In the 2000s, the idea of a so-called middle-segment arose in North-West Europe to address the criticism on intensive broiler production systems. Middle-segment systems being indoor housing of slower-growing broiler strains at a stocking density ≤38 kg/m². Previous literature showed that Dutch middle-segment systems entail a relatively large gain in animal welfare at a relatively low increase in costs, i.e., have a high cost-efficiency. The question is to what extent these findings are applicable to other countries. Therefore, the aim of this study is to gain insight in the global prospects of middle-segment systems by exploring the cost-efficiency of these systems in other parts of the world. A set of representative countries, containing the Netherlands, United States and Brazil were selected. Cost-efficiency was defined as the ratio of the change in the level of animal welfare and the change in production costs. The level of animal welfare was measured by the Welfare Quality (WQ) index score. Data was collected from literature and consulting experts. Results show that in the Netherlands, United States and Brazil a change from conventional towards a middle-segment system improves animal welfare in a cost-efficient manner (the Netherlands 9.1, United States 24.2 and Brazil 12.1). Overall, it can be concluded that in general middle-segment production systems provide a considerable increase in animal welfare at a relatively small increase in production costs and therefore offer good prospects for a cost-efficient improvement of broiler welfare.

Since the 1970s, animal welfare (AW) in Dutch broiler production has been criticized by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the general public. Despite the development of production concepts aimed at improving AW, the conventional concept, which satisfied only the minimum legal requirements, remained by far the most dominant one in the Dutch fresh broiler meat market. Then, quite suddenly, in 2014–2015 (i.e., within less than two years), a new broiler concept with increased AW was introduced, which included a slower growing animal, more space, and an improved light regime. This alternative completely replaced the by then conventional concept. The aim of this study was to investigate the origin, causes, and driving forces of this sudden change. Popular and scientific literature, as well as interviews with key players in this transition process, were used to re-construct the chronology of events and draw the main and decisive findings. The latter include: (1) The availability of a cost-efficient alternative to conventional concepts, (2) a basic willingness to change within the entire value chain (including consumers), (3) initiating and triggering actions by NGOs, (4) decisive initiatives by retailers and (5) simultaneous introduction of the new concept and replacement of the conventional concept (i.e., depriving the consumer of a cheaper choice alternative). The result was a real transition of the Dutch fresh meat market without negative purchasing responses of the consumers. It was concluded that, although the Dutch fresh broiler meat market only included 30% of total domestic production, the existence of the abovementioned decisive factors could bring about an important change in favor of AW within a short period of time.

CONTEXT: In response to societal concerns, the European Union set up goals to address the negative impact of intensive broiler production on animal welfare, the environment and human health. OBJECTIVE: This paper aimed to 1) explore combinations of system changes that perform best in terms of farm income, animal welfare, emissions of ammonia (NH3) and particulate matter (PM10) and 2) are robust to changes in society's expectations relating to animal welfare and environmental sustainability. METHODS: The prevailing system in the Dutch broiler market was used as a baseline for evaluating system changes. Animal welfare, NH3 emissions and PM10 emissions were the three external factors chosen for this evaluation. Farm income was quantified by the net return to labor and management (NRLM). Expert knowledge elicitation was used to identify system changes that were likely to be implemented in the baseline system. Combinations were made by selecting system changes from each of the chosen external factors. A deterministic model was used to calculate the effect of each combination of system changes on net return to labor and management. The performance of each combination was evaluated by estimating a benefit-of-the-doubt composite indicator. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Results show that 8 out of 70 combinations indicated a better outcome and were more robust to potential changes in society's expectations relating to animal welfare and environmental sustainability. These combinations included two or more of the following system changes: 'lower density' (30 kg/m(2)), '2 types of enrichment', and 'daylight'. Furthermore, these combinations included 'tube heaters' for the abatement of NH3 emissions, and 'negative air ionization system' or 'ionization filter' for the abatement of PM10 emissions. To compensate for the decrease in NRLM associated with these practices and abatement techniques, a price premium was required that ranged between 4.8 and 18.5 eurocents/broiler. We conclude that combinations including animal welfare related system changes (lower density, enrichment and/or daylight), tube heaters and an ionization technique performed best and were robust to changes of societal expectations of these external factors. SIGNIFICANCE: The insights obtained from this paper can support decision making in improving the sustainability of current broiler production systems.

The production of food from animals poses societal concern about the welfare of these animals in Western countries and increasingly also in economically developing countries. Animals and people may experience disutility from animal suffering, which can be seen as an external cost that is not (fully) included in the cost of production. Thus, consumers will consume too much of the good from an aggregate utilitarian perspective. A potential way to solve this issue is by including these external costs in the production costs. The aim of this paper was to provide a method that can be used to estimate the external costs of animal welfare (AW) of animals kept at farm level. The external costs were calculated by means of a cost function. This cost function shows the relationship between the AW score and costs of AW measures at farm level. The AW scores were calculated from principle scores of the Welfare Quality^® Protocol. The method was applied to three case studies, namely dairy cattle production in Germany, pig production in the Netherlands, and broiler production in the Netherlands. The results indicate that the external costs of AW of dairy cattle systems ranged from 0.02 to 0.10 euro/kg milk, those of pig production systems from 1.00 to 1.36 euro/kg live weight and those of broiler production systems from 3.67 to 4.52 euro/kg live weight. The empirical application showed that the method was effective in estimating external animal costs. The insights obtained from the application of our method can support decision making in the development and adoption of more AW friendly production systems.

This article develops a framework for assessing the implementation of standards in a context of multiple negative externalities resulting from meat production. The framework is applied to the introduction of the New Dutch Retail Standard in the Dutch broiler market, a standard on animal welfare initiated by the private sector with national coverage. The results show that this standard did not lower producer, retailer, and consumer welfare; rather, social welfare increased by approximately 300 million euros. The framework provides a sound scientific basis for an ex ante analysis on the market potential of multiple standards.JEL CLASSIFICATION: D62; Q13; Q18