Applying ethological and health indicators to practical animal welfare assessment: -EN- Applying ethological and health indicators to practical animal welfare assessment -FR- L’utilisation d’indicateurs éthologiques et sanitaires pour l’évaluation concrète du bien-être animal -ES- Aplicación de indicadores etológicos y sanitarios a la evaluación práctica del bienestar animal
Abstract
There is a growing effort worldwide to develop objective indicators for animal welfare assessment, which provide information on an animal's quality of life, are scientifically trustworthy, and can readily be used in practice by professionals. Animals are sentient beings capable of positive and negative emotion, and so these indicators should be sensitive not only to their physical health, but also to their experience of the conditions in which they live. This paper provides an outline of ethological research aimed at developing practical welfare assessment protocols. The first section focuses on the development and validation of welfare indicators generally, in terms of their relevance to animal well-being, their interobserver reliability, and the confidence with which the prevalence of described features can be estimated. Challenges in this work include accounting for the ways in which welfare measures may fluctuate over time, and identifying measures suited to monitoring positive welfare states. The second section focuses more specifically on qualitative welfare indicators, which assess the 'whole animal' and describe the expressive qualities of its demeanour (e.g. anxious, content). Such indicators must be validated in the same way as other health and behaviour indicators, with the added challenge of finding appropriate methods of measurement. The potential contribution of qualitative indicators, however, is to disclose an emotional richness in animals that helps to interpret information provided by other indicators, thus enhancing the validity of welfare assessment protocols. In conclusion, the paper emphasises the importance of integrating such different perspectives, showing that new knowledge of animals and new ways of relating to animals are both needed for the successful development of practical welfare assessment tools.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The social and ethical dimensions of animal welfare are increasingly being recognized.
“The social and ethical dimensions of animal welfare, which are concerned with how human society morally regards and treats non-human animals, are also increasingly being recognized [19].”
From A One Health Perspective on the Human-Companion Animal Relationship with Emphasis on Zoonotic Aspects. (2020) · cites this paper as [19]
Over the past decades, animal welfare has evolved to recognize that animals are sentient beings capable of experiencing positive and negative emotions.
“Over the past decades, animal welfare has evolved to recognize that animals are sentient beings capable of experiencing positive and negative emotions.”
From A One Health Perspective on the Human-Companion Animal Relationship with Emphasis on Zoonotic Aspects. (2020) · cites this paper as [19]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 79 · Cited by 83
- Authors
- WEMELSFELDER, F., & MULLAN, S.
- Affiliations
- Roslin Institute (GB)
- Venue
- Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'OIE
- Published
- 2014-04-01
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 111-120
- ISSN
- 0253-1933 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2129115254
- Cited by
- 83
- References
- 79
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 7.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Scientific and Technical Review (World Organisation for Animal Health) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- WBI Studies Repository (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Veterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
- Keywords
- animal welfare assessment, welfare indicators, ethology, inter-rater reliability, indicator validation, animal behavior, animal sentience, animal emotions, welfare assessment protocol
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Animal Husbandry, Animal Welfare, Behavior, Animal, Emotions, Time Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Observer Variation
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