Should the contribution of one additional lame cow depend on how many other cows on the farm are lame?
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Should the contribution of one additional lame cow depend on how many other cows on the farm are lame? / Sandøe, Peter; Forkman, Björn; Hakansson, Franziska; Andreasen, Sine Norlander; Nøhr, Rikke; Denwood, Matt; Lund, Thomas Bøker.
In: Animals, Vol. 7, No. 12, 96, 12.2017.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Should the contribution of one additional lame cow depend on how many other cows on the farm are lame?
AU - Sandøe, Peter
AU - Forkman, Björn
AU - Hakansson, Franziska
AU - Andreasen, Sine Norlander
AU - Nøhr, Rikke
AU - Denwood, Matt
AU - Lund, Thomas Bøker
PY - 2017/12
Y1 - 2017/12
N2 - Welfare Quality® proposes a system for aggregation according to which the total welfare score for a group of animals is a non-linear effect of the prevalence of welfare scores across the individuals within the group. Three assumptions serve to justify this: (1) experts do not follow a linear reasoning when they assess a welfare problem; (2) it serves to prevent compensation (severe welfare problems hidden by scoring well on other aspects of welfare); (3) experts agree on the weight of different welfare measures. We use two sources of data to examine these assumptions: animal welfare data from 44 Danish dairy farms with Danish Holstein Friesian cows, and data from a questionnaire study with a convenience sample of 307 experts in animal welfare, of which we received responses from over 50%. Our main results were: (1) the total group-level welfare score as assigned by experts is a non-linear function of the individual animal welfare states within the group; (2) the WQ system does not prevent what experts perceive as unacceptable compensation; (3) the level of agreement among experts appears to vary across measures. Our findings give rise to concerns about the proposed aggregation system offered by WQ.
AB - Welfare Quality® proposes a system for aggregation according to which the total welfare score for a group of animals is a non-linear effect of the prevalence of welfare scores across the individuals within the group. Three assumptions serve to justify this: (1) experts do not follow a linear reasoning when they assess a welfare problem; (2) it serves to prevent compensation (severe welfare problems hidden by scoring well on other aspects of welfare); (3) experts agree on the weight of different welfare measures. We use two sources of data to examine these assumptions: animal welfare data from 44 Danish dairy farms with Danish Holstein Friesian cows, and data from a questionnaire study with a convenience sample of 307 experts in animal welfare, of which we received responses from over 50%. Our main results were: (1) the total group-level welfare score as assigned by experts is a non-linear function of the individual animal welfare states within the group; (2) the WQ system does not prevent what experts perceive as unacceptable compensation; (3) the level of agreement among experts appears to vary across measures. Our findings give rise to concerns about the proposed aggregation system offered by WQ.
KW - Aggregation
KW - Animal welfare
KW - Expert perception
KW - Lameness
KW - Welfare assessment
KW - Welfare quality®
U2 - 10.3390/ani7120096
DO - 10.3390/ani7120096
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 29232887
AN - SCOPUS:85038086144
VL - 7
JO - Animals
JF - Animals
SN - 2076-2615
IS - 12
M1 - 96
ER -
ID: 187261225