How to Consider the Value of Farm Animals in Breeding Goals. A Review of Current Status and Future Challenges

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 309-330

  Nielsen, H M ^a   Olesen, I ^a   Navrud, S ^b   Kolstad, K ^a   Amer, P ^c  

^a NOFIMA   (Norway)

^b NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES   (Norway)

^c ABACUSBIO LIMITED   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Animal welfare; Breeding goal; Economic value; Market experiment; Non market value; Public good; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL WELFARE; ETHICS; PRICE DYNAMICS; REPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR; STAKEHOLDER; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 80051784603     PISSN: 11877863     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10806-010-9264-4     Document Type: Review

References (66)

1. Alfnes, F., Guttormsen, A. G., Steine, G., & Kolstad, K. (2006). Consumers' willingness to pay for the color of salmon: A choice experiment with real economic incentives. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 88, 1050-1061.
2. Amer, P. R. (1999). Economic accounting of numbers of expressions and delays in sheep genetic improvement. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 42, 325-336.
3. Bateman, I., & Willis, K. G. (1999). Valuing environmental preferences. Theory and practice of the contingent valuation method in the US, EU, and developing countries. Oxford, UK and New York, USA: Oxford University Press.
4. Bergsma, R., Kanis, E., Knol, E. F., & Bijma, P. (2008). The contribution of social effects to heritable variation in finishing traits of domestic pigs (Sus scrofa). Genetics, 178, 1559-1570.
5. Bijma, P., Muir, W. M., & Arendonk, J. A. M. (2007). Multilevel selection 1: Quantitative genetics of inheritance and response to selection. Genetics, 175, 277-288.
6. Brascamp, E. W., Smith, C., & Guy, D. R. (1985). Derivation of economic weights from profit equations. Animal Production, 40, 175-180.
7. Broom, D. M. (1991). Animal welfare: Concepts and measurement. Journal of Animal Science, 69, 4167-4175.
8. Cameron, T., Poe, G., Either, R., & Schulze, W. (2002). Alternative nonmarket value-elicitation methods: Are revealed and stated preferences the same? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 44, 391-421.
9. Carlsson, F., & Martinsson, P. (2001). Do hypothetical and actual marginal willingness to pay differ in choice experiments? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 41, 179-192.
10. Christensen, L. G. (1998). Possibilities for genetic improvement of disease resistance, functional traits and animal welfare. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica. Section A, Animal Science, Supplement, 28, 77-89.
11. Cummings, R. G., Harrison, G. W., & Rustrom, E. E. (1995). Homegrown value and hypothetical surveys: Is the dichotomous choice approach incentive-compatible? American Economic Review, 85, 260-266.
12. Dekkers, J. C. M., & Gibson, J. P. (1998). Applying breeding objectives to dairy cattle improvements. Journal of Dairy Science, 81, 9-35.
13. Desvousges, W. H., Smith, V. K., & Fisher, A. (1987). Option price estimates for water quality improvements: A contingent valuation study for the monongahela river. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 14, 248-267.
14. Diener, A., O'Brien, B., & Gafni, A. (1998). Health care contingent valuation studies: A review and classification of the literature. Health Economics, 7, 313-326.
15. Edel, C., Dempfle, L. (2006). The use of the contingent valuation method to define breeding objectives: Experiences from two studies on horse breeds. In Proc. 8th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production. 13-18 Aug 2006, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. CD-ROM: 31_368-1668. pdf. pp. 4.
16. Ellen, E. D., Visscher, J., van Arendonk, J. A. M., & Bijma, P. (2008). Survival of laying hens: Genetic parameters for direct and associative effects in three purebred layer lines. Poultry Science, 87, 233-239.
17. Fraser, D. (2003). Assessing animal welfare at the farm and group level: The interplay of science and values. Animal Welfare, 12, 433-443.
18. Gamborg, C., & Sandøe, P. (2005). Sustainability in farm animal breeding: A review. Livestock Production Science, 92, 221-231.
19. Garcia, S., Harou, P., Montagné, C., & Stenger, A. (2009). Models for sample selection bias in contingent valuation: Application to forest biodiversity. Journal of Forest Economics, 15, 59-78.
20. Gibson, J. P., & Wilton, J. W. (1998). Defining multiple-trait objectives for sustainable genetic improvement. Journal of Animal Science, 76, 2303-2307.
21. Goddard, M. E. (1998). Consensus and debate in the definition of breeding objectives. Journal of Dairy Science, 81, 6-18.
22. Groen, A. F. (1989). Economic values in cattle breeding. I. Influences of production circumstances in situations without output limitations. Livestock Production Science, 22, 1-16.
23. Groen, A. F., Steine, T., Colleau, J., Pedersen, J., Pribyl, J., & Reinsch, N. (1997). Economic values in dairy cattle breeding with special reference to functional traits. Report of an EAAP-working groups. Livestock Production Science, 49, 1-21.
24. Hazel, L. N. (1943). The genetic basis for constructing selection indexes. Genetics, 28, 476-490.
25. Heringstad, B., Klemetsdal, G., & Ruane, J. M. (2000). Selection for mastitis resistance in dairy cattle: A review with focus on the situation in the Nordic countries. Livestock Production Science, 64, 95-106.
26. Hersleth, E. (2005). NRF Norwegian red breed-a source for crossbreeding. Paper presented at the Red cow symposium: Breeding to meet the changing economics of the dairy industry. South Afrika.
27. Horgan, R., & Gavinelli, A. (2006). The expanding role of animal welfare within EU legislation and beyond. Livestock Production Science, 103, 303-307.
28. Just, R., Hueth, D., Schmitz, A. (1982). Applied welfare economics and public policy. New York, US.
29. Kanis, E., de Greef, K. H., Hiemstra, A., & van Arendonk, J. A. M. (2005). Breeding for societally important traits in pigs. Journal of Animal Science, 83, 948-957.
30. Kanis, E., van den Belt, H., Groen, A. F., Schakel, J., & de Greef, K. H. (2004). Breeding for improved welfare in pigs: A conceptual framework and its use in practise. Animal Science, 78, 315-329.
31. Kjærnes, U., Lavik, R., Kjørstad, I. (2005). Animal friendliness and food consumption practices. Preliminary results from population surveys in 7 countries. In A. Butterworth (Ed.), Science and society improving animal welfare. Welfare Quality conference proceedings, 17-18 Nov 2005, Brussels, Belgium, pp. 26-33.
32. Kjørstad, I. (2005). Welfare quality. WP1. 1 consumers literature review country report Norway. SIFO, National Institute for Consumer Research, P. O. Box 4682 Nydalen, N-0405 Oslo Norway. pp. 60.
33. Lawrence, A. B., Conington, J., & Simm, G. (2004). Breeding for animal welfare: Practical and theoretical advantages of multi-trait selection. Animal Welfare, 13, 191-196.
34. List, J. A. (2001). Do explicit warnings eliminate the hypothetical bias in elicitation procedures? Evidence from field auctions for sportcards. American Economic Review, 91, 1498-1507.
35. List, J. A., & Gallet, G. A. (2001). What experimental protocol influence disparities between actual and hypothetical stated values? Environmental Resource Economics, 20, 241-254.
36. Lusk, J. L., & Schroeder, T. C. (2004). Are choice experiments incentive compatible? A test with quality differentiated beef steaks. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 86, 467-482.
37. McInerney, J. (2004). Animal welfare, economics and policy. Report on a study undertaken for the Farm & Animal Health Economics Division of Defra. pp. 68.
38. Mitchell, R., & Carson, R. (1989). Using surveys to value public goods: The contingent valuation method. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
39. Navrud, S., Strand, J. (2002). Social cost and benefits of preserving and restoring the Nidaros Cathedral. In S. Navrud & R. C. Ready (Eds.) Valuing cultural heritage: Applying environmental valuation techniques to historic buildings, moments and artifacts. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.
40. Nielsen, H. M. (2004). Economic values for production and functional traits in dairy cattle breeding goals derived by stochastic simulation. Ph. D. Thesis, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen, Denmark.
41. Nielsen, H. M., & Amer, P. R. (2007). An approach to derive economic weights in breeding objectives using partial profile choice experiments. Animal, 1, 1254-1262.
42. Nielsen, H. M., Christensen, L. G., & Groen, A. F. (2005). Derivation of sustainable breeding goals for dairy cattle using selection index theory. Journal of Dairy Science, 88, 1882-1890.
43. Nielsen, H. M., Christensen, L. G., & Ødegård, J. (2006). A method to define breeding goals for sustainable dairy cattle production. Journal of Dairy Science, 89, 3615-3625.
44. Nielsen, H. M., Groen, A. F., Pedersen, J., & Christensen, L. G. (2004). Stochastic simulation of economic values and their standard deviations for production and functional traits in dairy cattle under current and future Danish production circumstances. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, 54, 113-126.
45. Olesen, I., Alfnes, F., Røra, M. B., & Kolstad, K. (2010). Eliciting consumers' willingness to pay for organic and welfare-labelled salmon in a non-hypothetical choice experiment. Livestock Science, 127, 218-226.
46. Olesen, I, Gjerde, B., & Groen, A. F. (1999). Methodology for deriving non-market trait values in animal breeding goals for sustainable production systems. In Proceedings International Workshop on EU Concerted Action on Genetic Improvement of Functional Traits in Cattle (GIFT); Breeding Goals and Selection Schemes, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 7-9th Nov 1999. Interbull Bulletin No. 23 (1999), pp. 13-21.
47. Olesen, I., Groen, A. F., & Gjerde, B. (2000). Definition of animal breeding goals for sustainable production systems. Journal of Animal Science, 78, 570-582.
48. Olesen, I., Navrud, S. & Kolstad, K. (2006). Economic values of animal welfare in breeding goals. In Proc. 8th World Cong. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod. 13-18 Aug 2006, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. CD-ROM: 31_538-1710. pdf. pp. 5.
49. Philipsson, J., & Lindhé, B. (2003). Experiences of including reproduction and health traits in Scandinavian dairy cattle breeding programmes. Livestock Production Science, 83, 99-112.
50. Quedrago, A. P. (2003). Symbolic goods in the market place. Public perceptions of farm animal breeding and reproduction in France and United Kingdom. In A. E. Liinamo & A. M. Neeteson-van Niewenhoven (Eds.) Pages 36-46 in SEFABAR (Sustainable European Farm Animal Breeding and Reproduction), Final Workshop, Rome, Italy.
51. Randall, A. (1987). Resource economics (p. 434). New York: John Wiley & Son.
52. Rauw, W. M., Kanis, E., Noordhuizen, E. N., & Grommers, F. J. (1998). Undesirable side effects of selection for high production efficiency in farm animals: A review. Livestock Production Science, 56, 13-33.
53. Sagoff, M. (1988). The economy of the earth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54. Samuelson, P. A. (1954). The pure theory of public expenditure. Review of Economics and Statistics, 36, 387-389.
55. Sandøe, P., Christiansen, S. B., & Appleby, M. C. (2003). Farm animal welfare: The interaction of ethical questions and animal welfare science. Animal Welfare, 12, 469-478.
56. Sandøe, P., Nielsen, B. L., Christensen, L. G., & Sørensen, P. (1999). Staying good while playing god-the ethics of breeding farm animals. Animal Welfare, 8, 313-328.
57. Shogren, J. F., Shin, S. Y., Hayes, D. J., & Kliebenstein, J. B. (1994). Resolving differences in willingness to pay and willingness to accept. American Economic Review, 84, 255-270.
58. Star, L., Ellen, E. D., Uitdehaag, K., & Brom, F. W. A. (2008). A plea to implement robustness into a breeding goal: Poultry as an example. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 21, 109-125.
59. Steine, G., Alfnes, F., & Rørå, M. B. (2005). The effect of color on consumer WTP for farmed salmon. Marine Resource Economics, 20, 211-219.
60. Timesonline. (2009). http://www. timesonline. co. uk/tol/life_and_style/food_and_drink/article5535331. ece. Accessed 10 April 2010.
61. Torp Donner, H., & Juga, J. (1997). Sustainability-a challenge to animal breeding. Agricultural Food Science Finland, 6, 229-239.
62. Train, K. E. (2003). Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
63. van Dorp, T. E., Dekkers, J. C. M., Martin, S. W., & Noordhuizen, J. P. T. M. (1998). Genetic parameters of health disorders, and relationships with 305-Day milk yield and conformation traits of registered Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 81, 2264-2270.
64. Vickrey, W. (1961). Counterspeculation, auctions, and competitive sealed bids. Journal of Finance, 16, 8-37.
65. von Rohr, P., Hofer, A., & Kunzi, N. (1999). Economic values for meat quality traits in pigs. Journal of Animal Science, 77, 2633-2640.
66. Wurzinger, M., Ndumu, D., Baumung, R., Drucker, A. G., Okeyo, A. M., Semambo, D. K., Sölkner, J. (2006). Assessing stated preferences through the use of choice experiments: Valuing (re)production versus aesthetics in the breeding goals of Ugandan Ankole cattle breeders. In Proc. 8th World Cong. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod. 13-18 Aug 2006, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. CD-ROM: 31_439-608. pdf. pp. 4.