Conducting a cost-benefit analysis is a standard part of policymaking. Lawmakers and regulators routinely calculate the economic value of civic improvements like cleaner air, safer roads, reduced emissions and public health protections.
But animal welfare lacks reliable ways of quantifying its benefits, says Richard Bennett, professor of agricultural economics at the University of Reading in the United Kingdom. This makes it harder for lawmakers to pass policies that may improve it.
“It just would prove very difficult for policymakers to argue the case for animal welfare policy when they couldn’t actually show what the benefits were in any tangible way,” says Bennett, who has been researching the economics of animal welfare since the mid-2000s.
Bennett co-authored a new study in Food Policy that offers a framework for calculating those benefits, estimating billions of dollars in value in the United Kingdom alone through just a few key changes to livestock production practices, such as reducing dairy cattle lameness, eliminating farrowing crates for pigs and reducing broiler stock density.
Already, the framework has been used to assess policies in the UK government’s animal welfare strategy, including phasing out the use of farrowing crates and carbon dioxide gas stunning for pigs.
Researchers say the framework could be adapted globally to offer policymakers a new economic case for improving the lives of farm animals. But others question whether surveys can accurately predict economic benefits — and whether putting monetary value on welfare can fully capture animals’ needs.
