Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:L:Livestock Production Science:Vol67.Issue3.Jan2001:

(1)

www.elsevier.com / locate / livprodsci

Organic livestock farming

A critical review

*

Albert Sundrum

Department of Animal Nutrition and Animal Health, University of Kassel, Nordbahnhofstr. 1a, D-37213 Witzenhausen, Germany Received 30 March 1999; received in revised form 13 January 2000; accepted 9 February 2000

Abstract

Based on production guidelines, organic livestock farming has set itself the goal of establishing environmentally friendly production, sustaining animals in good health, realising high animal welfare standards, and producing products of high quality. By striving for these goals, organic livestock farming meets the demands of an increasing number of consumers who are critical of conventional production methods. The paper gives an overview of the present state of the art in the different issues. Possibilities and limitations to perform the self-aimed goals under the basic standards of organic farming are discussed. Concerning environmental protection, the basic standards of organic farming are suited to reduce environmental pollution and nutrient losses on the farm level markedly. With reference to the health situation of dairy cows in both organic and conventional dairy farms, comparative studies show that currently there seem to be no fundamental differences between the production methods. In relation to animal welfare, organic livestock farming, based on minimal standards that go beyond the legislation standards, provide several preconditions for good living conditions of farm animals. Concerning product quality, there is little evidence for a system-related effect on product quality due to the production method. It is concluded that the benefits of the basic standards are primarily related to environmentally friendly production and to the animal welfare issue while the issues of animal health and product quality are more influenced by the specific farm management than by the production method. There is evidence to support the assumption that organic livestock farming creates stronger demands on the qualification of the farm management, including the higher risk of failure. As a consequence, quality assurance programs should be established to ensure that the high demands of the consumers are fulfilled.  2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Organic livestock farming; Environmentally friendly production; Animal health; Animal welfare; Product quality

1. Introduction duction costs. At the same time, production-intensifi-cation has pushed the issues of environmentally In recent years conventional livestock farming has friendly production, animal health and welfare into been impressively successful at increasing the per- the background, especially because these are cost-formance of farm animals and decreasing the pro- and labour-intensive. The willingness of an increas-ing number of consumers to pay premium prices (Bennet, 1996; Badertscher-Fawaz et al., 1998) *Tel.: 149-5542-981-710; fax: 149-5542-981-588.

(2)

pressure on the production costs. As a consequence, al feed is authorised. The maximum percentage per organic agriculture depends to a high degree on the year is 10% in the case of herbivores and 20% for consumers’ demands for organically produced prod- other species. The use of synthetic amino acids and ucts and for added values like biodiversity, species growth promoters is forbidden.

preservation, protection of nature, of landscape, of The minimal standards in relation to animal groundwater or of animals etc. which are closely welfare are primarily focussed on locomotion area, related to the production process (Philips and Soren- floor characteristics and husbandry practices. Dry sen, 1993; Knauer, 1995; Mignolet et al., 1997). This litter as well as group penning are prescribed for all requires a consumer-oriented approach in response to farm animals. Tethering of farm animals is forbid-shifting market principles. den. The indoor area is supplemented by an outdoor In contrast to conventional livestock production, area that must be at least 75% of the indoor area. organic livestock farming is defined by basic guide- There is, however, a scepticism from scientists lines. The first guidelines have been developed by a towards the effectiveness of organic agriculture in private association in 1924 in order to elaborate an relation to the self-created goals (Branscheid, 1996; alternative opposite to the development in conven- von Alvensleben, 1998). The question arises whether tional production (Schaumann, 1995). Main aspects the principles of organic livestock farming really of criticism were the increasing use of chemical enable a markedly better production than convention-substances, especially mineral fertilizers and pes- al principles. Up to now there are only few compara-ticides, and the reduced way of thinking in relation tive studies available, which refer to keeping cattle, to the production process. In contrast to conventional while studies for organic pig and poultry production agriculture, the farm is considered as a farm organ- are rare. The objective of this paper is to give an ism, where the integrative and holistic aspects were overview of the current situation in organic livestock

placed into the fore (Kopke, 1993). production with regard to environmentally friendly The guidelines have been formulated and further production, animal health and welfare, based on developed by the International Federation of Organic research in the field, and to discuss the possibilities Agriculture Movements (IFOAM, 1996) and mean- of ensuring quality of the products under the basic while have found application all over the world. standards.

Furthermore, the basic standards of IFOAM have been used as the baseline for developing the

EEC-Regulation for organic agriculture. 3. Environmentally friendly production

The main specifications concerning

environmen-2. EEC-Regulation for organic livestock farming tally friendly production in organic livestock farming have to do with the renunciation of pesticides and In the European Countries, the EEC-Regulation mineral nitrogen, with the need to reduce the number 1804 / 1999, supplementing regulation no. 2092 / 91 of farm animals per area unit and the handicap to on organic production has been passed and will minimise the amount of bought-in foodstuffs. With-become law in August 2000. The EEC-Regulation out these substitutes, organic farming must rely on provides a standard that involves the right to label efficient nutrient circulation within the farm to food as organic. It includes specifications for housing maintain soil fertility and high production. Reduction conditions, animal nutrition and animal breeding, as of pollution or energy consumption is reached by a well as animal care, disease prevention and vet- systemic and causally related approach, while con-erinary treatment and will create a framework for ventional strategies are often based on technical and organic livestock production and labelling products management related measures (Kristensen and Hal-in all European countries on an equal legal base. The berg, 1997).

maximum number of livestock density is limited to An overview of the impact of livestock production two livestock units per hectare. For a transition on climatic factors and a comparison between or-period, the use of a limited proportion of convention- ganic and conventional production is given by Haas

(3)

and Kopke (1994). The study showed that organic reduced production level in organic livestock farm-agriculture has clear benefits in reducing environ- ing (Vaarst et al., 1993; Boehncke, 1997). On mental pollution in comparison to conventional average, milk yield per cow per year in organic

agriculture. production is lower compared to conventional

pro-To assess nutrient losses on the farm level, the duction (BMELF, 1997; Kristensen and Kristensen, most common methodologies involve using balance 1998). Because of the renunciation of supple-sheets of the whole farm. Calculations demonstrate mentation by conventional produced foodstuffs, ge-that the systemic effect of organic agriculture has netic performance capacities are often not exhausted. great implication on the nutrient balance and the Although the relationship between milk yield and balance-surplus in relation to the product (Halberg et predisposition for diseases is not well understood, al., 1995; Spiekers and Hahner, 1995; Hoppe et al., there are reasons for the assumption that high 1996; Geier et al., 1997; Martinson, 1998). There is yielders react to inadequate conditions more sensi-reason for the assumption that the benefit of the tively than animals with an average performance system-related factors on minimising pollution are (Butler and Smith, 1989; Wanner, 1995).

much more effective as compared to management- Mastitis

related factors, such as increasing animal perform- Concerning the incidence of mastitis, studies ance per animal per year. For example, reducing revealed that mastitis was of the same or even of

nitrogen input of 100 kg N ha is more than doubly greater relevance on organic than on conventional efficient in relation to the balance surplus than farms (Augustburger et al., 1988; Offerhaus et al.,

increasing average milk yield for 1.000 kg cow 1993; Krutzinna et al., 1996; Weller and Cooper, and year (Mejs and Mandersloot, 1993). 1996; Spranger, 1998). In contrast Vaarst and By analyzing agricultural energy utilization Enevoldsen (1994) and Ebbesvik and Loes (1994) through system modelling, Refsgaard et al. (1998) found a lower incidence of clinical mastitis in found conventional dairy production to be more organic compared to conventional dairy herds. It is intensive with a greater feeding ration and a higher most likely that some local or national conditions proportion of high-protein feed, but also higher like traditions for management, use of medication or yields. However, the conventional yields were not herd size could explain differences between the sufficiently higher to compensate for the extra use of results. However, the limitation of the data do not energy compared with the organic feeding ration. justify further statements.

In summary, the basic standards of organic farm- Results about the incidence of reproductive dis-ing provide suitable tools to minimise environmental orders and other diseases in organic dairy herds are pollution and nutrient losses on the farm level. These less significant due to a small number of farms seem to be more effective than measures in conven- within those studies. However, studies in different tional production. However, there is a high vari- countries showed that the reproductive life span of ability within organic farms in relation to their dairy cows was significantly higher in organic com-efforts and their nutrient efficiency. pared to conventional farms (Offerhaus et al., 1993; Ebbesvik and Loes, 1994; Krutzinna et al., 1996).

According to Enevoldsen and Grohn (1996), most

4. Disease patterns of the diseases appear to be multivariate responses to a complex set of interrelated causal factors and are

Metabolic disorders often due to mistakes of the farmer, inadequate

Looking at the disease patterns as an indicator of handling and inappropriate housing conditions. Man-animal health at herd level, several authors found a agement-related factors, such as regular checks of decrease in the incidence of metabolic disorders on the milking machine, feed analysis and the calcula-organic compared to conventional farms (Ebbesvik tion of the diet are, and prove to be, of high and Loes, 1994; Vaarst and Enevoldsen, 1994; Krut- importance for animal health (Schukken et al., 1990; zinna et al., 1996). The decrease in metabolic Bartlett et al., 1992; Barkema, 1998). Whether these disorders is discussed as a factor of a general management-related factors are practised differently

(4)

between the two production methods cannot be In summary, comparative studies investigating the concluded from the present data. However, it can be health situation of organic and conventional dairy supposed that the management-related strategies farms show that there seems to be no fundamental mentioned above are more often used and farmers difference between the production methods with are more aware of the benefits of management- reference to the animal health status of dairy cows. related factors on highly specialised farms than on Management is the most important factor in both mixed farms. Due to their reliance on efficient production methods. However, organic livestock nutrient circulation, mixed farms follow, in most farming creates stronger demands on the qualifica-cases, the basic concept of organic farming, although tion of the farm management. The risk for inappro-the degree of mixture can be widely different priate handling increases when capacities are over-(Hermansen and Kristensen, 1998). Feeding, hand- taxed due to requirements of multiple demands. ling and taking care of the farm animals are in

competition with various other farm activities, being

different on organic mixed farms compared to highly 5. Animal welfare

specialised conventional farms. Because time

capaci-ty and competence of the farmers are limited, Direct measurements of animal welfare at herd excessive demands provoke conflicts within the farm level are not described in the literature. Sandoe et al. management and, in consequence, lead to deficits on (1996) argue, that there is no consensus on opera-one or more of the various agricultural fields (Table tional definitions of animal welfare which indicate 1). There are reasons to support the assumption that how scientists should measure welfare in practise. those fields most relevant to the farmer’s income are Despite the missing consensus, indirect approaches of the highest management priority. have been developed in order to assess the appro-In contrast to conventional production, the basic priateness of housing conditions in terms of animal standards of organic livestock production include welfare and to distinguish between poor and good regulations concerning housing conditions, which are living conditions for farm animals (Bartussek, 1988; suited to serve as preventive measures. For example, Sundrum et al., 1994; Bracke et al., 1997). In increasing the space of the floor and providing litter Austria, an assessment concept was developed as a for bedding can provide a reduction in conflict means of certifying the level of welfare on organic behaviour and the incidence of injuries and claw farms, which must obtain a specific level before

disorders (Muller et al., 1989; Bergsten, 1994; being recognised as organic (Bartussek, 1999). Ac-Hindhede et al., 1996). On the other hand, litter cording to Sundrum (1997b) and Bartussek (1999), includes hygienic risks for the incidence of mastitis these assessment concepts have proven suitable for (Fehling, 1998). Additionally, being limited to detecting weak points within housing conditions and home-grown feed stuffs can cause imbalances in the allow comparison of welfare preconditions on differ-diets with possibly negative effects on animal health ent farms to be made. However, there are still a lot

(Sundrum, 1997a). of questions concerning the assessment concepts

which are not yet answered satisfactorily. Especially the weighing of different aspects is still an unsolved problem.

By using an assessment concept, Horning (1998) Table 1

Examples for conflicts between providing benefits for animal found housing conditions on organic dairy farms to husbandry and other farm activities within organic farming _{be more appropriate for the requirements of dairy} Agricultural fields Conflicts of aims cows compared to conventional farms. Organic farms were characterised by higher dimensions of the Crop rotation Energy-rich basic ration⇔cash crops

feeding and locomotion area in loose housing sta-Manure Grassland⇔cash crops

Investments Farm machinery⇔housing conditions bles. In an investigation including 268 organic dairy Working time Animal care⇔marketing, harvesting or _{farms in Germany, Krutzinna et al. (1996) found the}

other emergencies

(5)

organic compared to the average in conventional area and providing litter bedding have been found to

livestock production. be of substantial benefit for animal health and

The legal preconditions of housing conditions for welfare of cows (Hindhede et al., 1996), calves organic livestock are provided by the EEC-Regula- (Groth, 1984), pigs (Ernst, 1995) and laying hens tion 1804 / 1999. The most relevant standards, in (Horne and Niekerk, 1998). The ban of stanchion comparison to the current Council Directives for the barns means a fundamental advance for the living protection of calves, pig and laying hens, are preconditions of cattle. Locomotion, social behaviour sented in Table 2. The minimal standards of the and the decrease of several diseases is clearly EEC-Regulation reach a level that is clearly higher improved in loose housing systems as compared to than the minimal standards of the Council Directives stanchion barns (Herlin, 1994). Furthermore, stanch-and, concerning dairy cattle, higher than private ion barns often are of an inappropriate size and branded programmes (Sundrum, 1999). Additionally, display poor technical execution because they have the EEC-Regulation on organic livestock farming been in use for a long time (Sundrum and Daase, includes regular checks by independent and qualified 1997).

inspectors at least once a year. Because the check- Although raising the level of minimal standards is system ensures a high degree of realisation of the intended to improve the housing conditions, a higher minimal standards, the EEC-Regulation is an essen- level of minimal standards cannot be treated as tial advance in comparison to the Council Directives. equivalent to appropriate livestock housing condi-Experimental studies have revealed the suitability tions and high animal welfare status out of different of minimal standards to improve animal welfare at reasons.

herd level. For example, enlarging the locomotion In the first place, minimal standards represent only

Table 2

Comparison between the EEC-Council Directives and the EEC-Regulation on organic livestock farming in relation to selected minimal standards

Farm animals EEC-Council Directives on EEC-Regulation on

protection of farm animals organic livestock farming

Dairy cows No Council Directives

a 2 2

Locomotion area 6.0 m indoors14.5 m outdoors

Floor characteristics Lying space with litter (bedding)

Husbandry practices Keeping tethered is forbidden

Calves

a 2 2 2

Locomotion area 1.3 m 1.5 m indoors11.1 m outdoors

Floor characteristics Dry litter bedding Dry litter bedding

Husbandry practices Group penning after 8th week Generally group penning Sow with piglets

a 2 2

Locomotion area 7.5 m indoors15.0 m outdoors

Floor characteristics Isolated, non-perforated floor Dry litter bedding Fattening pigs

a 2 b 2 b 2

Locomotion area 0.65 m 1.3 m indoors 11.0 m outdoors

Floor characteristics Safe floors Dry litter bedding

Husbandry practices Tools for occupation.1 h No tail-docking and tooth-clipping Laying hens

2 2 2

Locomotion area 450 cm 1660 cm indoors14 m outdoors

Area per animal.

Up to 110 kg live-weight.

(6)

a small section of the interrelationship between farm 6. Product quality

animals and their living conditions. Beside the

housing conditions, the quality of stockmanship and A clear comparison between organic and conven-management, the patterns of feeding, climatic factors tional produced products is difficult to establish due and the hygienic situation all have significant in- to the great variation within the production methods, fluences on animal health and welfare (Rushen and concerning among other things, intensification,

feed-´

De Passille, 1992; Bergsten, 1994). These factors are ing ration or breeds used. Honikel (1998) gave an not part of the Council Directives or the EEC- overview of the limited number of published studies Regulation due among others to the difficulties in dealing with milk, beef, pork and eggs. The author quantification and to the frequency of changes within concluded that the characteristics of product quality, short periods of time. the nutritional, hygienic, sensorial and technological Secondly, minimal standards are primarily based factors are not very different between the production on political decisions and are often a compromise methods. In some factors organic food gets better between different interests that are not, in all cases, marks, in others conventionally produced food scores related directly to the animal welfare issue. higher.

Thirdly, the meaningfulness of on-farm assess- Branscheid (1996) argued that organic production ment by design criteria is limited. Design criteria could lead to a lower quality of carcass and meat due lack validation when the responses of the animals are to a reduced energy supply and growth rate as the not assessed directly in the specific situation. Due to consequence of the extensive production method, differences in genetic origin, age, sex or in the while intensification has positive implications on experiences during ontogenesis, farm animals can carcass characteristics. On the other hand, implica-vary widely in their requirements in relation to the tions of a reduced nutrient supply on carcass qual-housing condition. Furthermore, specific qual-housing ities can be compensated for by choosing breeds conditions can have contrary effects on animal more adapted to the basic fodder on the farm. The behaviour and animal health. For example, outdoor renunciation of high live-weight gains provides the area and litter bedding provide benefits for the use of crossing with breeds famous for providing execution of different behaviour patterns but include relish when eaten, due to higher intramuscular fat relevant hygienic risk factors for animal health, content (Kreuzer, 1994; Claus, 1996). Furthermore, especially concerning parasites. Sandoe et al. (1996) the renunciation of amino acid supplementation in pointed out that there is a considerable lack of the diet of fattening pigs results in a reduction in pig knowledge about the interactions among the various performance but in an increase of intramuscular fat factors, stressing the need for a strategy that focuses content (Sundrum et al., 2000).

directly on the response from the animals on the According to hygienic aspects, Honikel (1998) farm. Certification of animal welfare should always suspected that there might be a higher risk for the be supplemented with some kind of records of how contamination of products with parasites due to a well the animals actual fare in the system (Johnson higher rate of outdoor-systems in organic compared

and Sandoe, 1999). to conventional farming. Concerning milk quality,

In summary, the higher level of the minimal Hauert (1990) found no differences between the standards in organic livestock farming and their microbial count of organic and conventional milk. regular check provide several preconditions for good According to the residues of drugs, organic products living conditions of farm animals. This reflects a are expected to be far less contaminated than con-clear improvement compared to the conventional ventional products due to the restricted use of situation. However, those minimal standards are not chemotherapeutic agents. However, comprehensive necessarily a guarantee for appropriate housing investigations are also missing in this case.

conditions. On-farm assessment can improve the In summary, there is little evidence for a system-meaningfulness of statements concerning the appro- related effect on product quality due to the pro-priateness of housing conditions in relation to animal duction method. Product quality is primarily a

(7)

• Developing the assessment of process qualities in both organic and conventional livestock

product-• Epidemiological studies to evaluate risk factors ion.

• Farmer decision support systems to improve the quality production process

• Socio-economical investigations concerning the

7. Conclusions

acceptance of organic livestock production • Resultant impacts of different agricultural strate-Organic livestock farming is not a production

gies method to solve all problems in livestock production.

• Elaborating methods and indicators for on-farm It is primarily a production method for a specific

assessment of animal welfare in a far-reaching premium market with high requirements for the

and objective way quality of the production process, demanding high

management qualification. For the development of organic livestock farming it is important to ensure

References

the confidence of the consumers in organic products by realising the self-created demands to a high

Augustburger, F., Zemp, J., Heuser, H., 1988. Vergleich der degree.

¨ Fruchtbarkeit, Gesundheit und Leistung von Milchkuhen in Studies indicate that a considerable number of _biologisch _und _{konventionell} _{bewirtschafteten} _Betrieben. farms cannot cope, in all respects, with the high Landw. Schweiz 1, 427–431.

Badertscher-Fawaz, R., Jorin, R., Rieder, P., 1998. Einstellungen demands (Sundrum and Daase, 1997; Spranger,

zu Tierschutzfragen: Wirkungen auf den Fleischkonsum. Ag-1998). One explanation for deficits may be due to the

rarwirtschaft 47, 107–113. fact that time requirements for animal husbandry are

Barkema, H.W., 1998. Udder health on dairy farms: a longitudinal in competition with other agricultural fields and often _{study. Dissertation, University of Utrecht.}

fail to be of first priority. Furthermore taking steps of Bartlett, P.C., Miller, G.Y., Lance, S.E., Heider, L., 1992. Environ-ment and managerial determinants of somatic cell counts and precaution concerning animal health and welfare are,

clinical mastitis incidence in Ohio dairy herds. Prev. Vet. Med. to a certain degree, in opposite to the objectives of

14, 195–207.

high productivity and low production costs (Kuhl- _{Bartussek, H., 1988. Haltung. In: Haiger, A., Storhas, R.,} Bartus-mann, 1998). Despite their benefits for animal wel- sek, H. (Eds.), Naturgemaße Viehwirtschaft. Ulmer, Stuttgart,¨ fare and environmental friendly production, the basic pp. 147–248.

Bartussek, H., 1999. A review of the animal needs index ANI for standards seem to be insufficient to ensure a higher

the assessment of animals wellbeing in the housing systems for animal health status and a higher product quality

Austrian proprietary products and legislation. Livest. Prod. Sci. compared to conventional production. In order to _{61, 179–192.}

improve the situation, quality assurance programs Bennet, R.M., 1996. Willingness-to-pay measures of public sup-should be established and controlling systems sup-should port for farm animal welfare legislation. Vet. Rec. 139, 320–

321. be improved to ensure the high demands of the

Bergsten, C., 1994. Haemorrhages of the sole horn of dairy cows consumers. Under the pressure of the decreasing

as a retrospective indicator of laminitis: an epidemiological official money and in expectation of the dramatic cut _{study. Acta Vet. Scand. 35, 55–66.}

of subvention money along with the future EU- BMELF, 1997. In: Agrarbericht der Bundesregierung 1997. policy (Agenda 2000), subvention is expected to be Bundesanzeiger Verlagsgesellschaft, Bonn, pp. 23–25,

Bundes-¨ ¨

ministerium fur Ernahrung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten. linked more closely to the ecological performances

Boehncke, E., 1997. Preventive strategies as a health resource for of each farmer. This will open more possibilities for

organic farming. In: Proc. of the 3rd ENOF Workshop on organic livestock farming for monetary compensa- _{Resource Use in Organic Farming, Ancona, Italy, 5–6 June} tion, if the ecological performances that are con- 1997, pp. 25–35.

nected with the production method are honoured Bracke, M.B., Metz, J.H., Udink ten Cate, A.J., 1997. Assessment ¨

of animal welfare in husbandry systems. In: Sorensen, J.T. directly by official money.

(Ed.), Livestock Farming Systems. More Than Food Pro-Organic livestock farming is a challenge not only

duction. EAAP, pp. 231–237, Publ. No. 89.

for the farmer but also for agricultural research and _{Branscheid, W., 1996. Zur Qualitat von Fleisch und Milch –}_¨ interdisciplinary work. The following items should Anspruche der Verbraucher und Maßnahmen der Tierproduk-¨ be pursued with high priority: tion. Ber. Ldw. 74, 103–117.

(8)

Butler, W.R., Smith, R.D., 1989. Interrelationships between energy D., 1996. Milchviehweidewirtschaft bei Verzicht auf

Stick-¨ ¨

balance and postpartum reproductive function in dairy cattle. J. stoffdungung. Zuchtungskunde 68, 131–146. ¨

Dairy Sci. 72, 767–783. Horning, B., 1998. Tiergerechtheit und Tiergesundheit in

¨ ¨

Claus, R., 1996. Physiologische Grenzen der Beeinflußbarkeit von okologisch wirtschaftenden Betrieben. Dtsch. tierarztl. Wschr. ¨

Leistungen beim Schwein. Zuchtungskunde 68, 493–505. 105, 313–321.

Ebbesvik, M., Loes, A.K., 1994. Organic dairy production in IFOAM, 1996. International Federation of the Organic Agricultur-Norway – feeding, health, fodder production nutrient balance al Movement: Basic Standards For Organic Agriculture and

¨ ¨

and economy – results from the ’30-farm-project: 1989–1992. Food Processing, 10th Edition. SOL, Bad Durckheim. In: Granstedt, A., Koistinen, R. (Eds.), Converting To Organic Johnson, P.F., Sandoe, P., 1999. Validation of methods for asses-Agriculture. Scandinavian Association of Agricultural Scien- sing animal welfare at herd level. In: KTBL: Regulation of tists Rapport, Vol. 93, pp. 35–42. Animal Production in Europe. KTBL, pp. 98–102, Schrift 270.

¨ ¨

Enevoldsen, C., Grohn, Y.T., 1996. A methodology for assessment Knauer, N., 1995. Okologische Anforderungen in Agrarlandschaf-of the health–production complex in dairy herds to promote ten. Agrarspectrum 24, 9–24.

¨ ¨

welfare. Acta Agric. Scand., Sect. A. Animal Sci. Suppl. 27, Kopke, U., 1993. Nahrstoffmanagement durch acker- und

pflan-86–90. zenbauliche Maßnahmen. Ber. Ldw. 71, 181–203.

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

Ernst, E., 1995. Die Bedeutung von Stroh fur die Haltung von Kreuzer, M., 1994. Ernahrungseinflusse auf die Produktqualitat ¨

Mastschweinen. Betriebswirtschaftl. Mitteilungen der LWK beim Schwein. Zuchtungskunde 65, 468–480.

Schleswig-Holstein 480, 17–24. Kristensen, E.S., Halberg, N., 1997. A system approach for ¨

Fehling, K., 1998. Diagnostik des Mastitisrisikos: Haltungs- und assessing sustainability in livestock farms. In: Sorensen, J.T. ¨

Futterungsaspekte. Der praktische Tierarzt, Collegium Vet- (Ed.), Livestock Farming Systems. More than Food Production. erinarium XXVII, 54–61. EAAP, Publ. No. 89, pp. 238–246.

Geier, U., Kessler, T., Kopke, U., Schiefer, G., 1997. Grundlagen Kristensen, T., Kristensen, E.S., 1998. Analysis and simulation ¨

einer prozeßkettenubergreifenden Okobilanz in der Fleischer- modelling of the production in Danish organic and convention-¨

zeugung. In: Proceedings der DLG-Umweltgesprache, al dairy herds. Livest. Prod. Sci. 54, 55–65. ¨

Deutsche Landwirtschaftliche Gesellschaft: Okobilanzen – von Krutzinna, C., Boehncke, E., Hermann, H.-J., 1996. Die Milch-¨

der Erzeugung zum Produkt, pp. 107–130. viehhaltung im Okologischen Landbau. Ber. Ldw. 74, 461– Groth, W., 1984. Kritische Bestandsaufnahme der Haltungsbeding- 480.

¨ ¨

ungen und Empfehlungen fur die Aufstallung von Kalbern. Der Kuhlmann, D., 1998. Betriebswirtschaftliche Beurteilung un-¨

praktische Tierarzt, Collegium Veterinarium XIV, 150–155. terschiedlich umweltvertraglicher Haltungssysteme. Dtsch. ¨

¨ ¨

Haas, G., Kopke, U., 1994. Vergleich der Klimarelevanz Okologi- tierarztl. Wschr. 105, 324–327.

scher und Konventioneller Landbewirtschaftung. In: Enquete- Martinson, K., 1998. Eight years of ecological and conventional ¨

Kommission ‘Schutz der Erdatmosphare’des Deutschen Bun- farming at Ojebyn. In: Mixed Farming Systems in Europe, destages. Studienprogramm. Bd. 1. Economia, Bonn, p. 99. Dronten, The Netherlands, APMinderhoudhoeve-reeks no. 2, Halberg, N., Kristensen, E.S., Kristensen, I., 1995. Nitrogen pp. 109–113.

turnover on organic and conventional farms. J. Environ Agric. Mignolet, C., Saintot, D., Benoit, M., 1997. Livestock farming Ethics 8, 30–51. system diversity and groundwater quality modelling at a

Hauert, W., 1990. Hygienische Risiken von Rohmilch aus regional scale. In: Sorensen, J.T. (Ed.), Livestock Farming biologischem Anbau und daraus hergestellten Produkten. Systems. More than Food Production. EAAP, pp. 313–318, Mittb. Gebiete Lebensm. Hyg. 81, 616–632. Publ. No. 89.

Herlin, A.H., 1994. Effects of tie-stalls or cubicles on dairy cows Mejs, J.A., Mandersloot, F., 1993. Boer blijven bij een beter in grazing or zero-grazing situations. Dissertation, Swedish milieu. Praktijkonderzoek 5, 1–10.

University of Agricultural Science, Upssala, Report 228. Muller, C., Ladeweg, J., Thielscher, A., Smidt, D., 1989. Be-Hermansen, J.E., Kristensen, T., 1998. Research and evaluation of haviour and heart rate of heifers housed in tether stanchions

mixed farming systems for ecological animal production in without straw. Physiol. Behav. 46, 751–754.

Denmark. In: Workshop Proceedings: Mixed Farming Systems Offerhaus, E.J., Baars, T., Grommers, F.J. (Eds.), 1993. in Europe, Dronten, The Netherlands, pp. 97–101, APMinder- Gezonheid en vruchtbaarheid op biologische bedrijven farms. houdhoeve-reeks no. 2. Louis Bolk Institute, Driebergen, Netherlands.

Hindhede, J., Sorensen, J.T., Bak Jensen, M.B., Krohn, C.C., Philips, C.J., Sorensen, J.T., 1993. Sustainability in cattle pro-1996. Effect of space allowance, access to bedding, and flock duction systems. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 6, 61–73. size in slatted floor systems on the production and health of Refsgaard, K., Halberg, N., Kristensen, E.S., 1998. Energy dairy heifers. Acta Agric. Scand., Sect. A. Animal Sci. 46, utilization in crop and dairy production in organic and conven-46–56. tional livestock production systems. Agric. Syst. 57, 599–630.

¨ ¨ ´

Honikel, K.O., 1998. Qualitat okologisch erzeugter Lebensmittel Rushen, J., De Passille, A.M.B., 1992. The scientific assessment ¨

tierischer Herkunft. Dtsch. tierarztl. Wschr. 105, 327–329. of the impact of housing on animal welfare: A critical review. ¨

Horne, P.L., Niekerk, T.C., 1998. Volieren- und Kafighaltung im Can. J. Anim. Sci. 72, 721–743. ¨

Vergleich – Produktqualitat, Gesundheit und Wirtschaftlichkeit Sandoe, P., Giersing, M.H., Jeppesen, L.L., 1996. Concluding von Legehennen. DGS-Mag. 6, 14–17. remarks and perspectives. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. A, Animal Hoppe, T., Weissbach, F., Schlichting, M.C., Schmidt, L., Smidt, Sci. Suppl. 27, 109–115.

(9)

Schaumann, W., 1995. Der wissenschaftliche und praktische In: KTBL’s Regulation of Animal Production in Europe. ¨

Entwicklungsweg des Okologischen Landbaus und seine KTBL, Schrift 270, pp. 93–97. ¨

Zukunftsaspekte. In: Dewes, T., Schmitt, L. (Eds.), Beitrage Sundrum, A., Daase, I., 1997. Assessing animal welfare on ¨

zur 3. Wissenschaftstagung zum Okologischen Landbau. Wis- organic farms. In: Proceedings of the 11th Int. Science senschaftlicher Fachverlag, Gießen, pp. 1–12. Conference of IFOAM, August 11–15, 1996, Copenhagen, Schukken, Y.H., Grommers, F.J., van de Geer, D., Erb, H.N., Denmark, p. 106.

Brand, A., 1990. Risk factors for clinical mastitis in herds with Sundrum, A., Andersson, R., Postler, G. (Eds.), 1994. Tiergerech-a low bulk milk somTiergerech-atic cell count. 1. DTiergerech-atTiergerech-a Tiergerech-and risk fTiergerech-actors for theitsindex – 200 / 1994 – Ein Leitfaden zur Beurteilung von

all cases. J. Dairy Sci. 73, 3463–3471. Haltungssystemen. Kollen, Bonn, p. 209. ¨

Spiekers, H., Hahner, I., 1995. Ausgleich der Stoffbilanzen auch Sundrum, A., Butfering, L., Henning, M., Hoppenbrock, K.-H., ¨

bei hoher Milchleistung durch gezielte Futterung. In: Finke, K., 1999. Effects of on-farm diets for organic pig production on ¨

Krekeler, H.-J. (Eds.), Vortrage der 49. Hochschultagung der performance and carcass quality. J. Anim. Sci. 78, 1199–1205.

¨ ¨

Landwirtschaftlichen Fakultat der Universitat Bonn, Vaarst, M., Enevoldsen, C., 1994. Disease control and health in ¨

18.02.1997. Landwirtschaftsverlag Munster-Hiltrup, Bonn, pp. Danish organic dairy herds. In: Hiusman, E.A. (Ed.), Proc. 4th

47–54. Zodiac Symposium, Biological Basis of Sustainable Animal

¨ ¨

Spranger, J., 1998. Richtliniengemaße Pravention und Therapie in Production. EAAP, Publ. No. 67, pp. 211–217. ¨

der Tierhaltung des Okolandbaus am Beispiel der Mastitis der Vaarst, M., Enevoldsen, C., Jakobsen, P., 1993. Reports on ¨

Kuh. Dtsch. tierarztl. Wschr. 105, 321–323. diseases in 14 organic farms in Denmark. Acta Vet. Scand. Sundrum, A. (Ed.), 1997a. Beurteilung der Auswirkungen Suppl. 89, 143–145.

¨ ¨ ¨

uberhohter Rohproteinversorgung beim Rind mit biochemis- von Alvensleben, R., 1998. Okologischer Landbau – ein umwelt-¨

chen und immunologischen Blutparametern. Koster, Berlin, p. politisches Leitbild. Agrarwirtschaft 47, 381–382. ¨

199. Wanner, M., 1995. In: Leistungshohe und Gesundheit der

Milch-¨

Sundrum, A., 1997b. Assessing animal welfare standards of kuh. Schriftenreihe Institut fur Nuztierwissenschaften, Vol. 14.

¨ ¨

housing conditions – possibilities and limitations. In: Sorensen, ETH, Zurich, pp. 53–61.

J.T. (Ed.), Livestock Farming Systems. More Than Food Weller, R.F., Cooper, A., 1996. Health status of dairy herds Production. EAAP, Publ. No. 89, pp. 238–246. converting from conventional to organic farming. Vet. Rec. Sundrum, A., 1999. EEC – Regulation on organic livestock 139, 141–142.

(1)

competition with various other farm activities, being

different on organic mixed farms compared to highly 5. Animal welfare

specialised conventional farms. Because time

(Sundrum, 1997a). of questions concerning the assessment concepts

which are not yet answered satisfactorily. Especially the weighing of different aspects is still an unsolved problem.

By using an assessment concept, Horning (1998)

Table 1

Examples for conflicts between providing benefits for animal found housing conditions on organic dairy farms to

husbandry and other farm activities within organic farming _{be more appropriate for the requirements of dairy} Agricultural fields Conflicts of aims cows compared to conventional farms. Organic farms were characterised by higher dimensions of the

Crop rotation Energy-rich basic ration⇔cash crops

feeding and locomotion area in loose housing

sta-Manure Grassland⇔cash crops

Investments Farm machinery⇔housing conditions bles. In an investigation including 268 organic dairy

Working time Animal care⇔marketing, harvesting or _{farms in Germany, Krutzinna et al. (1996) found the} other emergencies

(2)

organic compared to the average in conventional area and providing litter bedding have been found to

livestock production. be of substantial benefit for animal health and

herd level. For example, enlarging the locomotion In the first place, minimal standards represent only

Table 2

Comparison between the EEC-Council Directives and the EEC-Regulation on organic livestock farming in relation to selected minimal standards

Farm animals EEC-Council Directives on EEC-Regulation on

protection of farm animals organic livestock farming

Dairy cows No Council Directives

a 2 2

Locomotion area 6.0 m indoors14.5 m outdoors

Floor characteristics Lying space with litter (bedding)

Husbandry practices Keeping tethered is forbidden

Calves

a 2 2 2

Locomotion area 1.3 m 1.5 m indoors11.1 m outdoors

Floor characteristics Dry litter bedding Dry litter bedding

Husbandry practices Group penning after 8th week Generally group penning

Sow with piglets

a 2 2

Locomotion area 7.5 m indoors15.0 m outdoors

Floor characteristics Isolated, non-perforated floor Dry litter bedding

Fattening pigs

a 2 b 2 b 2

Locomotion area 0.65 m 1.3 m indoors 11.0 m outdoors

Floor characteristics Safe floors Dry litter bedding

Husbandry practices Tools for occupation.1 h No tail-docking and tooth-clipping

Laying hens

2 2 2

Locomotion area 450 cm 1660 cm indoors14 m outdoors

Area per animal.

Up to 110 kg live-weight.

(3)

a small section of the interrelationship between farm 6. Product quality

animals and their living conditions. Beside the

feed-´

short periods of time. the nutritional, hygienic, sensorial and technological

Secondly, minimal standards are primarily based factors are not very different between the production on political decisions and are often a compromise methods. In some factors organic food gets better between different interests that are not, in all cases, marks, in others conventionally produced food scores related directly to the animal welfare issue. higher.

and Sandoe, 1999). to conventional farming. Concerning milk quality,

(4)

• Developing the assessment of process qualities in both organic and conventional livestock

product-• Epidemiological studies to evaluate risk factors ion.

• Farmer decision support systems to improve the quality production process

• Socio-economical investigations concerning the

7. Conclusions

acceptance of organic livestock production • Resultant impacts of different agricultural strate-Organic livestock farming is not a production

gies method to solve all problems in livestock production.

• Elaborating methods and indicators for on-farm It is primarily a production method for a specific

assessment of animal welfare in a far-reaching premium market with high requirements for the

and objective way quality of the production process, demanding high

management qualification. For the development of organic livestock farming it is important to ensure

References

the confidence of the consumers in organic products by realising the self-created demands to a high

Augustburger, F., Zemp, J., Heuser, H., 1988. Vergleich der

degree.

¨ Fruchtbarkeit, Gesundheit und Leistung von Milchkuhen in

Studies indicate that a considerable number of _biologisch _und _{konventionell} _{bewirtschafteten} _Betrieben. farms cannot cope, in all respects, with the high Landw. Schweiz 1, 427–431.

Badertscher-Fawaz, R., Jorin, R., Rieder, P., 1998. Einstellungen

demands (Sundrum and Daase, 1997; Spranger,

zu Tierschutzfragen: Wirkungen auf den Fleischkonsum.

Ag-1998). One explanation for deficits may be due to the

rarwirtschaft 47, 107–113.

fact that time requirements for animal husbandry are

Barkema, H.W., 1998. Udder health on dairy farms: a longitudinal

in competition with other agricultural fields and often _{study. Dissertation, University of Utrecht.}

fail to be of first priority. Furthermore taking steps of Bartlett, P.C., Miller, G.Y., Lance, S.E., Heider, L., 1992. Environ-ment and managerial determinants of somatic cell counts and

precaution concerning animal health and welfare are,

clinical mastitis incidence in Ohio dairy herds. Prev. Vet. Med.

to a certain degree, in opposite to the objectives of

14, 195–207.

fare and environmental friendly production, the basic pp. 147–248.

Bartussek, H., 1999. A review of the animal needs index ANI for

standards seem to be insufficient to ensure a higher

the assessment of animals wellbeing in the housing systems for

animal health status and a higher product quality

Austrian proprietary products and legislation. Livest. Prod. Sci.

compared to conventional production. In order to _{61, 179–192.}

improve the situation, quality assurance programs Bennet, R.M., 1996. Willingness-to-pay measures of public

sup-should be established and controlling systems sup-should port for farm animal welfare legislation. Vet. Rec. 139, 320– 321.

be improved to ensure the high demands of the

Bergsten, C., 1994. Haemorrhages of the sole horn of dairy cows

consumers. Under the pressure of the decreasing

as a retrospective indicator of laminitis: an epidemiological

official money and in expectation of the dramatic cut _{study. Acta Vet. Scand. 35, 55–66.}

of subvention money along with the future EU- BMELF, 1997. In: Agrarbericht der Bundesregierung 1997.

policy (Agenda 2000), subvention is expected to be Bundesanzeiger Verlagsgesellschaft, Bonn, pp. 23–25,

Bundes-¨ ¨

ministerium fur Ernahrung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten.

linked more closely to the ecological performances

Boehncke, E., 1997. Preventive strategies as a health resource for

of each farmer. This will open more possibilities for

organic farming. In: Proc. of the 3rd ENOF Workshop on

organic livestock farming for monetary compensa- _{Resource Use in Organic Farming, Ancona, Italy, 5–6 June} tion, if the ecological performances that are con- 1997, pp. 25–35.

nected with the production method are honoured Bracke, M.B., Metz, J.H., Udink ten Cate, A.J., 1997. Assessment ¨

of animal welfare in husbandry systems. In: Sorensen, J.T.

directly by official money.

(Ed.), Livestock Farming Systems. More Than Food

Pro-Organic livestock farming is a challenge not only