Evaluation of the sustainability of contrasted pig farming systems: The procedure, the evaluated systems and the evaluation tools

M. Bonneau*, K. De Greef, D. Brinkman, M.U. Cinar, J.Y. Dourmad, H.L. Edge, E. Fàbrega, J. Gonzàlez, H.W.J. Houwers, M. Hviid, E. Ilari-Antoine, T.N. Klauke, C. Phatsara, L. Rydhmer, B. Van Der Oever, C. Zimmer, S.A. Edwards

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although a few studies consider the sustainability of animal farming systems along the three classical main pillars (economy, environment and society), most studies on pig farming systems address only one of these pillars. The present paper is the introduction to a series of companion papers presenting the results of a study undertaken within the EU-supported project Q-PorkChains, aiming at building a comprehensive tool for the evaluation of pig farming systems, which is robust to accommodate the large variability of systems existing in Europe. The tool is mostly based on questions to farmers and comprises a total of 37 dimensions distributed along eight themes: Animal Welfare, Animal Health, Breeding Programmes, Environmental Sustainability, Meat Safety, Market Conformity, Economy and Working Conditions. The paper describes the procedure that was used for building the tool, using it on 15 contrasted pig farming systems and analysing the results. The evaluated systems are briefly described and a short overview of the dimensions is provided. Detailed descriptions of the theme-wise tools and results, as well as the results of an integrated evaluation, are available in the companion papers.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2011-2015
Number of pages5
JournalAnimal
Volume8
Issue number12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 4 Aug 2014

Keywords

  • assessment
  • farming system
  • pig
  • sustainable

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluation of the sustainability of contrasted pig farming systems: The procedure, the evaluated systems and the evaluation tools'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this