1. The aim of this experiment was to describe and examine the relationship between pecks received by individual birds and the feather and skin damage of those birds at different ages. The effect of group size was also studied. 2. Laying hens were raised in floor pens in group sizes of 15, 30, 60 and 120 birds, each with 4 replicates. Behavioural observations were performed at the ages of 22, 27, 32 and 37 weeks. Detailed feather scoring was carried out at the ages of 18, 23, 28 and 33 weeks. 3. Behavioural observations focused on the number of feather pecks (gentle and severe) and aggressive pecks received, and on the part of the body that was pecked. Scoring of feather and skin damage focused on the same 11 parts of the body. 4. Increasing numbers of aggressive pecks received were associated with decreased body weight and increased feather damage at the ages of 27 and 32 weeks. 5. The number of severe feather pecks received was significantly related with feather damage at all ages; however, no relation with gentle feather pecks received was found. 6. Group size had a significant effect on feather condition, with large group sizes having most feather damage.

Although stocking density is perceived as a topic of major importance, no consensus has been reached on what density would allow for good welfare. In

As farm animal welfare becomes an increasingly important component of contemporary global livestock production, animal welfare science and animal welfare policy-making need to find new ways of entering global debates over food security and sustainability. In this paper, we explore the means by which both animal welfare science and policy should articulate with these emerging global debates. Having first established the important gains in animal welfare policy and the maturity of animal welfare science, we identify and explore the potential impact of these current debates and argue that they have the potential for profound change in our understanding of, and our response to, the welfare of animals. We conclude the paper with a number of possible recommendations for how a scientifically informed, sustainable animal welfare policy might flourish.

This paper systematically evaluates the extent to which achieving the UN sustainable development goals (SDGs) is compatible with improving animal welfare. The analyses were based on discussion and independent scoring in a group of 12 participants with academic backgrounds within agricultural or veterinary sciences. We considered all categories of animals; those kept for food production, working and companion animals, but also laboratory and wild animals. The strengths of the links between improving animal welfare and achieving an SDG were scored on a 7-point scale, from being completely indivisible, at one end of the scale, to where it is impossible to reach both the SDG and improved animal welfare at the same time. There was good consensus between participants, with the overall scores being positive, indicating that although animal welfare is not explicitly mentioned in the SDGs, working to achieving the SDGs is compatible with working to improve animal welfare. When analyzing the direction of the links, the impact of achieving an SDG was considered, on average, to be slightly better at leading to improved animal welfare, than the impact of improving animal welfare was on achieving the SDG. The exception to this was for SDG 2, dealing with zero hunger. The two SDGs for which there was strongest mutual reinforcing were SDG 12, which deals with responsible production and consumption, and SDG 14, which deals with life below water. Most of the targets under these two SDGs were considered relevant to animal welfare, whereas when all SDGs were considered, 66 targets of the total of 169 were considered relevant. Although the results of this study suggest a mutually beneficial relationship between improving animal welfare and achieving SDGs, this should be confirmed on a wider group of people, for example people from less developed countries and other stakeholders. Showing the relationships between animal welfare and the sustainable development goals helps highlight the importance of animal welfare when implementing these goals in practice. The methodology described in this study could also be useful to researchers working with other societal and environmental issues not yet considered within the overall SDG framework.

The concept of animal welfare is evolving due to progress in our scientific understanding of animal biology and changing societal expectations. Animal welfare science has been primarily concerned with minimizing suffering, but there is growing interest in also promoting positive experiences, grouped under the term positive animal welfare (PAW). However, there are discrepancies in the use of the term PAW. An interdisciplinary group arrived at a consensus that ‘PAW can be defined as the animal flourishing through the experience of predominantly positive mental states and the development of competence and resilience. PAW goes beyond ensuring good physical health and the prevention and alleviation of suffering. It encompasses animals experiencing positive mental states resulting from rewarding experiences, including having choices and opportunities to actively pursue goals and achieve desired outcomes’. The definition also considers individual and species-specific differences. It provides a framework for researchers to investigate PAW and thereby generate innovative, informative and reproducible science. Studies of PAW can contribute to a richer picture of an animal’s life and may elucidate the biological foundations of happiness. The definition creates opportunities to inspire scientific progress in animal biology and to align animal care practices, legislation and markets with societal expectations.