Environmental Quality and Compliance with Animal Welfare Legislation at Swedish Cattle and Sheep Farms

Jan Hultgren, Matthew Hiron, Anders Glimskär, Eddie A. M. Bokkers and Linda J. Keeling
Additional contact information
Jan Hultgren: Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 234, 53223 Skara, Sweden
Matthew Hiron: Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 7044, 75007 Uppsala, Sweden
Anders Glimskär: Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 7044, 75007 Uppsala, Sweden
Eddie A. M. Bokkers: Animal Production Systems Group, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University and Research, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
Linda J. Keeling: Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 7068, 75007 Uppsala, Sweden

Sustainability, 2022, vol. 14, issue 3, 1-14

Abstract: Conflicts between different goals can obstruct progress in sustainability, but interests may also coincide. We evaluated relationships between environmental quality and animal welfare on Swedish farms with grazing livestock, using publicly available databases. Data were collected from 8700 official animal welfare inspections on 5808 cattle farms and 2823 inspections on 2280 sheep farms in 2012–2017. Compliance with three animal-based checkpoints was modeled using logistic regression, including a random farm effect to account for repeated inspections. Compliance was regressed on semi-natural grassland area, participation in the National Meadow and Pasture Inventory, Agri-Environmental Scheme (AES) grassland payments, presence of indicator plant species, and the presence of Natura 2000 habitats. Cattle farms complied more often if they received AES payments for grasslands of special values compared with if they did not apply for them (OR = 1.55–1.65; p ≤ 0.0001) and there was a similar tendency for cattle farms that applied for but were denied such payments (OR = 1.29; p = 0.074). There was also a strong tendency for Natura 2000 habitats on cattle farms to be associated with higher compliance (OR = 1.36; p = 0.059). These results suggest a direct or indirect causal effect of biodiversity on cattle welfare. The same associations could not be shown in sheep.

Keywords: biodiversity; farm animal; grassland; meat production; pasture; sustainability (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1095/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/3/1095/ (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:14:y:2022:i:3:p:1095-:d:727680

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 ().