enrichment in pig farming, 2020 / Foppa, L. et al. Brasilia: MAPA.
  20. European Commission, 2020. A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system Brussels [online] Available at: https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontal-topics/farm-fork-strategy_en [Accessed November 22, 2024].
  21. European Commission, 2023. Summary of CAP Strategic Plans for 2023-2027: joint effort and collective ambition. Brussels [online] Available at: https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-11/com-2023-707-report_en.pdf [Accessed November 22, 2024].
  22. European Commission. EU animal welfare legislation [online] Available at: https://food.ec.europa.eu/animals/animal-welfare/eu-animal-welfare-legislation_en? [Accessed September 20, 2025].
  23. European Commission. The European Green Deal. Striving to be the first climate-neutral continent [online] Available at: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_en [Accessed September 20, 2025].
  24. European Union. 92/583/EEC: Council Decision of 14 December 1992 on the conclusion of the Protocol of amendment to the European Convention for the Protection of Animals kept for Farming Purposes [online] Available at: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/1992/583/oj [Accessed September 20, 2025].
  25. Eurostat. Sustainable development in the European Union – Monitoring report on progress towards the SDGs in an EU context – 2023 edition, 2023 [online] Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-flagship-publications/w/ks-04-23-184 [Accessed September 15, 2025].
  26. Evans, H. C., Briggs, E. F. & Burnett, R. H., 2022. Harnessing the value of reproductive hormones in cattle production with considerations to animal welfare and human health. Journal of Animal Science, 100 (7), skac177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skac177
  27. FAWS: Farm Animal Welfare Counsil. Farm Animal Welfare in Great Britain: Past, Present and Future. London, 2009 [online] Available at: http://www.fawc.org.uk/ [Accessed September 15, 2025].
  28. Fraser, D., 2024. Compreendendo bem-estar animal. EDUEL.
  29. Garner, J. P., 2005. Stereotypies and other abnormal repetitive behaviors: potential impact on validity, reliability, and replicability of scientific outcomes free. ILAR Journal, 46 (2), pp. 106–117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.46.2.106
  30. Garrett, R. D., Niles, M. T., & Gil, J.D.B., 2017. Social and ecological analysis of commercial integrated crop livestock systems: Current knowledge and remaining uncertainty. Agricultural Systems, 155, pp. 136–146. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2017.05.003
  31. Gebert, J., & Kuhne, F., 2024. Effects of different husbandry systems and attitudes of cattle farmers on the behavior and welfare of cattle in Germany. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2024.2409144
  32. Gobikrushanth, M., Macmillan, K., & Behrouzi, A., 2019. The factors associated with postpartum body condition score change and its relationship with serum analytes, milk production and reproductive performance in dairy cows. Livestock Science, 228, pp. 151–160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2019.05.016
  33. Guiné, Rd.PF, Pato, M.L.J., & Costa, C. A., 2021. Food Security and Sustainability: Discussing the Four Pillars to Encompass Other Dimensions. Foods, 10, pp. 2732. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10112732
  34. Impact of global climate change on the health, welfare and productivity of intensively housed livestock, 2011 / Kuczynski, T. et. al. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 4 (2), pp. 1–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3965/j.issn.1934-6344.2011.02.001-022
  35. Impact of global climate change on the health, welfare and productivity of intensively housed livestock, 2011 / Kuczynski, T. et al. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 4 (2), pp. 1–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3965/j.issn.1934-6344.2011.02.001-022
  36. Impacts of climate change on animal welfare, 2023 / Joseph, J., Charalambous, R., Pahuja, H. et al. CABI Reviews, 19 (1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1079/cabireviews.2023.0020
  37. Jensen, P., 2017. The ethology of domestic animals. An introductory text. 3rd edition. CABI International.
  38. Kovtun, O. V., 2018. Development of family farming production as the guaranty of stable food security: review of the situation in Ukraine and some countries of the world. Animal Breeding and Genetics, 56, pp. 141–148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31073/abg.56.19
  39. Kovtun, O. V., 2023. Threats to the sustainable development of the agricultural sector and the countryside during the Russian-Ukrainian war. In: Scientific research in modern conditions of instability’2023: monograph. European Science, 3, pp. 114–123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30890/2709-2313.2023-24-03-021
  40. Kovtun, O., & Stiurko, M., 2025. European Union Policy on Sustainable Rural Development: Challenges for Ukraine in Unstable Times. In: Brito, P. S., da Costa Sanches Galvão, J. R., Almeida H., Rosa Ferreira L. C., Alves Flores de Oliveira Gala PE (eds) ICoWEFS 2024 Sustainability Proceedings. ICoWEFS 2024. Lecture Notes on Multidisciplinary Industrial Engineering. Springer, Cham. P. 179–185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-80330-7_19
  41. Kushnerenko, V. H., 2023. The influence of stress factors on the quality of animal meat. Tavria Scientific Bulletin, 131, pp. 290–295. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2226-0099.2023.131.35
  42. Lacetera, N., 2019. Impact of climate change on animal health and welfare. Feature Article, 9 (1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/af/vfy030
  43. Law of Ukraine No 3447–IV “On the Protection of Animals from Cruelty” of February 21, 2006 [online] Available at: https://www.president.gov.ua/documents/3447-iv-3976 [Accessed September 15, 2025].
  44. Liudvenko, D. V., Tomilova-Yaremchuk, N. O., & Khomovyi, S. M., 2024. The negative impact of military actions on the economic indicators of the development of the livestock industry in Ukraine: accounting, analytical and audit aspects. Achievements of the economy: prospects and innovations, 8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12794991
  45. Lukianchuk, D., 2023. How the war affected animal life and animal protection in Ukraine. Ukrainska Pravda [online] Available at: https://life.pravda.com.ua/columns/2023/02/24/253030/ [Accessed September 15, 2025].
  46. Maji, C., Patel, N. R., & Suthar, A. 2024. Animal welfare and public health in relation to milk hygiene. The microbiology, pathogenesis and zoonosis of milk borne deseases, pp. 359–385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-13805-8.00023-5
  47. Mason, G., 2006. Stereotypic behaviour in captive animals: fundamentals and implications for welfare and beyond. CABI Digital Library, 325–356. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851990040.0325
  48. Meta-analysis and systematic literature review of climate change effects on livestock welfare, 2022 / Morgado, J. N. et al. EFSA Journal, 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.e200413
  49. Mitchell, L., 2011. Moral Disengagement and Support for Nonhuman Animal Farming. In: Society & Animals. Brill [online] Available at: https://brill.com/view/journals/soan/19/1/article-p38_3.xml [Accessed 15.09.2025].
  50. Moberg, G. P.E., & Mench, J. A., 2000. The biology of animal stress. Basic principles and implications for animal welfare. CABI Publishing.
  51. Moore, R. S., Cabana, F., & Nekaris, K. A. I., 2015. Factors influencing stereotypic behaviours of animals rescued from Asian animal markets: A slow loris case study. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 166, pp. 131–136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2015.02.014
  52. Morgan, K. N., & Tromborg, C. T., 2007. Sources of stress in captivity. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 102 (3–4), pp. 262–302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.05.032
  53. Moyano-Estrada, E., & Ortega, A. C., 2014. A reforma da PAC para o período 2014–2020: uma aposta no desenvolvimento territorial. Revista Economia e Sociologia Rural. Piracicaba-SP, 5 (4), pp. 687–704 [online] Available at: http://www.scielo.br/pdf [Accessed September 15, 2025].
  54. Narayan, E., Barreto, M., & Hantzopoulou, G. C., 2021. A retrospective literature evaluation of the integration of stress physiology indices, animal welfare and climate change assessment of livestock. Animals, 11, pp. 1287. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11051287
  55. Newsletter of the Welfare Quality Network, 2023 [online] Available at: https://www.welfarequalitynetwork.net/media/1318/wqnews-9.pdf [Accessed September 15, 2025].
  56. OIE – Terrestrial Animal Health Code. 19 Edition, Paris, 2019 [online] Available at: https://rr-europe.woah.org/app/uploads/2020/08/oie-terrestrial-code-1_2019_en.pdf [Accessed September 15, 2025].
  57. Organic pork production technologies, 2023 / Zasukha, L. V. et al. Pig farming and agro-industrial production, 1 (79), pp. 54–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37143/2786-7730-2023-1(79)04
  58. Pashkovska, M.V., 2018. Legal Regulation of Animal Protection Against Improper Treatment in Ukraine. Scientific Bulletin of the National Academy of Internal Affairs, 3 (108), pp. 108–120 [online] Available at: https://elar.naiau.kiev.ua/server/api/core/bitstreams/001c290d-a3ee-4151-bead-2e300c7b13ab/content [Accessed October 28, 2025].
  59. Precision livestock farming technology: applications and challenges of animal welfare and climate change, 2024 / Papakonstantinou, G. I., et al. Agriculture, 14, pp. 620. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14040620
  60. Ribas, J., Nagano, Y. F, & Costa, M. J. P., 2023. Strategies to improve pig welfare: Literature revision. Veterinaria (Montev.), 59 (220). DOI: https://doi.org/10.29155/vet.59.220.5.
  61. Roche, J. R., Friggens, N. C., & Kay, J. K., 2009. Invited review: Body condition score and its association with dairy cow productivity, health, and welfare. Journal of Dairy Science, 92 (12), pp. 5769–5801. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2431
  62. Russian-Ukrainian war impacts the total environment, 2022 / Pereira, P. et al. Science of the total environmental, 837. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155865
  63. Ryan, M., Waters, R., & Wolfensohn, D., 2021. Assessment of the Welfare of Experimental Cattle and Pigs Using the Animal Welfare Assessment Grid. Animals, 11 (4), pp. 999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11040999
  64. Rykovska, O., 2024. Analysis of the state of agriculture in Ukraine and the implementation of EU regulatory legal acts related to agricultural and environmental issues / Rykovska, O. Frayer, O. Mykhailenko; ed. M. Belkina, A. Danyliak. Kyiv: NGO “Ekodiia”.
  65. Rykovska, O., Fryer, O., & Yarovyi, V., 2023. European integration challenges and solutions for sustainable rural development and environmental protection on the example of Poland, Bulgaria and Romania. Kyiv: NGO “Ekodiia” Center for Environmental Initiatives.
  66. Samoylovych, A. H., 2023. Scientific approaches to the research of the impact of digitalization on ensuring the sustainable development of the country and its regions. Economic Synergy, (2), pp. 131–147. DOI: https://doi.org/10.53920/ES-2023-2-10
  67. Shields, S., & Orme-Evans, G., 2015. The impacts of climate change mitigation strategies on animal welfare. Animals, 5, pp. 361–394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani5020361
  68. Silva, W. C., Silva, J. A. R., & Camargo-Júnior, J. N. C., 2023. Animal welfare and effects of per-female stress on male and cattle reproduction – A review. Front. Vet. Sci., Sec. Animal Reproduction – Theriogenology. 10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1083469
  69. Singh, S., 2024. Pig behavior and welfare. In: Good practices and principles in pig farming. Springer Nature, 77–83 [online] Available at: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-97-4665-1_6 [Accessed September 15, 2025].
  70. Stolba, A., & Wood-Gush, D. G. M., 1989. The behaviour of pigs in a semi-natural environment. Animal production, 48 (2), pp. 419–425.
  71. Stovbetska, L., Poroshinska, O., & Nischemenko, M., 2021. Effect of stress on performance and physiological functions in pigs. Scientific Messenger of LNU of Veterinary Medicine and Biotechnologies. Series: Veterinary Sciences, 23 (102), pp. 14–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32718/nvlvet10203
  72. Synoverska, T. I., 2019. International and national legislation in the field of animal protection from cruelty. Journal of the Kyiv University of Law, 1, pp. 257–262 [online] Available at: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Chkup_2019_1_56 [Accessed September 15, 2025].
  73. The effects of providing shade to lactating dairy cows in a temperate climate, 2006 / Kendall, P. E. et al. Livestock Science, 103, pp. 148–157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.02.004
  74. The European Green Deal: Opportunities and Threats for Ukraine, 2020. Analytical document. Resource and Analytical Center «Society and Environment».
  75. Tunikovska, L. H., 2023. Peculiarities of the influence of various stress factors on the organism of farm animals. Tavria Scientific Bulletin, 111, pp. 225–230. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32851/2226-0099.2020.111.31
  76. Tuyttens, F. A. M., 2005. The importance of straw for pig and cattle welfare: A review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 92, pp. 261–282. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2005.05.007
  77. Uetake, K., 2012. Newborn calf welfare: A review focusing on mortality rates. Animal Science Journal. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12019
  78. UK Parliament, 1965. Brambell Commettee (Report). House of Commons [online] Available at: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1965-12-15/debates/d55f57f7-8868-48bb-8c47-7c6d3a7ef2e4/BrambellCommittee(Report) [Accessed 15.09.2025].
  79. Ukraine World, 2019 [online] Available at: https://ukraineworld.org/en/articles/ukraine-explained/5-ukrainian-biosphere-reserves-you-have-visit [Accessed August 10, 2025].
  80. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Order No 224 of 08.02.2021. On approval of the Requirements for the welfare of farm animals during their maintenance [online] Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0206-21#Text [Accessed August 10, 2025].
  81. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Requirements for the welfare of pigs during their maintenance. 08.02.2021 [online] Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0209-21#Text [Accessed August 10, 2025].
  82. Waiblinger, S., Menke, C., & Coleman, G., 2002. The relationship between attitudes, personal characteristics and behaviour of stockpeople and subsequent behaviour and production of dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 79 (3), pp. 195–219.
  83. Wendy, J., 2002. Pain and distress in agricultural animals. Animal Welfare Forum: Pain Management: JAVMA, 221 (2), pp. 208–211.
  84. Williams, J., & Randle, H., 2017. Is the expression of stereotypic behavior a performance-limiting factor in animals? Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 20, pp. 1–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2017.02.006
  85. Wolfsberger, W., Chhugani, K., Shchubelka, K., Frolova, A., & Salyha, Y., 2023. Scientists without borders: lessons from Ukraine. GigaScience, 12: giad045. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giad045
  86. Yeates, J. W., 2024. Animal behaviour and welfare research: A One Health perspective. Research Ethics, 20 (3), pp. 411–432. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161241236941
  87. Zaitseva, L. O., 2019. Constituents of sustainable development. Efficient Economics, 11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32702/2307-2105-2019.11.55
  88. Zubchenko, N. I., 2016. International legal cooperation of states in the sphere of ensuring animal welfare and their protection from cruelty: monograph. Odesa: Fenix.
  89. Zubets, M. V., Tokarev, M. F., & Vinnychuk, D. T., 1996. Ethology of cattle. Kyiv: Agricultural Science.