Guidance on Risk Assessment for Animal Welfare

被引:80
作者
Botner, Anette [1 ]
Broom, Donald [1 ]
Doherr, Marcus G. [1 ]
Domingo, Mariano [1 ]
Hartung, Joerg [1 ]
Keeling, Linda [1 ]
Koenen, Frank [1 ]
More, Simon [1 ]
Morton, David [1 ]
Oltenacu, Pascal [1 ]
Salati, Fulvio [1 ]
Salman, Mo [1 ]
Sanaa, Moez [1 ]
Sharp, James M. [1 ]
Stegeman, Jan A. [1 ]
Szucs, Endre [1 ]
Thulke, Hans-H. [1 ]
Vannier, Philippe [1 ]
Webster, John [1 ]
Wierup, Martin [1 ]
机构
[1] EFSA, Parma, Italy
关键词
Animal welfare risk assessment; problem formulation; exposure assessment; consequence characterisation; risk characterisation;
D O I
10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2513
中图分类号
TS2 [食品工业];
学科分类号
0832 ;
摘要
The document provides methodological guidance to assess risks for animal welfare, considering the various husbandry systems, management procedures and the different animal welfare issues. The terminology for the risk assessment of animal welfare is described. Risk assessment should not be carried out unless the relevant welfare problem is clearly specified and formulated. The major components of the problem formulation are the description of the exposure scenario, the target population and the conceptual model linking the relevant factors of animal welfare concern. The formal risk assessment consists of exposure assessment, consequence characterisation, and risk characterisation. The systematic evaluation of the various aspects and components of the assessment procedure aims at ensuring its consistency. All assumptions used in problem formulation and risk assessment need to be clear. This also applies to uncertainty and variability in the various steps of the risk assessment. The choice between qualitative, semi-qualitative or quantitative approaches should be made based on the purpose or the type of questions to be answered, data, and resource availability for a specific risk assessment. Quantitative data should be used whenever possible. Positive effects on welfare (benefit) could be handled within the framework of risk assessment if the analysis considers factors as having both positive and negative effects on animal welfare. The last section details the main components of risk assessment documentation. (C) European Food Safety Authority, 2012
引用
收藏
页数:30
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] Algers B, 2008, EFSA J, V6, DOI 10.2903/j.efsa.2008.736
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2007, EFSA J, V610, P1, DOI DOI 10.2903/J.EFSA.2007.610
  • [3] Scientific Opinion on the use of animal-based measures to assess welfare of dairy cows EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW)
    Botner, Anette
    Broom, Donald
    Doherr, Marcus G.
    Domingo, Mariano
    Hartung, Joerg
    Keeling, Linda
    Koenen, Frank
    More, Simon
    Morton, David
    Oltenacu, Pascal
    Salati, Fulvio
    Salman, Mo
    Sanaa, Moez
    Sharp, James M.
    Stegeman, Jan A.
    Szuecs, Endre
    Thulke, Hans-H.
    Vannier, Philippe
    Webster, John
    Wierup, Martin
    [J]. EFSA JOURNAL, 2012, 10 (01)
  • [4] Scientific Opinion on the use of animal-based measures to assess welfare in pigs
    Botner, Anette
    Broom, Donald
    Doherr, Marcus G.
    Domingo, Mariano
    Hartung, Joerg
    Keeling, Linda
    Koenen, Frank
    More, Simon
    Morton, David
    Oltenacu, Pascal
    Salati, Fulvio
    Salman, Mo
    Sanaa, Moez
    Sharp, James M.
    Stegeman, Jan A.
    Szucs, Endre
    Thulke, Hans-H.
    Vannier, Philippe
    Webster, John
    Wierup, Martin
    [J]. EFSA JOURNAL, 2012, 10 (01)
  • [5] Scientific Opinion on welfare aspects of the management and housing of the grand-parent and parent stocks raised and kept for breeding purposes
    Botner, Anette
    Broom, Donald
    Doherr, Marcus
    Domingo, Mariano
    Hartung, Joerg
    Keeling, Linda
    Koenen, Frank
    More, Simon
    Morton, David
    Oltenacu, Pascal
    Osterhaus, Albert
    Salati, Fulvio
    Salman, Mo
    Sanaa, Moez
    Sharp, Michael
    Stegeman, Jan
    Szucs, Endre
    Thulke, Hans-Hermann
    Vannier, Philippe
    Webster, John
    Wierup, Martin
    [J]. EFSA JOURNAL, 2010, 8 (07)
  • [6] CAC (Codex Alimentarius Commission), 2002, 30 CACGL
  • [7] EFSA, 2006, EFSA J, V366, P1
  • [8] EFSA, 2009, EFSA J, V1143, P1, DOI DOI 10.2903/J.EFSA.2009.1143
  • [9] EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2007, EFSA J, V572, P1, DOI DOI 10.2903/J.EFSA.2007.572
  • [10] EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2007, BAS INF DEV AN WELF