References

De Boyer des Roches A, Lussert A Dairy cows under experimentally-induced Escherichia coli mastitis show negative emotional states assessed through Qualitative Behaviour Assessment.. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2018; 206:1-11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2018.06.004

Ellingsen K, Coleman GJ, Lund V, Mejdell CM Using qualitative behaviour assessment to explore the link between stockperson behaviour and dairy calf behaviour.. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2014; 153:10-17 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2014.01.011

Fleming PA, Clarke T, Wickham SL The contribution of qualitative behavioural assessment to appraisal of livestock welfare.. Anim Prod Sci. 2016; 56:(10)1569-78 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN15101

Grosso L, Battini M, Wemelsfelder F On-farm Qualitative Behaviour Assessment of dairy goats in different housing conditions.. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2016; 180:51-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2016.04.013

Hubbard C, Scott K Do farmers and scientists differ in their understanding and assessment of farm animal welfare?. Anim Welf. 2011; 20:79-87

Main DCJ, Mullan S, Atkinson C, Cooper M, Wrathall JHM, Blokhuis HJ Best practice framework for animal welfare certification schemes.. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2014; 37:(2)127-36 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2014.03.009

Mellor D Updating Animal Welfare Thinking: Moving beyond the ‘Five Freedoms’ towards ‘A Life Worth Living’.. Animals (Basel). 2016; 6:(3) https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6030021

Mendl M, Burman OHP, Paul ES An integrative and functional framework for the study of animal emotion and mood.. Proc Biol Sci. 2010; 277:(1696)2895-904 https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.0303

Muri K, Stubsjøen SM Inter-observer reliability of Qualitative Behavioural Assessments (QBA) of housed sheep in Norway using fixed lists of descriptors.. Anim Welf. 2017; 26:(4)427-35 https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.26.4.427

Murphy E, Nordquist RE, van der Staay FJ A review of behavioural methods to study emotion and mood in pigs, Sus scrofa.. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2014; 159:9-28 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2014.08.002

Nawroth C, Langbein J, Coulon M Farm Animal Cognition—Linking Behavior, Welfare and Ethics.. Front Vet Sci. 2019; 6 https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2019.00024

Phythian CJ, Michalopoulou E, Cripps PJ, Duncan JS, Wemelsfelder F On-farm qualitative behaviour assessment in sheep: repeated measurements across time, and association with physical indicators of flock health and welfare.. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2016; 175:23-31 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2015.11.013

Reefmann N, Wechsler B, Gygax L Behavioural and physiological assessment of positive and negative emotion in sheep.. Anim Behav. 2009; 78:(3)651-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.06.015

Rutherford KMD, Donald RD, Lawrence AB, Wemelsfelder F Qualitative Behavioural Assessment of emotionality in pigs.. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2012; 139:(3-4)218-24 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2012.04.004

Stockman CA, Collins T, Barnes AL Qualitative behavioural assessment and quantitative physiological measurement of cattle naïve and habituated to road transport.. Anim Prod Sci. 2011; 51:(3)240-9 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN10122

Stockman CA, Collins T, Barnes AL Flooring and driving conditions during road transport influence the behavioural expression of cattle.. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2013; 143:(1)18-30 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2012.11.003

Tuyttens FAM, de Graaf S, Heerkens JLT Observer bias in animal behaviour research: can we believe what we score, if we score what we believe?. Animal Behaviour. 2014; 90:273-80 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.02.007

van Dijk L, Elwes S, Main DCJ, Mullan SM, Jamieson J Farmer perspectives on welfare outcome assessment: learnings from four farm assurance scheme consultation exercises.. Anim Welf. 2018; 27:(1)1-11 https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.27.1.001

Weary DM, von Keyserlingk MAG Public concerns about dairy-cow welfare: how should the industry respond?. Anim Prod Sci. 2017; 57:(7)1201-9 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN16680

Wemelsfelder F How animals communicate quality of life: the qualitative assessment of animal behaviour.. Animal Welfare. 2007; 16:25-31

Wemelsfelder F, Hunter TEA, Mendl MT, Lawrence AB Assessing the ‘whole animal’: a free choice profiling approach.. Anim Behav. 2001; 62:(2)209-220 https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2001.1741

Wemelsfelder F, Nevison I, Lawrence AB The effect of perceived environmental background on qualitative assessments of pig behaviour.. Anim Behav. 2009; 78:(2)477-84 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.06.005

Würbel H Ethology applied to animal ethics.. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2009; 118:(3-4)118-27 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2009.02.019

Farm practice

Qualitative behaviour assessment as an indicator of animal emotional welfare in farm assurance

02 July 2020
Farm Practice
9 mins read
02 July 2020
Volume 25 · Issue 4
Figure 1. Pigs showing different expressive demeanours (images © Marianne Farish, SRUC).
Figure 1. Pigs showing different expressive demeanours (images © Marianne Farish, SRUC).

Abstract

Acknowledgement of animals as sentient beings (including farm animal species), capable of experiencing positive and negative emotions, has highlighted the need for suitable ‘welfare outcome’ measures in farm assurance schemes. Current schemes tend to focus on measures of physical health and productivity, but there is as yet a lack of indicators addressing farmed animals' emotional wellbeing. A number of assessment techniques exist that may help us develop such indicators, and better understand the extent to which farm animals do, or do not, experience ‘a good life’. This article focuses on one such technique, ‘qualitative behaviour assessment’ (QBA), and reviews the potential benefits of, and challenges to, its practical deployment in the field.

It is now well accepted that animals are sentient beings, with the commonly-farmed domestic species known to be capable of a complex variety of intellectual capacities, and of experiencing positive and negative emotions (Nawroth et al, 2019). Keepers of farm animals and consumers of livestock products are therefore invested in the idea that good welfare of farmed animals is desirable and an ethical responsibility (Weary and von Keyserlingk, 2017). Traditionally, commonly used frameworks in the UK such as the Five Freedoms have focused on the prevention of negative experiences. More recent frameworks for animal welfare assessment however have expanded this to include positive experiences and capacities such as choice and decision-making (Mellor, 2016). The Farm Animal Welfare Committee suggested in their 2009 review, Farm Animal Welfare in Great Britain: Past, Present and Future, that policy goals should be to ensure that all farm animals have a ‘life worth living’ and an increasing number should enjoy ‘a good life’.

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting UK-VET Companion Animal and reading some of our peer-reviewed content for veterinary professionals. To continue reading this article, please register today.

Register
Or continue by

Signing in with your registered email address

qualitative behaviour assessment
animal welfare
farm assurance