FarmWel (AWF0014)

Introduction

Farmwel is working to generate momentum towards sustainable and accountable mainstream agriculture and aquaculture, focussing on the environment, people's livelihoods, and farm animal welfare. Our work is supported by the expertise of FAI Farms, a globally respected Oxford-based farm consultancy which helps the food-sector overcome key challenges and implement better farming practices, on land and at sea.

This paper builds on information previously submitted to the House of Lords, EU Energy and Environment Sub-Committee, Brexit: Agriculture inquiry.  Appendix 1 sets out Farmwel’s pillars and goals for secure and sustainable food.

What impact will Brexit have on assurance and standards in relation to farm animal welfare?  Is a decline in farm animal welfare standards post-Brexit inevitable?

The best way for UK producers to compete, both at home and on the global stage, is to promote high standards and quality products. To achieve this it is vital that farm animal welfare standards are maintained, and improved. There is strong evidence that there is a reliable market for higher welfare products in Britain (as demonstrated by cage-free egg and higher welfare pork sales), and that there is a largely untapped market for higher welfare products around the world. 

To ensure that producers and farm animals benefit from the market’s potential to reward welfare and environmental quality it will be important to address transparency and food labelling to ensure a level playing for producers working to higher standards, which may be associated with additional costs.

Which monitoring bodies will need to be replaced or strengthened?

Although in the first instance European Union rules should be imported wholesale, it is critical that the government takes this opportunity to develop a land use policy, and to identify clearly its future priorities for secure and sustainable agriculture and aquaculture. At that point it will be possible to take a considered position on future monitoring bodies, and on the appropriate level of involvement from state and private sector institutions.

In our view, the complexities of CAP should be replaced with a national policy framework for secure and sustainable agriculture. We should also develop a framework for sustainable aquaculture.  Individual farmers who wish to continue receiving public payments should work closely with monitoring bodies and citizens to build their own farm management plans, based on Farmwel’s pillars and goals for sustainable food.

What will the government need to do to ensure continued protection for farm animals across the UK?

Government must ensure that farm animal sentience continues to be embedded in UK law, and that all farm animals are legally protected with species-specific legislation.  Where EU farm animal welfare Directives already exist, for example for pigs and poultry, these protections should be imported.  Where EU Directives are absent, for example for dairy cattle, new protections should be proposed and adopted.

How can the UK remain a world leader in farm animal welfare?

Quality and high standards should become the foundation of UK food and agriculture. There is an opportunity for Britain to become a global leader in sustainable food and farming.  Government should work with industry to embed high ethical and environmental standards in any new settlement for agriculture, where public payments are used to deliver public goods, and where the market is empowered to provide farm gate prices that more accurately reflect the costs of production.  Together we should invest in high standards, innovation and new technologies, to support our rural economies at home, and for export around the world.

Action should be taken to better inform consumers about the way their food has been produced, and to reform labelling rules to ensure that citizens can drive and support standards from the market place.

Farm worker pay, conditions and morale should also be improved if we are to see consistent levels of good animal welfare applied on farms.  Workers who feel valued are more likely to value the farm animals they tend, and all farm workers should receive at least the national living wage.

Many of Farmwel’s goals are designed to help improve farm animal welfare.  In particular:

• Every farm animal has the freedom to express natural behaviour
• No routine behavioural mutilations
• No routine use of antibiotics
• Legislation protects the welfare of all farm animals
• Farm system labelling on all products
• Outcome-based assessments are required as a route to market
• Financial support is targeted to deliver sustainable food production.

It is also important that we recognise the costs associated with upgrading farm systems, and reflect on an appropriate balance between public and private investment.  Assistance options may include grants, loans, match-funding, and community investment.

What is the role of consumer demand and consumer awareness in high farm animal welfare standards?

The remainder of this paper will focus on the opportunity provided by mandatory method of production labelling, underpinned by robust outcome based assessments.

Method of production labelling

Mandatory method of production labelling provides the government with a straight-forward opportunity to deliver increased opportunities and growth in all meat and dairy sectors, by improving consumer choice, and allowing the market to influence and reward improvements in farm animal welfare.

Existing initiatives demonstrate the success of method of production labelling in delivering consumer-supported price differentiation.

Market-led improvements

The government has previously declared its intention to empower consumers to make informed choices in order that the market can drive further improvements in farm animal welfare.  Method of production labelling of meat and dairy products is the best way to deliver on this.  Clear, objective labelling provides consumers with the information they most want to know: ‘how was this animal kept?’

Method of production labelling is the natural partner of country of origin labelling.  If the government chooses to retain COOL, then method of production labels will help complete the origin story for consumers. Consumers are equally concerned about both  ‘where’ and ‘how’ an animal has been reared.

Confusing labels distort the marketplace

Research has provided compelling evidence that, based on the label alone, most consumers, even those who feel they have ‘a reasonable, basic knowledge’ or ‘a good knowledge’ about ‘how farm animals are kept and reared’, are likely to misinterpret the farming method used for meat and dairy products.[1]  Most consumers are unable to identify from the label how the animals that provided the meat or dairy products were farmed, such as whether they were kept outdoors, indoors with good facilities, or in basic conditions, or in a mixture of these systems.

This research demonstrates that consumers are confused, explicitly or implicitly, over the farm systems used to produce their meat and dairy foods.  This is important because labels influence consumer behaviour directly at point of sale. Confusing labels have a significant adverse economic impact on those producers operating to higher welfare standards because they undermine natural consumer preferences, preventing the market place from operating efficiently. 

The research indicates that the market place for higher welfare animal products is unhelpfully distorted, against higher welfare meat and dairy products, by the widespread use of confusing labels for meat and dairy products from systems likely to result in lower welfare. 

The widespread existence of confusing labels undermines the competitiveness of higher welfare brands and disincentivises new entrants, further improvements, and innovation.

Case study – mandatory egg labelling rules (EU)

The mandatory EU egg labelling rules provide a successful labelling precedent, using terms that are short and easily understood by consumers.  Under these rules, egg packs must be labelled ‘eggs from caged hens’, ‘barn eggs’ or ‘free range eggs’.

European Commission figures show the proportion of cage-free egg-laying hens in Europe rose from 19.7% in 2003 to 42.2% in 2012.[2]  In the UK, over 50% of the eggs we produce are from cage-free hens.  The remarkable rise in the production of cage-free eggs suggests that consumers are reacting positively to the availability of clear information as to farming method.  The Commission has officially recognised the link between increased sales of higher welfare eggs and mandatory labelling. It has also recognised that the labelling scheme allows consumer-supported price differentiation.[3]

Case study – voluntary pork labelling (UK)

In the UK, voluntary method of production labelling of pork products has facilitated substantial growth in higher welfare pigmeat, and led to greater overall value of the UK pork market. 

A voluntary code of practice for labelling pork products was introduced in the UK by the British Pig Executive (industry trade body) in 2010.  Prior to this date the labelling terms ‘outdoor bred’, ‘outdoor reared’ and ‘free range’ had been used for some pork products by food retailers.  However, without consistency or clear definitions this had led to confusion amongst consumers as to what farming systems they were supporting when buying pork labelled with these terms.  The voluntary code of practice introduced clear definitions for these terms, setting out key elements of the farming systems they described. This information was made available to the public on a website (www.porkprovenance.co.uk) and all major retailers in the UK signed up to applying the definitions when using the labels on their own brand products.  Each of these methods of production has better welfare potential than intensive indoor pig farming.  At least 40% of UK pigs are now born outdoors and assured as ‘outdoor bred’, ‘outdoor reared’, ‘free-range’, or ‘organic’.  Around a third are assured by the RSPCA scheme, Freedom Food.

The scheme is successful because it has been adopted on a whole industry basis, meaning it operates as though it were mandatory. However, we believe that even greater market penetration could be achieved for UK pork products from outdoor systems, if indoor intensive systems were also labelled.  This would provide complete transparency, and enable consumers to make a full and fair comparison.

The Anderson’s report to the Oxford Farming Conference in 2015 noted that, ‘40% of UK pigs are reared outdoors, involving higher costs which is unique to the UK pig herd, but also attract[ing] premium prices.’[4]

Underpinned by robust outcome-based assessments

Farmwel believes that method of production labelling should be underpinned by robust welfare outcome-based assessments.  These objectively measure welfare and provide a mechanism that can give reassurance that systems generally felt to be associated with higher welfare (outdoor and extensive indoor systems) are indeed delivering good welfare.

As well as measuring a farm animal’s capacity to express natural behaviours, assessments can also be used to record live transport distances, and method of slaughter.  (We believe that progress in the area of slaughter labelling is possible, if labelling is fair and non-discriminatory. Farmwel can provide more information if required.)

The AssureWel project is already delivering robust and affordable welfare outcome assessments as part of existing farm assurance schemes, such as Soil Association and Freedom Food and Red Tractor.  More information about welfare outcome assessment can be found on the AssureWel website: www.assurewel.org

A small change

Farmwel views mandatory method of production labelling as a simple measure to enhance transparency, which will help increase marketplace opportunities for farmers and has the potential to deliver significant growth across all meat and dairy product areas.  In addition to aiding growth, labelling will also help deliver market-driven improvements in farm animal welfare.

Method of production labelling will benefit consumers, who will be able to correctly identify products from farming systems associated with higher animal welfare.  It will reward farmers working to higher welfare standards and encourage others to do the same.

Mandatory method of production labelling will increase producer confidence in the market for higher welfare meat and dairy products, incentivising new entrants, and stimulating further improvements, and innovation.

Appendix 1

Secure and sustainable food – Strategic pillars

The repatriation of power from the European Union allows parliament, the government, and the farming industry to take stock, to consider the likely challenges of coming decades, and to set a framework for success.  We believe this success should be built on economic, environmental, and ethical sustainability.  In our view, public policy for agricultural land use should be constructed around three strategic pillars. 

Pillar one – Mitigating greenhouse gas pollution

Food systems account for up to 29% of global greenhouse gas emissions, within which agriculture accounts for up to 86%. There is an urgent need for a managed transition to systems and technologies that swiftly reduce the impact of food production on global warming by reducing carbon, methane and nitrogen emissions.  We should take action to increase carbon sequestration through effective soil management, to increase renewable energy production from farm land, and to implement new technologies that reduce our reliance on oil-hungry farm machinery.

Pillar two – Integration with biodiversity

Biodiversity boosts productivity.  It includes the microbial life forms that improve soil health, as well as the plants, insects, birds, and larger mammals we generally associate with the countryside.  Unfortunately, our biodiversity is in dramatic decline.  The RSPB’s State of Nature report in 2013 showed that 60% of UK species have declined over the last 50 years, and 31% have declined strongly.  Good integration between agriculture and biodiversity will require that measures are taken to improve the land’s productivity and resilience. 

Pillar three – Feeding people well

The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has stated that western diets lack nutritional diversity. Increasingly high levels of meat and dairy consumption are associated with obesity, heart disease and many other conditions.  A McKinsey and Company report in 2014 found that the UK spends around £47bn a year (3% of GDP) on obesity alone.  Poor diet affects people’s ability to work, adding an unnecessary burden to the UK economy.  Poor diet also affects people’s ability to enjoy a healthy life.

This pillar also has an ethical component.  Higher levels of farm animal welfare and positive environmental impacts help us to feel good about the food we eat.

Policy goals for secure and sustainable food

The next layer of policy architecture should be tactical.  We have developed a number of clear goals, which when delivered together will ensure food produced in the United Kingdom is economically, environmentally, and ethically sustainable.

Goals for Secure and Sustainable Food – All farmed food, on land or at sea

Farming families

- All farms, on land or at sea, are profitable

- A good life for all farm workers

- A vibrant industry provides opportunities for new entrants

Communities

- Diets are healthy and diverse

- Farms contribute to community life and rural development

- Every farm improves the climate resilience of its surrounding landscape

Farm animals and nature

- No routine behavioural mutilations

- Every farm animal has the freedom to express natural behaviour

- Biodiversity is increasing on all farms

- No routine use of antibiotics

Environment

- Farms have healthy soil and clean water

- Farms are net exporters of energy

- Farms are waste and carbon neutral

- Farms have good water management and are weather-resistant

Framework

- Financial support is targeted to deliver sustainable food production

- Legislation protects the welfare of all farm animals

- Farm system labelling on all products

- Outcome-based assessments are required as a route to market

7 April 2017