Journal of Veterinary Medicine and Health
Open Access

Life cycle assessment (LCA); Animal welfare; Sustainability assessment; Environmental impact

Introduction

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has become a vital tool for evaluating the environmental impacts of products and processes throughout their entire life cycle. However, as society places increasing importance on ethical considerations, there is a growing interest in incorporating animal welfare variables into LCA. This presents a unique set of challenges due to the complexity of assessing and measuring the well-being of animals in various stages of production. This article explores the difficulties associated with integrating animal welfare variables into LCA and the implications for a more comprehensive sustainability assessment [1]. Animal welfare is a multifaceted concept that encompasses physical health, behavior, and emotional well-being. Evaluating and quantifying these variables throughout the life cycle of a product pose significant challenges. Unlike environmental factors, which often have established metrics and measurement tools, animal welfare is subjective and context-dependent [2]. For example, assessing the stress levels of animals in a farm setting may involve considering factors such as space, social interactions, and access to natural behaviors. One of the primary challenges in incorporating animal welfare into LCA is the limited availability and reliability of relevant data. Unlike environmental impacts, which can be measured using standardized metrics, animal welfare data often rely on observational studies, surveys, and expert opinions. This lack of standardized data makes it difficult to compare and integrate animal welfare considerations across different products and industries. Determining what constitutes good or bad animal welfare is subjective and varies among stakeholders, including consumers, producers, and animal welfare advocates. Different groups may have divergent views on acceptable practices and standards. This subjectivity complicates the establishment of universally accepted criteria for assessing and incorporating animal welfare variables into LCA. Balancing the diverse perspectives while maintaining scientific rigor presents a significant challenge. Animal welfare conditions can vary significantly over time and space. Seasonal changes, regional differences in farming practices, and evolving industry standards all contribute to the temporal and spatial variability of animal welfare. LCA, which often aims to provide a comprehensive picture of a product’s life cycle, must grapple with these dynamic factors. Accounting for such variability requires sophisticated modeling techniques and a nuanced understanding of the specific contexts in which animals are raised and processed. Integrating animal welfare variables into existing LCA models poses technical challenges. LCA models are typically designed to quantify environmental impacts, and modifying them to include complex and dynamic animal welfare considerations requires careful calibration. Developing standardized methodologies for assessing and integrating animal welfare into LCA is an ongoing area of research, with experts working to establish best practices that balance scientific rigor and practical applicability [3-5].

Discussion

Ethical considerations play a central role in the integration of animal welfare into LCA. Determining acceptable standards requires engagement with various stakeholders, including consumers, producers, animal welfare organizations, and policymakers. Transparent and inclusive processes that consider diverse perspectives are crucial in developing a framework that is both ethically sound and widely accepted. Establishing a dialogue among stakeholders can help identify common ground and foster cooperation in defining and implementing animal welfare criteria. One of the key challenges in assessing animal welfare is the absence of standardized metrics comparable to those used for environmental impact assessment. The development of universally accepted metrics for different species and production systems is a critical step in ensuring consistency across LCAs. Collaboration between scientists, animal welfare experts, and industry stakeholders can contribute to the establishment of standardized indicators that reflect the well-being of animals throughout their life cycle. Technological advancements offer new opportunities to address the data challenges associated with animal welfare assessments. Remote sensing, sensors, and other monitoring technologies can provide real-time data on animal conditions, facilitating more accurate and comprehensive assessments. Additionally, advancements in data analytics and machine learning can help process and interpret complex datasets, contributing to a more robust understanding of the relationships between production practices and animal welfare outcomes. Enhancing awareness and understanding among LCA practitioners, industry professionals, and consumers regarding the importance of incorporating animal welfare into sustainability assessments is crucial. Education initiatives can help bridge the gap between environmental and animal welfare considerations, fostering a holistic understanding of the impacts of products and processes. As awareness grows, there may be increased demand for products that adhere to higher animal welfare standards, encouraging industries to adopt more sustainable practices. The establishment of clear regulatory frameworks is essential in encouraging the integration of animal welfare variables into LCA. Governments and international bodies can play a pivotal role in setting standards, providing incentives for compliance, and ensuring that ethical considerations are incorporated into broader sustainability initiatives. Regulatory support can create a level playing field, encouraging industries to invest in practices that prioritize both environmental and animal welfare outcomes. Addressing the complexity of animal welfare within LCA requires interdisciplinary collaboration. Scientists, veterinarians, ethicists, and LCA practitioners need to work together to develop comprehensive methodologies that consider the nuances of different production systems and species. Interdisciplinary collaboration can contribute to a more holistic and nuanced understanding of the relationships between production practices, environmental impacts, and animal welfare outcomes. The field of animal welfare is dynamic, with evolving scientific understanding and changing societal expectations. Continuous research and adaptation of LCA methodologies are essential to keep pace with advancements in animal welfare science and evolving ethical standards. A flexible and adaptive approach will ensure that LCA remains a relevant and reliable tool for sustainability assessments in the face of changing perspectives and scientific insights [6-9].

Conclusion

While the integration of animal welfare variables into Life Cycle Assessment is a commendable goal, it comes with a myriad of challenges. From the subjective nature of animal welfare assessments to the scarcity of reliable data and the temporal and spatial variability in conditions, incorporating these variables demands a nuanced and multifaceted approach. However, with concerted efforts from stakeholders, advancements in technology, and ongoing interdisciplinary research, it is possible to develop robust methodologies that enhance the comprehensiveness and relevance of sustainability assessments. Integrating animal welfare into LCA represents a crucial step toward a more holistic and ethical approach to evaluating the overall impact of products and processes on the planet and its inhabitants. As sustainability assessments evolve to address ethical concerns, finding common ground among stakeholders and developing standardized methodologies will be crucial in ensuring the credibility and effectiveness of LCA as a tool for promoting both environmental and animal welfare considerations.

Conflict of Interest

None

Acknowledgment

None

1. Solomn G, Abule E, Yayneshet T, Zeleke M, Yoseph M, et al. (2017) Feed resources in the highlands of Ethiopia: A value chain assessment and intervention options. ILRI 1–36.

Google Scholar, Indexed at

2. Duguma B, Janssens GPJ (2021) Assessment of Livestock Feed Resources and Coping Strategies with Dry Season Feed Scarcity in Mixed Crop-Livestock Farming Systems Around the Gilgel Gibe Catchment, South West Ethiopia. Sustain 13.

Google Scholar, Crossref

3. Adinew D, Abegaze B, Kassahun D (2020) Assessment of feed resources feeding systems and milk production potential of dairy cattle in Misha district of Ethiopia. Ethiop J Appl Sci Technol 11: 15–26.

Google Scholar

4. Chufa A, Tadele Y, Hidosa D (2022) Assessment on Livestock Feed Resources and Utilization Practices in Derashe Special District, Southern-Western Ethiopia: Status, Challenges and Opportunities. J Vet Med 5: 14.

Google Scholar

5. Melaku T (2011) Oxidization versus Tractorization: Options and Constraints for Ethiopian Framing System. Int J Sustainable Agric 3: 11-20.

Google Scholar, Indexed at

6. World Bank (2017) International Development Association: Project Appraisal Document on a Proposed Credit in the Amount of SDR 121.1 Million (US$ 170 Million Equivalent) to the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia for a Livestock and Fisheries Sector Development Project (Project Appraisal Document No. PAD2396). Washington DC.
7. FAO (2014) OECD, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United States, Agricultural Outlook 2014, OECD Publishing FAO.
8. Belay G, Negesse T (2019) Livestock Feed Dry Matter Availability and Utilization in Burie Zuria District, North Western Ethiopia. Trop Subtrop Agroecosystems 22: 55–70.

Google Scholar

9. Management Entity (2021) Ethiopia’s Livestock Systems: Overview and Areas of Inquiry. Gainesville, FL, USA: Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Livestock Systems.
10. Azage T (2004) Urban livestock production and gender in Addis Ababa. ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Urban Agric Mag 12:3.

Google Scholar, Indexed at