<b>Bijsluiter</b>. De hyperlink naar het originele document werkt niet meer. Daarom laat Woogle de tekst zien die in dat document stond. Deze tekst kan vreemde foutieve woorden of zinnen bevatten en de opmaak kan verdwenen of veranderd zijn. Dit komt door het zwartlakken van vertrouwelijke informatie of doordat de tekst niet digitaal beschikbaar was en dus ingescand en vervolgens via OCR weer ingelezen is. Voor het originele document, neem contact op met de Woo-contactpersoon van het bestuursorgaan.<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 1 ======================================================================

<pre>  Profitable Welfare
             Improving farm animal welfare
                              by
            facilitating innovation processes
                             and
                   using market forces
                        RDA/2012/01
RDA/2012/01              Profitable Welfare   1
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 1 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 2 ======================================================================

<pre>Excellence,
It is my pleasure to present to you this Opinion of the Council on Animal Affairs,
entitled Profitable Welfare. The initiative for this Opinion was taken by my
worthy predecessor, Prof Henk Vaarkamp. The idea arose shortly after the
merger of the ministries of Agriculture and Economic Affairs, so it is no
coincidence that this Opinion concerns agriculture, the economy and innovation
processes.
The aim of this Opinion is to give new impetus to the societal issue of animal
welfare in livestock farming in the Netherlands. Since 2001, when the
commission chaired by Herman Wijffels published its report on the future of
livestock farming, public calls for higher levels of farm animal welfare have been
prominent in the public debate. Yet despite an array of commissions, covenants
and reports, little structural progress seems to have been made.
The future of the strongly export-oriented Dutch livestock sector does not lie in
conventional bulk production for prevailing world market prices. Rather, it lies in
finding, serving and expanding market segments that place greater value on
sustainability, including a high standard of animal welfare. This requires
stimulating new consumer perceptions and marketing innovative products as
distinct brands consistent with these new perceptions, with a view to providing
economic added value for all links in the chain and without compromising on
competitiveness.
The advice of the Council on Animal Affairs is markedly different from that of the
earlier commissions of Wijffels (2001), Alders (2011) and Van Doorn (2011),
that improvement of farm animal welfare must take place by means of various
private ‘plus’ standards for animal welfare – instead of by raising the (statutory)
minimum welfare standards that apply to all livestock farms.
Indeed, raising welfare standards in anticipation of higher European norms would
almost certainly result in a competitive disadvantage for Dutch livestock farmers,
who now produce mainly generic products for the European and world markets
and compete based on price. Nonetheless, simply raising minimum standards in
step with or via European regulations would take too long; thereby doing
injustice to the broadly expressed societal wish – certainly since 2001 – for a
higher level of animal welfare in the Netherlands.
The Council is not advocating further refinement of the existing livestock farming
system (this time emphasizing animal welfare aspects, following earlier attempts
at refinements, e.g., related to the environment and health). Rather, systemic
change is proposed: a choice has to be made for other, more diverse production
objectives and to serve other markets.
The Council is convinced that this transition towards differentiated production for
added value can best be accomplished by stimulating private initiatives in an
open market. In the open market new product concepts and production systems
can and will be developed and validated in the most promising and quickest
manner and with the broadest support possible.
Stimulating and facilitating innovation and early adoption of advances in the area
of animal welfare will give livestock farmers opportunities to develop products to
RDA/2012/01                          Profitable Welfare                           2
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 2 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 3 ======================================================================

<pre>a higher standard of animal welfare (‘plus’ attributes) and for which consumers
are willing to pay a price premium. Moving away from a ‘market based on price
competition’ towards a ‘market based on added value’, livestock production
chains (from the farmer extending to and including the retailer) will enable
producers to satisfy the societal demand for a higher level of animal welfare in
the Netherlands while, at the same time, work towards a better income position.
It is the government that must create the space for this transition, but the actors
in the livestock production chains are the ones that must effectuate the shift.
Cooperation involving all parties in the chain will be essential for this, as well as
providing space for smaller innovative parties and taking into consideration the
international context in which Dutch livestock sector operates.
In your Memorandum on Animal Welfare and Animal Health, you indicate the
Netherlands’ aim to be a leader in animal welfare. The retail sector shares this
ambition, as demonstrated by recent developments in the market, such as the
intention expressed by Dutch retailers to adopt one ‘Better Life’ star as their
minimum animal welfare standard. With the Dutch ‘top sector policy’, a suitable
foundation has been laid for better cooperation. The task now is to forge these
developments together into a sustainable, future-ready transformation of the
Netherlands’ agrifood sector. I trust with this Opinion to have given you new
instruments in hand to make this possible.
Frauke Ohl
Chairperson, Council on Animal Affairs (Raad voor Dierenaangelegenheden, RDA)
RDA/2012/01                        Profitable Welfare                               3
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 3 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 4 ======================================================================

<pre>CONTENTS
       Guide for readers........................................................................................5
1. Summary .......................................................................................................6
2. Introduction ....................................................................................................8
       Moral questions and societal demands ...........................................................8
       Position of the production chains ...................................................................9
       The central question.................................................................................. 10
       The way to solutions: innovating and marketing ............................................ 10
3. Innovation .................................................................................................... 11
3.1 The desired developments and actual practice ................................................... 11
       Current situation....................................................................................... 11
       The first step............................................................................................ 11
3.2 Innovation processes ..................................................................................... 12
       Knowledge and scaling up in practice........................................................... 12
       Pace ....................................................................................................... 13
       Government support now and in the future................................................... 13
       The role of national laws and regulations...................................................... 13
       The European playing field: the greater goal and competitive advantage........... 14
4. Market forces and added value ........................................................................ 15
4.1 Consumer behaviour and added value .............................................................. 15
       International markets and cooperation......................................................... 15
4.2 The nature and effectiveness of hallmarks ......................................................... 16
       Effectiveness............................................................................................ 16
       Role of the government ............................................................................. 17
4.3 Consumer awareness ..................................................................................... 18
       Education ................................................................................................ 18
       Agricultural education and production chains ................................................ 18
5. Future vision ................................................................................................. 19
       Government tasks..................................................................................... 19
Appendix 1: Bibliography..................................................................................... 21
RDA/2012/01                               Profitable Welfare                                              4
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 4 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 5 ======================================================================

<pre>Guide for readers
Chapter 1 summarises this report’s main conclusions and recommendations.
Chapter 2 discusses the background and the framing of this Opinion. After this,
chapter 3 deals with innovation policy in the agrifood sector and offers further
recommendations regarding the direction of innovation and innovation
processes. In chapter 4, market forces in the agrifood sector are addressed, and
recommendations are presented related to conceptual thinking, hallmarks and
certification and promotion of greater awareness. Chapter 5 concludes the report
with a sketch of the Council’s vision of the future, emphasizing the role of the
government and how government should perform its part.
RDA/2012/01                        Profitable Welfare                          5
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 5 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 6 ======================================================================

<pre>1. Summary
The future of the strongly export-oriented Dutch livestock sector does not lie in
conventional bulk production for prevailing world market prices. Rather, it lies in
finding, serving and expanding market segments that place greater value on
sustainability, including a high standard of animal welfare. This requires
stimulating new consumer perceptions and marketing innovative products as
distinct brands consistent with these new perceptions, with a view to providing
economic added value for all links in the chain and without compromising on
competitiveness.
The Council is convinced that this transition towards differentiated production for
added value can be best accomplished by stimulating private initiatives in an
open market. It is in the open market that new product concepts and production
systems can and will be developed and validated in the most promising and
quickest manner and with the broadest support possible. Following from this, the
central question of this Opinion reads:
    How can government stimulate improvements in animal welfare via market
     mechanisms in the various links of production chains?
The answer to this question is fivefold:
    by integrating animal welfare as a community shared value 1 into new product
     perceptions;
    by ensuring that sustainability goals, including animal welfare objectives, are
     clarified, strengthened and consistently reflected in policy;
    by stimulating innovation as an integral chain process;
    by working towards the realization of one well-implemented hallmark for
     animal welfare, which subsequently can be developed further at the
     European level;
    by continuing to promote higher European minimum standards for animal
     welfare.
Today, many innovative solutions and advances are already emerging from
within the agrifood sector itself. Nonetheless, innovative ‘animal welfare plus’
products have generally been unable to secure a sufficiently robust market
share. To change this, the primary objective of research should be shifted away
from development of new technologies towards the process of production, up to
and including sales and product perceptions. Moreover, scientific knowledge has
to be applied more fully, for instance, with its translation for and dissemination
in practice. Conflicts, whether real or imagined, need to be solved, for example,
conflicts in existing innovative production systems between animal welfare, the
environment and public health. Chain partners collectively utilize this knowledge
to develop new products and the product perceptions that go along with them.
1
   ‘Corporate policies and practices that enhance competitiveness of the company while
simultaneously advancing social and economic conditions in the communities in which it sells and
operates’ (M. Porter, Dutch Sustainable Trade Initiative Video Conference, New York, NY, 15
December 2011).
RDA/2012/01                             Profitable Welfare                                     6
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 6 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 7 ======================================================================

<pre>Stimulating innovation also means eliminating barriers, for example, simplifying
and shortening permit procedures for more sustainable livestock farming
systems and reducing implementation risks associated with new developments.
But technological development is not the only step that involves risk; connecting
with a market segment, developing the right product perception, and
introduction and rollout bring their own risks as well.
Consumers’ knowledge about farming and their awareness of what is happening
in the livestock sector leaves much to be desired. It is important that citizens
learn more about animal keeping and animal welfare from an early age in
(primary) school. Similarly, those who work in the agrifood sector will need to
develop a better appreciation of the needs of animals, animal welfare and the
importance attached to these issues by contemporary Dutch society. For this,
reform and integration of university and vocational education are needed.
For animal welfare hallmarks, the government should establish ground rules so
that consumers can be confident that their purchasing decisions do in fact
contribute to better animal welfare. These ground rules concern the measuring
instruments used and the certification system itself. Development of specific
quality criteria is a task for the certification authority.
Sales of products from the Netherlands offering a higher standard of animal
welfare would be strengthened by pursuit of a single animal welfare hallmark
that is broadly supported at the European level. Initial efforts along these lines
should focus on North-Western Europe, where a market segment sensitive to
animal welfare arguments is already beginning to take shape. Thus, a new
standard will be formed that also enables the Netherlands’ sustainable livestock
industry to capitalize on and export its vanguard position as a knowledge
commodity and premium product.
By working towards a sensible increase of European legal minimum standards,
the innovative production systems newly developed in the Netherlands will
become firmly anchored in laws and regulations, earning a competitive
advantage for the Dutch agrifood sector abroad. Moreover, this will contribute to
solidify the Netherlands’ role as a leader in the area of animal welfare.
RDA/2012/01                           Profitable Welfare                         7
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 7 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 8 ======================================================================

<pre>2. Introduction
The call to raise animal welfare remains high on the political and social agenda in
the     Netherlands.     The    Council    on    Animal    Affairs   (Raad    voor
Dierenaangelegenheden, RDA) observes an urgent demand from within our
society for animal welfare standards that are higher than the current legal
minimums, which are based on European norms, while Dutch livestock farmers
produce for the mainly European international market.
The sizable interests connected to the livestock farming sector justify major
efforts to seek ways to achieve the higher levels of animal welfare that society
demands, without sacrificing competitiveness. How this can be achieved is the
subject of the current report.
The recommendations put forward in this Opinion are addressed primarily to the
government, but where applicable, they also concern other parties involved in
the agrifood production chains. Furthermore, the Council focuses explicitly on
factors that can be gainfully influenced by government, livestock farmers,
retailers and other chain partners and non-governmental organizations (NGOs),
and not on less tangible aspects such as culture, the economic climate and the
times we live in.
Moral questions and societal demands
In 2010, the Council presented in its Moral Issues and Public Policy on Animals
the Assessment Model for Policy on Animals (Figure 1). That model posed three
fundamental moral questions on animal keeping:
    May we keep animals?
    For what purposes may we keep animals?
    In what way may we keep animals?
In the Netherlands it is generally accepted that we keep animals in order to
produce food for human kind in the form of animal proteins. This is the starting
point of the current policy of the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture
and Innovation and of this RDA Opinion. On that basis, the Council formulated
the following three specific moral questions:
   I.   Is recognition of the intrinsic value of the animal at odds with the
         existence of the animal as a product?
  II.   Is the human desire to produce animal proteins at odds with the desire to
         ensure a high standard of animal welfare?
III.    Are the interests of the Dutch livestock sector and food sector at odds
         with the wish emanating from Dutch society to ensure that high
         standards of animal welfare are maintained?
RDA/2012/01                         Profitable Welfare                            8
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 8 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 9 ======================================================================

<pre>Position of the production chains
The Council observes that it is mainly the specific context in which Dutch
livestock farming operates that raises these questions. Dutch livestock farming is
an economically important, largely export-oriented sector that must compete
internationally, which is why farm animal welfare comes under pressure. At the
same time, the sector operates within an urbanized, relatively well-educated and
affluent society that has very little knowledge about and affinity with livestock
farming, but is greatly concerned about the welfare of animals.
Figure 1: Assessment Model for Policy on Animals
Moral questions and dilemmas associated with livestock farming in the
Netherlands anno 2012
         Assessment model                               Fundamental moral questions
                     for                                 May we keep animals?
    Profitable Animal Welfare
           Based on:
                                                         If so, for what purposes may we
                                                         keep animals?
    Public Morals
    Broadly shared and ideally based on:
        intuitions                                      In what      way    may    we   keep
        principles                                      animals?
        facts
           and
                                                     Specific moral questions:
    Scientific knowledge
                                                        If we may keep animals for production
    (relevant and up to date)
                                                         purposes, is recognition of the intrinsic
                                                         value of the animal at odds with the
                                                         existence of the animal as a product?
           interests are weighed
                                                        Is the human desire to produce animal
                                                         proteins at odds with the desire to
  Among others:                                          ensure a high standard of animal
     animal welfare, including animal                   welfare?
      health
                                                        Are the interests of the Dutch livestock
     human welfare, including public
                                                         sector and food sector at odds with the
      health and food security                           wish emanating from Dutch society to
     economic interests                                 ensure that high standards of animal
     environment                                        welfare are maintained?
RDA/2012/01                              Profitable Welfare                                      9
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 9 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 10 ======================================================================

<pre>The central question
The Council is convinced that the economic interests of Dutch agrifood chains are
reconcilable with the societal call for better animal welfare, and it views
innovation, market forces and creation of added value as the principal and
quickest-working instruments to achieve that goal. The RDA is not the first to
reach this conclusion, nor is it alone in this standpoint. The central question in
the current Opinion is then:
   How can government stimulate improvements in animal welfare via market
    mechanisms in the various links of production chains?
Appendix 1 presents a selection of the many documents and advisory reports on
this topic consulted by the Council and appearing over the past decades. In an
earlier Opinion, Responsible Animal Keeping (2009), the Council itself made a
distinction between ‘minimum standards’ and ‘plus standards’ for animal welfare,
and also indicated the roles and responsibilities of each of the different actors
with respect to animal welfare. In Moral Issues and Public Policy on Animals
(2010), the Council submitted the following advice with regard to market
mechanisms in animal keeping:
1. The government should make a well-considered decision on what position it
    wants and can take with respect to market forces in animal keeping.
2. It is desirable for citizens to become aware of the bottlenecks in common
    animal-keeping practices and of their own abilities to do something about
    these via conscientious purchasing decisions. At the same time, it is difficult
    to disqualify animal-keeping practices that are in compliance with all current
    regulations.
3. Using the Assessment Model for Policy on Animals the effects can be
    evaluated of a choice for or against reliance on market forces to regulate
    animal keeping, including associated aspects such as food security, food
    safety, animal welfare and the economy.
In general terms, the Council advised that in the interest of transparency and
consistency of policies, the government should make use of a public, transparent
and comprehensive Assessment Model for Policy on Animals.
The way to solutions: innovating and marketing
The way to solutions starts with our transforming the problematic context of the
Dutch livestock sector into an asset. A first step in that direction is to stimulate
innovations that raise farm animal welfare, such as Roundel housing systems for
chickens, Comfort Class pens for pigs, bedded pack barns for cows and Comfort
Class transport vehicles. The next step is to market the higher welfare standard,
via new product concepts that appeal to large groups of consumers. Examples of
such concepts are the ‘Rondel egg’, premium store-brand products such as the
free-range chicken of Dutch supermarket Albert Hein, and ‘ethical’ products
developed by major brands, such as Unox’s free-range farmers sausage and
Peter’s Farm veal. These products represent innovations that can secure a
sufficiently large share of the international market and offer economic prospects
to all links in the production chain. That latter aspect can translate into higher
incomes, but in the opinion of the Council, it could equally entail better income
security or more pleasant working conditions at the same level of income.
RDA/2012/01                         Profitable Welfare                            10
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 10 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 11 ======================================================================

<pre>3. Innovation
In the past 25 years, a fairly clear and consistent vision has emerged, step by
step, regarding where the Dutch livestock industry should be headed in the long
term. As early as 1989, the Van der Stee Commission recommended a shift
away from low-value bulk production to ‘production for added value markets’. 2
In 2001, sustainability was added as an objective, 3 and in 2011 and 2012 came
recognition of the need to shift to generic sustainable production for the Dutch
market. 4 All of these recommendations have been adopted by the government to
some extent.
3.1      The desired developments and actual practice
Current situation
Under the fourth Balkenende Cabinet (2007–2010) the government has played a
facilitating and stimulating role to raise levels of animal welfare in the Dutch
livestock sector to above the legally required minimums. However, since the first
Rutte Cabinet took office in 2010, government has pulled back, again ‘leaving
things to the market’. Notwithstanding the success of the ‘Better Life’ hallmark,
it appears that the market, by itself, is still insufficiently able to bring about
structural improvements in animal welfare. The Council observes that new
products offering a higher than minimum standard of animal welfare are
sometimes put on the market, but that scaling up to more substantial volumes
tends to fail. The ambitions expressed in the visions of Van der Stee and Wijffels
have not been achieved in practice. Regarding the visions of Van Doorn and
Alders, and market initiatives such as the ‘Better Life’ hallmark, it is still too
early to judge.
This state of affairs demands that the Netherlands government create better
opportunities for innovation and improvement of farm animal welfare. But it also
requires that the chain partners in this sector take better and more frequent
advantage of the opportunities offered. The Council observes that from both a
social and scientific perspective, there is already enough clarity on what is the
most desirable course. Now it is up to the government to find practical ways to
bring about the desired developments and to secure them for the future.
The first step
A necessary first step for government is to more clearly formulate its
sustainability objectives, in cooperation with stakeholders (businesses and
NGOs). For example, in relation to barn renovations and new builds, businesses
need a clear vision for the coming ten years, and a longer-term perspective for
the following ten to fifteen years. Such a long-term vision, if scientifically
validated and endorsed by society, can be understood as a ‘license to produce’
for the agrifood sector and offer farm enterprises some assurance of continuity
for the future.
2
  Om schone zakelijkheid, Van der Stee Commission (1989)
3
  Toekomst voor de veehouderij, Wijffels Commission (2001)
4
  See, among others Al het vlees duurzaam, Van Doorn Commission (2011); Van
mega naar beter, Alders Commission (2011) and Duurzaamheid, innovatie en
risico’s, LEI (2011)
RDA/2012/01                         Profitable Welfare                          11
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 11 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 12 ======================================================================

<pre>3.2      Innovation processes
Innovation is more than just the ‘supply oriented’ development of new
technologies; it also encompasses coming up with new ideas, shaping them and
putting them into practice in the form of new ways of working, new services and
new products. New ideas, and the practical applications, production systems and
concepts that follow from them, usually arise in niches where innovators are
active and in contexts where a range of different stakeholders interact and
consult.
A major stumbling block is the market development phase: the actual
introduction and scaling up of innovations to a level where robust volumes can
be achieved. Here again, an important role is played by the well-established
dominant market parties. 5 In processes of innovation and market development,
it is vital that space and support be available for all parties, and not only for
those that are part of the established order. Whether it actually comes to
cooperation between new and/or small-scale parties with the large-scale
established actors is a matter for the market to determine. Providing space and
facilitating open innovations and market development processes are the
important government tasks. The ‘top sector policy’ for the agrifood sector
should be modified to offer innovators explicit space to operate and to promote
productive contacts between them and established actors. Furthermore,
government could be expected to provide constructive support to proven
innovative projects in its public information campaigns.
Knowledge and scaling up in practice
There is enough scientific and technical knowledge now available in the field of
livestock farming to take key steps forward towards higher standards of animal
welfare. Less successful has been the scaling up of advances: translation into
practice of the knowledge that has already been generated in part thanks to
government support. As far as that is concerned, the Netherlands long ago lost
its leadership position. 6
By making on-the-shelf knowledge applicable to innovation processes, the
government can effectively raise the returns on its investments. A significant
share of current and future R&D budgets under the agrifood industry top-sector
policy could be earmarked for this purpose. Advantages could also be gained by
stimulating openness and ensuring that knowledge and incentive schemes are
accessible to all stakeholders. Results of scientific research commissioned wholly
or in part with government funds need to be made easily available and
accessible to all. This also holds true for the content and objectives of
programmes and initiatives of Dutch ministries, such as Economic Affairs,
Agriculture and Innovation; Infrastructure and Environment; and Health, Welfare
and Sport.
Under these circumstances, research should be targeted to a large degree
towards finding and resolving dilemmas and conflicts between the welfare of
animals, on one hand, and the importance of the environment, public health and
the like, on the other, in new and developing innovative systems of production.
5
  Van Onderstroom naar Draaggolf, Rotmans (2007)
6
   This is true for knowledge valorization broadly, see De Innovatie Vernieuwd,
Scientific Council for Government Policy (2008)
RDA/2012/01                          Profitable Welfare                        12
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 12 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 13 ======================================================================

<pre>Pace
In any case, the pace of change is too slow at present. The development time for
innovations has to be drastically reduced, and the number of innovative products
brought to market needs to be raised. This is an area where government can
make an essential contribution, for example, by:
   simplifying the rules, for example, for realizing innovative livestock housing
    systems;
   instituting a maximum permit processing period of 6 months for farmers who
    demonstrate that their new production system is eligible for an animal
    welfare hallmark that meets government-set ground rules;
   placing animal welfare on equal footing with the environment and spatial
    planning in criteria for granting permits for constructing or refitting a
    livestock farm, while also transforming the mandatory environmental effects
    reports into societal effects reports. 7
Government support now and in the future
Currently, government support is oriented mainly towards providing direct
financial assistance to enterprises via complex and still inadequately publicized
incentive schemes. The Council believes that this must change. Incentive
schemes must be made simpler, clearer and better organized, but there is also
much to be gained by:
   reducing the business risks associated with innovation, pilot projects and the
    general introduction and diffusion of an innovative production system;
   taking into account that many failures are necessary before innovation can
    be achieved.
Failure is inherent in innovation, and government support ensures that the
ground remains fertile for new ideas to germinate. A revolving fund to cover
start-up risks would be an appropriate instrument for this, similar to the
Innovation Fund for SMEs that came into effect as of 1 January 2012. The
Council advises the government to inventory and evaluate the effectiveness of
incentive schemes suitable that could reduce risk in the various phases of the
innovation process.
The role of national laws and regulations
Of course the government should establish and enforce legal minimum standards
for animal welfare. But relatively little should be expected of more extensive
laws and regulations in this area. Developments in the market and in society are
taking place such a quick pace that legislation invariable lags years behind. At
the same time, there is a shortage of enforcement capacity for existing laws.
Moreover, societal norms and values – and with them ambitions in the area of
animal welfare – diverge widely across Europe.
7
  Using a clear assessment framework for evaluating effects, for example, on the
environment, animal welfare, animal health and human health.
RDA/2012/01                          Profitable Welfare                         13
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 13 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 14 ======================================================================

<pre>The abolishment of piglet castration, including the rollout in Europe of this Dutch
initiative, is a good example of how rapidly societal developments even without
government coercion can lead to improvements in the welfare of animals. The
government should, therefore, at the national level particularly focus on the
following:
    eliminating barriers to development and implementation of production
     methods systems with higher standards of animal welfare than legally
     required;
    preventing enactment of new measures that would result in cumulatively
     high regulatory burdens and overlapping and even contradictory rules;
    along similar lines, ensuring better harmonization among the national,
     provincial and municipal levels of government.
The European playing field: the greater goal and competitive
advantage
In parallel with promoting innovation at home, the government must continue to
work to raise the minimum levels of animal welfare in European legislation. As
such, the welfare gains achieved through private-sector initiatives will become
firmly rooted in statutory regulations. The Netherlands would then not only live
up to its responsibility as a country at the vanguard of advances in animal
welfare, but the innovative frontrunners will be rewarded as well, in this case the
Dutch agrifood sector, which will have a competitive advantage during the
transition period as more stringent European regulations come into effect. This is
already happening, for example, in the requirement for group housing of calves
and in the recently introduced European ban on battery cages.
RDA/2012/01                         Profitable Welfare                           14
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 14 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 15 ======================================================================

<pre>4. Market forces and added value
Generating innovative inventions and readying them for practical application is
just part of the story. The more animal-friendly products derived from these
advances must also find their way to the consumer. Market forces will continue
to catalyse initiatives for further animal welfare improvements only if consumer
preferences deliver real economic benefits to the frontrunners in the production
chain.
4.1     Consumer behaviour and added value
Numerous studies have found that day-to-day grocery shopping is a matter of
routine. Marketing can influence that routine by using clear product concepts,
such as a store’s own brands as opposed to premium brands, Rondel or Puur &
Eerlijk (a store brand developed by a leading Dutch supermarket). As part of
such concepts, hallmarks such as ‘Label Rouge’, ‘Organic’ and ‘Better Life’,
makes a higher level of animal welfare, more marketable.
Yet animal welfare considerations are still not a major part of most consumers’
purchasing decisions. If two products differ only in price, the customer generally
chooses the one that is least expensive. The sales chances of high animal
welfare products increase if other factors also enhance consumer perceptions.
The synergies existing between the different sustainability objectives can play a
part in this process. As an example, some modern sustainable livestock systems
in practice not only improve the welfare of farm animals, but also operate
(virtually) without the use of antibiotics.
In the European and the world market, animal welfare itself is not (yet)
considered an economic added value. However, welfare gains do generally bring
higher production costs. It is therefore unwise to introduce mandatory increases
in welfare standards across the board in Dutch livestock farming. A better option
is market segmentation, whereby differentiated total product concepts are
developed that offer a higher standard of animal welfare and are put on the
market alongside the existing standard product lines. The explicit intention of
such a strategy would be for these new segments to quickly gain a large enough
market share that over time, the higher welfare level becomes the standard for
production in the Netherlands.
International markets and cooperation
The now prevalent bulk production for world market prices that is irreconcilable
with higher levels of animal welfare than the legal minimum. The future of
livestock farming in the Netherlands lies in finding and serving market segments
that place greater value on sustainability, including better animal welfare. Such a
market is starting to take shape in the north-western part of Europe. The Council
expects understanding of this trend to deepen over the coming two years
through research projects such as Mobilizing the Latent Consumer Demand for
Animal Welfare-Friendly Products, funded by the Netherlands Organisation for
Scientific Research (NWO).
RDA/2012/01                          Profitable Welfare                          15
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 15 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 16 ======================================================================

<pre>Successful development of total product concepts appropriate for market
segments in North-Western Europe requires that two preconditions be in place:
   a government that is supportive of open, international concepts, plus national
    initiatives that can be scaled up to the international level;
   cooperation among all chain partners, their suppliers and their advisors: feed
    companies, barn construction companies, raw materials producers, livestock
    farmers, financiers, veterinarians, other advisors, meat processors, retailers
    and restaurants and catering companies, as well as consumers with
    involvement of NGOs.
For all parties in the production chain, there has to be an added value to gain.
This could consist of higher incomes, but it could also take the form of greater
business continuity, maintenance of market share, higher job satisfaction and
enhanced societal acceptance of the livestock sector in the Netherlands.
4.2      The nature and effectiveness of hallmarks
The strength of a brand name is that it gives the consumer a certain feeling for
the product: status, belonging to a group, peace of mind, reliability, tradition,
and so forth. The Rondel egg is an example of a well known ‘ethical’ brand-name
product in the Netherlands, with others being Albert Hein’s free-range chicken
and Unox’s free-range farmers sausage. A hallmark offers consumers the
additional assurance that a (branded) product actually possesses the qualities
being claimed. Regarding animal welfare, ‘Better Life’ is a clear example of such
a hallmark. Hallmarks like ‘Organic’ and ‘Label Rouge’ have brand appeal as well.
Effectiveness
For a hallmark to be effective, it must be readily recognized, clearly stand for
something and be trusted by consumers. Again, ‘Better Life’ is a good example:
this hallmark clearly differentiates products with high animal welfare value; it
represents a standard of animal welfare than is higher than the legal minimum,
and consumers have confidence in it.
In the best possible scenario, in the Council’s opinion, there would be just one
animal welfare hallmark, within which there could be leeway for different welfare
levels. Such a hallmark clearly conveys to consumers whether a product meets
specific demands regarding animal welfare.
RDA/2012/01                         Profitable Welfare                          16
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 16 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 17 ======================================================================

<pre>Role of the government
Government’s involvement in a hallmark is limited to five tasks:
   establishing ground rules;
   developing a measurement and evaluation system for animal welfare;
   promoting acceptance of the hallmark at the European level;
   promoting use of the hallmark in other (European) countries;
   raising awareness of the hallmark via communication and public information
    campaigns.
The ground rules enable consumers to use the hallmark as an indicator. These
ground rules pertain to the system underlying the hallmark, not to the specific
quality criteria applied. The government should, for example, ensure that welfare
criteria are scientifically validated, that inspections are sufficiently frequent and
that the certification process itself is unbiased. But it is up to the certification
authority to determine which criteria are to be complied with. Another aspect
that merits recommendation is that government, in line with its social
responsibility, should regularly investigate the extent to which a hallmark
actually leads to better farm animal welfare.
In order to speak of ‘better’ animal welfare, measures are needed to gauge
welfare in a uniform and reliable way and subsequently to evaluate (give a value
to) these measures in an appropriate assessment model.
Of utmost importance is that government promote acceptance of the animal
welfare hallmark at the European level, like it previously did for the national
‘healthy choice’ hallmark, while stimulating use of the hallmark abroad.
Disseminating the seal of animal welfare quality will help create a new standard
of welfare throughout the European market, which is good for sales of Dutch
products that offer extra ‘plus’ value in animal welfare terms. It will also help the
Dutch livestock sector export and capitalize on its head start in the area of
sustainability as a knowledge commodity.
RDA/2012/01                          Profitable Welfare                            17
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 17 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 18 ======================================================================

<pre>4.3     Consumer awareness
Marketing and public information campaigns can achieve their intended
objectives only if there is adequate awareness among consumers: buyers must
have sufficient knowledge about the issues underlying their purchases. These
range from how animals are kept to the needs of animals and how society
perceives the treatment of animals.
Education
A variety of studies have shown that most consumers consider themselves
poorly informed about animal keeping and animal welfare. Primary school is the
ideal place to start laying the foundation for a future frame of reference to
enable consumers to make responsible purchasing decisions. While the effects
will become visible only in the longer term, this does entail a task for
government in the short term. 8
Agricultural education and production chains
The vocational schooling (‘MBO’ level) and professional-level education (‘HBO’
level) now on offer in agricultural fields of study is still very traditional and
closed. As a rule, studies in animal care are strictly divided from studies in
livestock farming. Moreover, links between agricultural and non-agricultural
studies leave much to be desired. Furthermore, agricultural education has few if
any links to food services and food technology education, butcher trade schools
and retail training. This situation is not conducive to exchanges of cultures,
visions and ideas about animal keeping, and it hinders innovative chain thinking
among today’s and tomorrow’s livestock farmers and employees and
entrepreneurs in the retail trade and processing industry. There is also the
question of whether the closed environment of agricultural education can
adequately prepare future entrepreneurs for their later role in a critical and
pluralistic society. There is thus a need for:
   decompartmentalization, a change of mind-set and knowledge development
    in agricultural education and, by extension, in production chains in general;
   government pressure for reform of educational curricula for this purpose;
   integration of agricultural education with related studies outside of the
    agricultural sector;
   in due time, abolishment of ‘agricultural’ as a separate category of education.
8
   See also the earlier recommendations in Responsible Animal Keeping, RDA
(2009) and Moral Issues and Public Policy on Animals, RDA (2010)
RDA/2012/01                          Profitable Welfare                          18
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 18 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 19 ======================================================================

<pre>5. Future vision
The Netherlands agrifood sector is among the world’s top performers when it
comes to production efficiency and food safety. The Dutch government has
stated its ambition to position itself among the global leaders in other areas as
well, including animal welfare. 9
This requires accelerated improvements in animal welfare standards and a more
rapid transition from production of generic products sold at world market prices
to differentiated production geared towards added value. It is the Council’s
conviction that this transition will be brought about most quickly by stimulating
private initiatives in the open market. In the open market, new product concepts
and production systems can and will be developed and validated in the most
promising and quickest manner and with the broadest support possible.
Government has an important role in all of this, but that role is not, in the first
place, direct development or support of innovative product concepts and
production systems. Ideally, government will focus on promoting dissemination
of knowledge and raising awareness among livestock farmers and consumers,
among others, and it will create an innovation-friendly environment in the area
of animal welfare and the marketing thereof. The agrifood sector, for its part,
should seize the opportunities on offer and develop societally acceptable, animal-
friendly products that in an international context offer good economic prospects
for all links in the production chain.
Government tasks
In concrete terms, the government has certain tasks to perform to create a
opportunity-rich environment:
   Promoting knowledge and awareness among consumers and livestock
    farmers, for example, by creating space for this topic in (primary) schooling.
   Integrating agricultural education with non-agricultural education
    and creating explicit space for awareness-raising and changed attitudes
    towards animal welfare and innovation in livestock-related studies (both
    agricultural and non-agricultural at the vocational, professional and university
    level, including Wageningen UR and Utrecht University’s Faculty of Veterinary
    Medicine).
   Sketching a clear sustainability vision that points out where the
    development and innovation opportunities lie for livestock farming, in
    cooperation with the private sector and NGOs. With such a vision in hand, the
    agrifood sector can, over time, earn itself a societally and economically
    endorsed ‘license to produce’. Part of the sustainability vision is a long-term
    research strategy proactively aimed at solving societal problems. The
    government will clearly communicate what it is doing in this respect, and it
    will stick to the strategy it sets out on.
9
   Policy Memorandum on Animal Welfare and Animal Health, Ministry of
Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation (2012)
RDA/2012/01                           Profitable Welfare                         19
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 19 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 20 ======================================================================

<pre> In research, shifting the accent to a sales and chain-oriented approach.
  In so doing, existing knowledge will become more accessible for practical
  applications, with the result being more and quicker innovation of the market
  and products. New research should also aim to solve conflicts between the
  different aspects of sustainability within innovative production systems.
 Eliminating practical barriers that stand in the way of large and small
  innovators, for example, by simplifying permit procedures, by abolishing
  unnecessary cumulative and even contradictory rules and procedures and
  preventing their re-emergence, and by striving for better harmonization
  among municipal, provincial and central government levels. Consideration
  also has to be given to transforming the environmental effects reports into
  societal effects reports.
 Via the top sector policy, creating an open environment for
  innovation with a focus on segmented markets. The revamped top
  sector policy offers opportunities to bring large and small players into contact
  with one another – innovators, researchers, implementers, marketing agents
  and NGOs – if the prerequisites for the needed transition and innovation
  processes are adequately fulfilled. The required knowledge is already readily
  available. The top sector policy should provide more room for small
  innovators, for multiple national and international centres of expertise and for
  civil society organizations. Results must be made as publicly accessible as
  possible.
 Covering risks instead of offering ad hoc income support. The
  government has various instruments at its disposal, including subsidies and
  regulations, to support development and diffusion of innovations in practice.
  It is more fruitful to spend government resources on covering various risks at
  the different stages of development and implementation than to devote
  public funds to direct financial support for ‘conventional’ (generic) products.
  In this light, the Council advises government to inventory its arsenal of
  instruments, to assess them and make adjustments where needed.
  Moreover, the government should make every effort to bring to the
  Netherlands as large a share as possible of EU funding slated for these
  objectives to support work towards the transformation of the livestock
  farming sectors.
 Working towards one European hallmark for animal welfare in the
  emerging North-Western European market for more sustainable agri-
  products. The Netherlands government can achieve this by working with the
  governments of other countries to promote their sanctioning of sustainability
  hallmarks in order to gain as much public support as possible throughout
  Europe.
RDA/2012/01                        Profitable Welfare                          20
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 20 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 21 ======================================================================

<pre>Appendix 1: Bibliography
- Abma, R., Briene, M., Buter, E., Overmars, K., Quist, J., Sloot, P., Verbeek,
  L. (2008), Maatschappelijke effecten van de intensieve veehouderij. Een
  vergelijking van productiesystemen
- Alders, H. (2011), Van Mega naar Beter. Rapportage van de
  maatschappelijke dialoog over schaalgrootte en toekomst van de veehouderij
- Bakker, J. (2009), Monitor Duurzame Dierlijke               Producten    2009,
  Diervriendelijke keuzes door consumenten. LEI
- Bakker, J.H., Bunte, F.H.J. (2009), Biologische internationale handel. LEI
- Bakker, T., Dijk, S. van, Galen, M. van, Lauwere, C. de, Meulen, H. van der,
  Ruijs, M., Wolf, P. de (2011), Duurzaamheid, innovatie en risico. Vier cases
  uit de agrarische sector. LEI report 2011-078
- Bartels. J., Fischer. A.R.H., Meeusen. M.J.G., Onwezen. M.C., Ronteltap. A.
  (2011), Denken, doen en duurzame voeding. Verschillen tussen
  consumentengroepen. LEI report 2010-060
- Bellis, E. (2011), Are quality labels making their mark in the poultry
  industry?, Poultry International, 21 February
- Berkhout, P., Esch, J.W.J., van, Massink, H.F., Poppe, K.J., Riphagen, H.J.,
  Timmers, J.C.M. (2011), In perspectief. Over de toekomst van de
  Nederlandse agrosector. LEI
- Berg, B. van den, Cornelisse, A., Dobbe, J., Dorland, N., Jong-Timmerman,
  A. de, Kossen, J., Mellema, D., Zaat, M. (2011), Ieder jaar een beter leven
  voor steeds meer dieren. Dierenbescherming, Jaarrapport Beter Leven
  kenmerk 2007-2010
- Beukers, R., Bolhuis, J., Galen, M. van, Knijff, A. van der (2011),
  Verduurzaming voedselproductie. Inzicht in productie, import, export en
  consumptie van voedsel. LEI
- Bodde, R. (2012), Niet zeuren over prijzen. Boerderij 97, no. 15 (10 January)
- Bolhuis, J., Bont, C.J.A.M. de, Galen, M. van (2006), Coöperaties onder druk
  van de supermarktoorlog
- Bont, K. de, Dijk, S. van, Jongeneel, R., Smit, B., Wolf, P. de (2010),
  Stimuleren van concurrentie en duurzaamheid bij nieuw Europees
  landbouwbeleid. LEI report, 2010-095
- Bremmer, B., Hoste, R., Greef, K.H. de, Oosterkamp, E.B. (2011),
  Verkenning van dierlijke tussensegmenten in onze buurlanden. Duurzaam
  varkensvlees, pluimveevlees en eieren. LEI report, 2011-028
RDA/2012/01                       Profitable Welfare                          21
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 21 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 22 ======================================================================

<pre>- Buller, H. (2010), The marketing and communication of animal welfare: a
  review of existing tools, strategies and practice. European Animal Welfare
  Platform, University of Exeter
- Bunte, F.H.J., Galen, M.A. van, Goddijn, S.T., Kuiper, W.E. (2003), Macht en
  prijsvorming in agrofoodketens. LEI
- Bunte, F., Georgiev, E., Logatcheva, K., Meulen, B. van der (2011),
  Mededinging en transparantie. Randvoorwaarden voor concurrentie en
  duurzaamheid. LEI report, 2011-050
- Butter, F. den (2011), Nederland mist handelsinnovatie. Trouw 10 August
- Centrale     Organisatie    voor     de    Vleessector,   Dierenbescherming,
  Interprovinciaal Overleg, Land- en Tuinbouw Organisatie Nederland, Natuur &
  Milieu, Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation, Nederlandse
  Vereniging Diervoederindustrie, Nederlandse Zuivel Organisatie, Rabobank
  Nederland (2011), Uitvoeringsagenda Duurzame veehouderij. Tweede
  voortgangsrapportage samenwerkingsverband
- Council on Animal Affairs (2009), Responsible Animal Keeping
- Council on Animal Affairs (2010), Moral Issues and Public Policy on Animals
- De Cock Buning, Tj. et al. (2012), Trendanalyse Denken over Dieren
- Deloitte, Branchegroep Retail (2011), Consumentenonderzoek 2011
- Deloitte (2011), Consument besteedt weer meer aan duurzame producten in
  de supermarkt. Press release. 7 September
- Doorn, van, Commission (2011), Al het vlees duurzaam. De doorbraak naar
  een gezonde, veilige en gewaardeerde veehouderij in 2020
- Ennik, I., Erp, Lenny, van, Hopster, H., Meijberg, W., Poorthuis, M., Ruis, M.
  (2011), Dierbare metgezellen. Domeinbeschrijving Dierenwelzijn. St.
  Veldwerk Nederland and Wageningen UR
- European Commission (2011), Green Paper on promotion measures and
  information provision for agricultural products: a reinforced value-added
  European strategy for promoting the tastes of Europe
- Farm Animal Welfare Council (UK) (2011), Economics and Farm Animal
  Welfare
- Galen, M.A. van (2011), Innovatie in de agrosector. LEI
- Galen, M. van (2006), Innovatie: ontbreken financiering belangrijkste
  belemmering. LEI Agri-Monitor (June)
- Galen, M. van, Verstegen, J. (2008), Innovatie in de agrarische sector. We
  kunnen er niet genoeg van krijgen! LEI
- Galen, M. van, Vlist, A.J. van der (2005), Innovatiemanagement en de rol
  van LNV. Inventarisatie van Studies en Aanbevelingen. LEI
RDA/2012/01                      Profitable Welfare                           22
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 22 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 23 ======================================================================

<pre>- Hoogendam, K., Wijk-Jansen, E. van, Winter, M. de (2011), Vee in zicht.
  Boeren en burgers over transparantie in de veehouderij. LEI report, 2011-
  021
- Immink, V., Ingenbleek, P., Vogelzang, T.A., Winter, M.A. de (2008), ‘De
  prijs is onredelijk’: Over de verwaarding van duurzaamheid in de biologische
  zuivelsector. LEI report, 2008-007
- Miele, M. (2010), Report concerning perceptions and atitudes towards farm
  animal welfare. European Animal Welfare Platform, Cardiff University
- Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation (2011), Naar de top.
  Het bedrijvenbeleid in actie(s)
- Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation (2012),
  Memorandum on Animal Welfare and Animal Health [Nota Dierenwelzijn en
  Diergezondheid]
- Porter, M. (2011), Dutch Sustainable Trade Initiative Video Conference, New
  York, NY, 15 December
- Raden voor de leefomgeving en infrastructuur (2011), Het Europees
  landbouwbeleid als transitie-instrument voor de land- en tuinbouw
- Rotmans, J. (2007), Van onderstroom naar draaggolf
- Scientific Council for Government Policy (2008), De innovatie vernieuwd
- Stee, Commission Van der (1989), Om schone zakelijkheid
- Stevenson, P. (2011), Reviewing the costs. The economics of moving to
  higher welfare farming
- Topsector Agro&Food (2011), Agro&Food: De Nederlandse groeidiamant
- Verhagen, M.J.M. (2011), Kabinetsreactie op SER-advies: Overheid én
  markt: Het resultaat telt! Voorbereiding bepalend voor succes
- Wetenschappelijke Raad voor Integrale Duurzame Landbouw en Voeding
  (2011), Naar een integrale benadering van duurzame landbouw en gezonde
  voeding
- Wijffels, Commissie (2001), Toekomst voor de veehouderij
- www.rondeel.org
- www.voedingscentrum.nl
RDA/2012/01                       Profitable Welfare                         23
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 23 =================================================================

<br><br>====================================================================== Pagina 24 ======================================================================

<pre>About the RDA
The Council on Animal Affairs (RDA) is an assembly of experts that upon request or at its own
initiative advises the minister and state secretaries of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation
on issues of animal welfare, animal health and animal ethics. The Council bases its opinions on the
latest developments in science, society and ethics. The RDA is made up of scientific and practical
experts who serve on the Council in their personal capacity, without obligation or compulsion.
Every Opinion of the Council is completed by a Forum. A Forum is made up of council members
with expertise relevant to the issue at hand, in some cases supplemented by external experts. The
names of the Forum members who prepared this Opinion for the Council are marked with an
asterisk in the list below. The Forum presents a draft report to all Council members for comment. It
then finalizes the Opinion, taking into account the comments offered in this horizontal assessment
and in consultation with the Council chairperson. With this, an Opinion of the Council is expressly a
product of the full Council.
The Council on Animal Affairs is made up of the following experts:
J.A.M. van Arendonk                                     J. Kaandorp
H.M.G. van Beers-Schreurs                               F. van Knapen
F.W.A. Brom                                             P.A. Koolmees
W.H.B.J. van Eijk                                       J. Lokhorst
A.A. Freriks                                            F. Ohl, chairperson
L.J. Hellebrekers                                       P.I. Polman, MPH
W.H. Hendriks                                           P. Poortinga *
S.A. Hertzberger *                                      F.C. van der Schans
J.E. Hesterman                                          M.M. Sloet van
A.J.M. van Hoof                                         Oldruitenborgh-Oosterbaan
H. Hopster*                                             J.A. Stegeman
R.B.M. Huirne                                           M.H.A. Steverink, MFM *
M.J.B. Jansen                                           H.W.A. Swinkels *
M.C.M. de Jong                                          H.M. van Veen*
M. de Jong-Timmerman                                    P.J. Vingerling *
J.Th. de Jongh                                          W. Zwanenburg *
More information about the Council on Animal Affairs can be found on our website: www.RDA.nl
All of our previously published advisory reports can also be downloaded there, and you can also
subscribe to our newsletter.
Council on Animal Affairs
P.O. Box 20401
2500 EK The Hague
T: 070-3785266
www.RDA.nl
        RDA/2012/01                           Profitable Welfare                               24
</pre>

====================================================================== Einde pagina 24 =================================================================

<br><br>