Sustainability of Pork Production with Immunocastration in Europe

Kevin Kress, Sam Millet, Étienne Labussière, Ulrike Weiler and Volker Stefanski
Additional contact information
Kevin Kress: Department of Behavioral Physiology of Livestock, Institute of Animal Science, University of Hohenheim, Garbenstraße 17, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
Sam Millet: ILVO (Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food), Scheldeweg 68, 9090 Melle, Belgium
Étienne Labussière: Department of Feeding and Nutrition—Physiology, Environment, and Genetics for the Animal and Livestock Systems, Institut national de la recherche agronomique, Agrocampus Quest, 35590 Saint-Gilles, France
Ulrike Weiler: Department of Behavioral Physiology of Livestock, Institute of Animal Science, University of Hohenheim, Garbenstraße 17, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
Volker Stefanski: Department of Behavioral Physiology of Livestock, Institute of Animal Science, University of Hohenheim, Garbenstraße 17, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany

Sustainability, 2019, vol. 11, issue 12, 1-20

Abstract: Immunocastration, a technique to replace surgical castration of piglets, consists of two consecutive vaccinations to induce antibodies which transiently suppress testicular functions and avoid boar taint. It is a method to ensure both a high product quality and a high level of animal welfare. The impact of immunocastration on the three pillars of sustainability has been studied extensively. While all aspects of sustainability have been studied separately, however, a contemporary global overview of different aspects is missing. In immunocastrates, performance results are better than in barrows, but worse than in boars. The environmental impact of pork production with immunocastrates is lower than with barrows, but higher than with boars. The level of aggression is considerably lower in immunocastrates compared to boars. Societal concerns are mainly related to food safety, and are not supported by scientific evidence. After second vaccination, immunocastrates switch from a boar- to a barrow-like status. Therefore, the timing of second vaccination is a fine-tuning tool to balance advantages of boars with environmental and economic benefits against increased risk of welfare problems and boar taint. Nevertheless, both synergic and conflicting relationships between the pillars of sustainability must be communicated along the value chain to produce tailored pork products.

Keywords: sustainability; immunocastration; carbon footprint; animal welfare; food safety; pork production; boars; surgical castration (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/12/3335/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/12/3335/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:12:p:3335-:d:240374

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().