Understanding the behaviour of grazing animals at pasture is crucial in order to develop management strategies that will increase the potential productivity of grazing systems and simultaneously decrease the negative impact on the environment. The objective of this review was to summarize and analyse the scientific literature that has addressed the site use preference of grazing cattle using global positioning systems (GPS) collars in the past 21 years (2000–2020) to aid the development of more sustainable grazing livestock systems. The 84 studies identified were undertaken in several regions of the world, in diverse production systems, under different climate conditions and with varied methodologies and animal types. This work presents the information in categories according to the main findings reviewed, covering management, external and animal factors driving animal movement patterns. The results showed that some variables, such as stocking rate, water and shade location, weather conditions and pasture (terrain and vegetation) characteristics, have a significant impact on the behaviour of grazing cattle. Other types of bio-loggers can be deployed in grazing ruminants to gain insights into their metabolism and its relationship with the landscape they utilise. Changing management practices based on these findings could improve the use of grasslands towards more sustainable and productive livestock systems.

Stakeholders can hold conflicting values and viewpoints, on what animal welfare is and how a good life is achieved and can signal different problems, or problematize specific aspects of farm animal welfare, and propose different actions or interventions within food supply chains. The aim of the study is to explore the contribution of narrative and argumentative discourse to the social construction and framing of animal welfare and its implications. The methodological approach in this research is composed of two phases with phase 1 being the foundational structured literature search in both academic and grey literature. Phase 2 was the analysis of the secondary data from the literature review to develop a synthesized iterative paper and in doing so develop a typology of five narratives: the ‘farming as a business’ narrative, the ‘religion-based’ narrative, the ‘research, legislative and political based narrative’, the ‘higher welfare’ narrative, and the “animal rights/power-based” narrative. Our findings demonstrate the contestation within the stakeholder discourse of the articulation of why farm animals should have a good life. Performance-related perspectives are rooted in the value-laden language and narratives that shape the arguments regarding notions of good and bad welfare; the emergent positioning of positive welfare for farm animals as well as how to achieve a good life in practice. The novel contribution of this review is the application of an explanatory word-language-discourse-person-situation-environment framework in this specific context to inform future research on animal welfare discourse analysis.

The concept of positive welfare is an expansion of the traditional understanding that animal welfare is defined by minimizing stress, pain, suffering, and disease. Positive welfare shifts the animal welfare narrative from a focus on reducing negative experiences to proactively providing animals with opportunities to have positive experiences and feelings. The concept, although around for several decades, is in its infancy in terms of developing ways of assessing positive welfare on farms, especially in extensive systems, and there are challenges in the adoption of positive welfare practices and the monitoring of continuous improvement at the farm level. Using an iterative approach, this critical review aims to explore the extent to which positive welfare interventions and indicators are positioned and have been developed within the animal welfare literature for sheep. This paper critiques existing positive welfare indicators, such as choices in food and the physical environment, conspecific social synchronization, maternal bonds, intergenerational knowledge transfer, positive human–animal relationships, etc., as currently assessed by the ‘good life framework’. It also reviews the characteristics of scientific measures for (positive) affective states in the current sheep literature and their potential contribution to understanding positive welfare states in sheep. In conclusion, this paper provides recommendations for future research regarding sheep welfare.

The control of climatic conditions where cattle are kept is one of the challenges in the livestock sector regarding the digital automation of the process. (1) Background: The main purpose of this study is to define the optimal foundations for automatic climatic systems in organic and energy-sustainable livestock production. In particular, the following components are suggested: (a) the determination of current deviations and interdependency between factors; (b) an algorithm for defining the possible sources of regulation; (c) the ranking approach of the optimal sequence of possible sources; and (d) ensuring transparency and coordination of the model with organic and energy certificates. (2) Methods: This investigation accumulates information on the characteristics of the main microclimatic parameters and simulates their possible combinations in a livestock building in Poland within 24 h of a spring day. A few indices are considered that signal the impact on the thermal comfort of cattle based on the example of recommended measures for the Angus steer genotype. (3) Results: The proposed transparent algorithm is designed for selecting and ranking potential sources of microclimate control according to three criteria. (4) Conclusions: This paper potentially contributes to determining the most optimal digital algorithm for managing microclimate conditions to ensure acceptable comfort for animals, meeting the requirements of organic certification with minimum costs of production, and switching to sustainable types of energy with consideration of technologies’ efficiency. The algorithm is scalable and adjustable to the individual conditions of any livestock premise with a digitally controlled environment.

On-farm welfare assessment tends to focus on minimising negative welfare, but providing positive welfare is important in order to give animals a good life. This study developed a positive welfare framework for dairy cows based on the existing scientific literature which has focused on developing positive welfare indicators, and trialled a participatory approach with farmers; refining the framework based on their recommendations, followed by a vet pilot phase on farm. The results revealed that farmers and scientists agree on what constitutes “a good life” for dairy cattle. Farmers value positive welfare because they value their cows’ quality of life, and want to be proud of their work, improve their own wellbeing as well as receive business benefits. For each good life resource, the proportion of farmers going above and beyond legislation ranged from 27 to 84%. Furthermore, barriers to achieving positive welfare opportunities, including monetary and time costs, were not apparently insurmountable if implementation costs were remunerated (by the government). However, the intrinsic value in providing such opportunities also incentivises farmers. Overall, most farmers appeared to support positive welfare assessment, with the largest proportion (50%) supporting its use within existing farm assurance schemes, or to justify national and global marketing claims. Collaborating with farmers to co-create policy is crucial to showcase and quantify the UK’s high welfare standards, and to maximise engagement, relevance and uptake of animal welfare policy, to ensure continuous improvement and leadership in the quality of lives for farm animals.

Existing animal welfare standards for legislation and food certification programmes are primarily designed to avoid harms to the livestock, with minimal consideration given to their behavioural freedoms. Recent research has shown, however, that animal welfare should not only be evaluated by the absence of negative states but also by the presence of “good life” or positive experiences enjoyed by animals. The objective of the present study is to investigate the scientific validity and on-farm cost implications of utilising potential input-based measures of positive welfare as part of evaluation criteria for farm assurance schemes. Building upon the Farm Animal Welfare Council’s concept of good life opportunities, an assessment was undertaken on 49 noncaged laying hen farms across the UK by measuring on-farm resources to facilitate positive experiences alongside commonly measured metrics for welfare outcomes. The financial cost of providing these resources on each enterprise was also estimated using a farm-scale costing tool. The results suggested that 63% of resource needs that facilitate the behaviour opportunities of laying hens are already being provided by these producers, far above legal and commercial requirements. This practice attracts no reward mechanism or direct financial benefit under the current market structure. Additional provision of opportunities was positively associated with behavioural outcomes, but only limited impact was observed on health and productivity measures. Economic modelling indicated that significant room exists to further improve welfare scores on these farms, on average by 97%, without incurring additional costs. Together we argue that these results can be seen as evidence of market failure since producers are providing positive welfare value to society that is not being currently recognised. It is therefore contended that measuring and rewarding the supply of good life opportunities could be a novel policy instrument to create an effective marketplace that appropriately recognises high welfare production.