Cited by 69Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesOrganic Food and AgricultureSustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis

Health and welfare in organic livestock production systems—a systematic mapping of current knowledge

Open access
Åkerfeldt, Magdalena Presto, Gunnarsson, Stefan, Bernes, Gun, Blanco-Penedo, Isabel·2021·Organic Agriculture

Abstract

This review aimed to systematically map and summarize the status of animal health and welfare in organic production. The prevalence of diseases and behavioural effects in organic dairy cow, beef cattle, sheep, pig, laying hen and broiler chicken were discussed in the context of the organic values and current knowledge on animal health and welfare. In total 166 peer-reviewed scientific publications between 2008 and 2020 were included. No strong evidence for neither inferior nor distinctly higher animal welfare in organic compared with conventional production could be supported. The welfare status of organic livestock is in general good in relation to the OIE definition of animal health and welfare. However, organic systems are still facing several challenges related to animal health and the arising of goal conflicts due to management and practical implications. Greater possibilities to perform species-specific behaviours in organic production systems, however, indicate that the organic standards offer a good framework for high animal welfare management. For organic dairy farmers, the main health problems are similar to those of non-organic farms; especially mastitis and lameness need improvement. Parasites, together with mastitis and lamb mortality, are important welfare issues in organic sheep production. Piglet mortality, leg problems, parasite load and increasing respiratory problems are of major relevance in organic pig production. For organic laying hens, major health challenges relate to feather pecking and cannibalism, parasites and possibilities to express species-specific behaviours. For organic broilers, dermatitis of footpads, hocks and breast are reported as main health issues.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s13165-020-00334-y

Cites

193 of 193 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Animals in organic production, especially beef animals, have a greater possibility to express natural behaviors.

    “In general, animals in organic production, especially beef animals, have a greater possibility to express natural behaviors (Presto Åkerfeldt et al. 2021).”

    From Delivering “less but better” meat in practice—a case study of a farm in agroecological transition (2022) · cites this paper as Presto Åkerfeldt et al. 2021

    The Conclusions say organic regulations seem to better enable species-specific behaviours, supporting the general claim. But the Results section on dairy cows and beef cattle says no studies of naturalness in organic cattle were found; it does not support singling out beef animals as especially advantaged. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Lameness is commonly reported to be a problem in both organic and conventional production.

    “Lameness is however commonly reported to be a problem in both organic and conventional production (Presto Åkerfeldt et al. 2021)”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Kongsted H Hermansen JE Sow body condition at weaning and reproduction performance in organic piglet production Acta Agr Scand A-An 2009 59 2 93 103 10.1080/09064700903071768 · DOI
  2. Verkaik J (2011) in: M.B.M. Bracke (Ed.) et al. Verbeteren welzijnsprestaties in de biologische veehouderij: Korte termijn prioriteiten en aanzet tot lange termijn visie (English title: Improving welfare performance in organic farming: Short term priorities and long term vision). Report 479, Wageningen UR Livestock Research, Lelystad, The Netherlands. ISSN 1570–8616

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Åkerfeldt, M. P., Gunnarsson, S., Bernes, G., & Blanco-Penedo, I.
Affiliations
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE)
Corresponding author
Åkerfeldt, Magdalena Presto
Venue
Organic Agriculture
Published
2020-11-25
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
105-132
ISSN
  • 1879-4238 (ISSN-L)
  • 1879-4246
OpenAlex
W3108829707
Cited by
69
References
193
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 7
FWCI
6.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Organic Agriculture (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Epsilon Open Archive (Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet biblioteket (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences)) (acceptedVersion)
  • Organic Eprints (International Centre for Research in Organic Food Systems, and Research Institute of Organic Agriculture) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Organic Food and Agriculture
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
Keywords
animal health, animal welfare, organic livestock farming, organic vs conventional farming, dairy cattle, beef cattle, sheep, pigs, laying hens, broiler chickens, mastitis, lameness, parasitic infection, piglet mortality, feather pecking, cannibalism, species-specific behavior, welfare standards

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review