What Are the Positives? Exploring Positive Welfare Indicators in a Qualitative Interview Study with Livestock Farmers

Farmers' Perspectives of the Benefits and Risks in Precision Livestock Farming in the EU Pig and Poultry Sectors

More efficient livestock production systems are necessary, considering that only 41% of global meat demand will be met by 2050. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic crisis has clearly illustrated the necessity of building sustainable and stable agri-food systems. Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) offers the continuous capacity of agriculture to contribute to overall human and animal welfare by providing sufficient goods and services through the application of technical innovations like digitalization. However, adopting new technologies is a challenging issue for farmers, extension services, agri-business and policymakers. We present a review of operational concepts and technological solutions in the pig and poultry sectors, as reflected in 41 and 16 European projects from the last decade, respectively. The European trend of increasing broiler-meat production, which is soon to outpace pork, stresses the need for more outstanding research efforts in the poultry industry. We further present a review of farmers' attitudes and obstacles to the acceptance of technological solutions in the pig and poultry sectors using examples and lessons learned from recent European projects. Despite the low resonance at the research level, the investigation of farmers' attitudes and concerns regarding the acceptance of technological solutions in the livestock sector should be incorporated into any technological development.

Integrating Individual Animal and Population Welfare in Zoos and Aquariums

Over the last 50 years, animal welfare science has advanced dramatically, especially in zoos and aquariums. A shifting focus from population-level welfare parameters such as reproductive success and longevity (macroscopic, big-picture concepts) to the subjective experience of individual animals (microscopic, focused concepts) has led to more effective animal welfare assessments and improvements in animal welfare. The interplay between individual animal and population welfare for captive animals is critical to the way zoos and aquariums operate to realize their welfare and conservation missions, especially when these missions conflict with one another. In this report, we explore the intersection of individual animal and population welfare in zoos and aquariums and how these two concepts may support one another or be in conflict.

Digital Livestock Technologies as boundary objects: Investigating impacts on farm management and animal welfare

Digital Livestock Technologies (DLTs) can assist farmer decision-making and promise benefits to animal health and welfare. However, the extent to which they can help improve animal welfare is unclear. This study explores how DLTs may impact farm management and animal welfare by promoting learning, using the concept of boundary objects. Boundary objects may be interpreted differently by different social worlds but are robust enough to share a common identity across them. They facilitate communication around a common issue, allowing stakeholders to collaborate and co-learn. The type of learning generated may impact management and welfare differently. For example, it may help improve existing strategies (single-loop learning), or initiate reflection on how these strategies were framed initially (double-loop learning). This study focuses on two case studies, during which two DLTs were developed and tested on farms. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with stakeholders involved in the case studies (n = 31), and the results of a separate survey were used to complement our findings. Findings support the important potential of DLTs to help enhance animal welfare, although the impacts vary between technologies. In both case studies, DLTs facilitated discussions between stakeholders, and whilst both promoted improved management strategies, one also promoted deeper reflection on the importance of animal emotional well-being and on providing opportunities for positive animal welfare. If DLTs are to make significant improvements to animal welfare, greater priority should be given to DLTs that promote a greater understanding of the dimensions of animal welfare and a reframing of values and beliefs with respect to the importance of animals' well-being.

Perception of laying hen farmers, poultry veterinarians, and poultry experts regarding sensor-based continuous monitoring of laying hen health and welfare

Daily farm management practices play an essential role in determining and steering health, welfare and productivity of laying hen flocks. Optimal management requires expertise of farmers and coworkers, especially when hens are kept in complex, large-scale aviary systems. Relatively little sensor-based support is available to farmers, even though numerous research groups are working on developing technologies to continuously detect deviations in layer health and welfare. A survey with laying hen farmers, poultry veterinarians and poultry experts from Western Europe and Canada was conducted to identify and prioritize indicators of optimal and suboptimal laying hen health and welfare in commercial farms. The status-quo of sensor technology and the advantages, wishes, and concerns regarding sensors were additionally assessed to contribute to the future development of a predictive monitoring tool that continuously monitors laying hen health and welfare. A total of 45 stakeholders were interviewed, of which 41 filled in an online questionnaire. Although the prioritization of indicators differed between stakeholders, the majority identified the use of feed and water intake, egg production and quality, sound, activity, and movement of hens as important indicators to assess health and welfare. Currently collected (sensor) data were not used to their full potential, and stakeholders missed the integration and storage of data into one monitoring system with easy visualization tools. Most interest was observed in the use of cameras and microphones to detect deviations in health and welfare at an early stage, to reduce subjectivity of the assessment and to gain more knowledge on layer behavior. It can be concluded that these results could steer research efforts towards the development of continuous monitoring techniques, and enhance their adaptability and acceptability by stakeholders.

Exploring the effect of auditory stimuli on activity levels, milk yield and faecal glucocorticoid metabolite concentrations in Holstein cows

Health and welfare are inextricably linked within efficient and sustainable dairy production, and several potential risk factors may affect the well-being of dairy cows, including chronic stress. Although auditory stimuli could be used as a tool to decrease the potential stress that cows might experience, it is seldom applied to livestock production systems due to the perception that enrichment is an unnecessary expense. This study aimed to explore the effect of auditory stimuli as a form of enrichment in a Holstein herd by monitoring fecal glucocorticoid metabolite (fGCM) concentrations (a non-invasive, stress-associated biomarker). Cow activity level and milk yield were also measured. Nine cows in their second and third lactation were divided into 3 groups, using a Latin Square experimental design, exposing each cow group to each of the 3 treatments, namely constant exposure (CE), limited exposure (LE), and no exposure (NE) to classical music. FGCMs were quantified using a group-specific enzyme immunoassay detecting 11,17-dioxoandrostanes. Compared to LE and NE animals, cows exposed to constant music had significantly lower fGCM concentrations (P = 0.012), as well as higher milk yields (P < 0.0001) and lowered activity levels during the morning (P = 0.005) and the evening activity period (P = 0.048). These findings indicate that auditory stimuli in the form of classical music may have a positive effect on the welfare of cows as well as milk yield, which hold economic benefits for the producer and potentially reduces the number of cows needed for profitable production.

Positive Aspects of Welfare in Sheep: Current Debates and Future Opportunities

The concept of positive welfare is an expansion of the traditional understanding that animal welfare is defined by minimizing stress, pain, suffering, and disease. Positive welfare shifts the animal welfare narrative from a focus on reducing negative experiences to proactively providing animals with opportunities to have positive experiences and feelings. The concept, although around for several decades, is in its infancy in terms of developing ways of assessing positive welfare on farms, especially in extensive systems, and there are challenges in the adoption of positive welfare practices and the monitoring of continuous improvement at the farm level. Using an iterative approach, this critical review aims to explore the extent to which positive welfare interventions and indicators are positioned and have been developed within the animal welfare literature for sheep. This paper critiques existing positive welfare indicators, such as choices in food and the physical environment, conspecific social synchronization, maternal bonds, intergenerational knowledge transfer, positive human-animal relationships, etc., as currently assessed by the 'good life framework'. It also reviews the characteristics of scientific measures for (positive) affective states in the current sheep literature and their potential contribution to understanding positive welfare states in sheep. In conclusion, this paper provides recommendations for future research regarding sheep welfare.

Positive Welfare Indicators in Dairy Animals

Nowadays, there is growing interest in positive animal welfare not only from the view of scientists but also from that of society. The consumer demands more sustainable livestock production, and animal welfare is an essential part of sustainability, so there is interest in incorporating positive welfare indicators into welfare assessment schemes and legislation. The aim of this review is to cite all the positive welfare indicators that have been proposed for dairy animals in theory or practice. In total, twenty-four indicators were retrieved. The most promising are exploration, access to pasture, comfort and resting, feeding, and behavioral synchronicity. Qualitative behavioral assessment (QBA), social affiliative behaviors, play, maternal care, ear postures, vocalizations, visible eye white, nasal temperature, anticipation, cognitive bias, laterality, and oxytocin have been also studied in dairy ruminants. QBA is the indicator that is most often used for the on-farm welfare assessment. Among all dairy animals, studies have been performed mostly on cattle, followed by sheep and goats, and finally buffaloes. The research on camel welfare is limited. Therefore, there is a need for further research and official assessment protocols for buffaloes and especially camels.

A “Good Life” for Dairy Cattle: Developing and Piloting a Framework for Assessing Positive Welfare Opportunities Based on Scientific Evidence and Farmer Expertise

Simple Summary

There is increasing appetite to understand how we can provide quality of life to farm animals. A framework to evaluate positive welfare opportunities for dairy cattle was developed using a participatory approach where farmer’s recommendations were integrated into a scientific framework and piloted on farm by vets. When provided with the opportunity to collaborate, farmers and scientists broadly agree on what constitutes “a good life” for dairy cattle and worked together to develop an assessment framework. Farmers did not agree equally on the value of each positive welfare opportunity. However, farmers supported positive welfare assessment as a means of recognition and reward for higher animal welfare, within existing farm assurance schemes, and to justify national and global marketing claims of higher animal welfare.

Abstract

On-farm welfare assessment tends to focus on minimising negative welfare, but providing positive welfare is important in order to give animals a good life. This study developed a positive welfare framework for dairy cows based on the existing scientific literature which has focused on developing positive welfare indicators, and trialled a participatory approach with farmers; refining the framework based on their recommendations, followed by a vet pilot phase on farm. The results revealed that farmers and scientists agree on what constitutes “a good life” for dairy cattle. Farmers value positive welfare because they value their cows’ quality of life, and want to be proud of their work, improve their own wellbeing as well as receive business benefits. For each good life resource, the proportion of farmers going above and beyond legislation ranged from 27 to 84%. Furthermore, barriers to achieving positive welfare opportunities, including monetary and time costs, were not apparently insurmountable if implementation costs were remunerated (by the government). However, the intrinsic value in providing such opportunities also incentivises farmers. Overall, most farmers appeared to support positive welfare assessment, with the largest proportion (50%) supporting its use within existing farm assurance schemes, or to justify national and global marketing claims. Collaborating with farmers to co-create policy is crucial to showcase and quantify the UK’s high welfare standards, and to maximise engagement, relevance and uptake of animal welfare policy, to ensure continuous improvement and leadership in the quality of lives for farm animals.

Twelve Threats of Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) for Animal Welfare

Research and development of Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) is booming, partly due to hopes and claims regarding the benefits of PLF for animal welfare. These claims remain largely unproven, however, as only few PLF technologies focusing on animal welfare have been commercialized and adopted in practice. The prevailing enthusiasm and optimism about PLF innovations may be clouding the perception of possible threats that PLF may pose to farm animal welfare. Without claiming to be exhaustive, this paper lists 12 potential threats grouped into four categories: direct harm, indirect harm via the end-user, via changes to housing and management, and via ethical stagnation or degradation. PLF can directly harm the animals because of (1) technical failures, (2) harmful effects of exposure, adaptation or wearing of hardware components, (3) inaccurate predictions and decisions due to poor external validation, and (4) lack of uptake of the most meaningful indicators for animal welfare. PLF may create indirect effects on animal welfare if the farmer or stockperson (5) becomes under- or over-reliant on PLF technology, (6) spends less (quality) time with the animals, and (7) loses animal-oriented husbandry skills. PLF may also compromise the interests of the animals by creating transformations in animal farming so that the housing and management are (8) adapted to optimize PLF performance or (9) become more industrialized. Finally, PLF may affect the moral status of farm animals in society by leading to (10) increased speciesism, (11) further animal instrumentalization, and (12) increased animal consumption and harm. For the direct threats, possibilities for prevention and remedies are suggested. As the direction and magnitude of the more indirect threats are harder to predict or prevent, they are more difficult to address. In order to maximize the potential of PLF for improving animal welfare, the potential threats as well as the opportunities should be acknowledged, monitored and addressed.

Humans and Goats: Improving Knowledge for a Better Relationship

Simple Summary

A good relationship between humans (e.g., farmers, owners) and farm animals is vital for the well-being of both parties: on the one hand, people are satisfied with their work, which becomes less stressful and more profitable, and may receive social benefits in terms of education or animal-assisted therapy; on the other hand, animals are rewarded by the presence of humans and are not afraid of them. Goats have high cognitive and communicative abilities towards humans: recognising these abilities helps humans to work properly on the quality of this relationship that is built from the first hours of the goat kids’ life, thanks to frequent and positive contacts (e.g., stroking, talking in a calm voice). Improving the quality of this relationship is an investment in the future of livestock farming and meets public demands for ethical and sustainable production. This review outlines the characteristics and predisposing factors for the establishment of a good human–goat relationship and for its evaluation.

Abstract

There is consensus that the quality of the human–animal relationship (HAR) is relevant to guarantee appropriate levels of animal welfare. Given the impact that HAR may have on both goats and human beings, the aim of the present review is to elucidate: (1) how humans and goats communicate; (2) which are the factors affecting human–goat interactions; (3) how we can measure the quality of this relationship. The systematic review led to the selection of 58 relevant articles. Effective human–goat communication takes place by means of visual, tactile and auditory stimuli and, to a less extent, via olfactory and gustative stimuli. Goats have well-developed socio-cognitive abilities and rely on humans to get relevant information. A deep knowledge of goats’ communication means and socio-cognitive abilities may greatly help improving the human–goat relationship. Management practices (e.g., rearing methods, amount and quality of interactions), as well as genetic selection for suitable individual traits, may contribute to improving HAR. Several measures to assess the quality of HAR have been validated, including avoidance in the pen and at the feeding rack and latency to first contact. Finally, farmers’ attitudes and empathy with goats, as well as their motivation to work with animals, should be improved through appropriate training.

Towards a Positive Welfare Protocol for Cattle: A Critical Review of Indicators and Suggestion of How We Might Proceed

Current animal welfare protocols focus on demonstrating the absence (or at least low levels) of indicators of poor welfare, potentially creating a mismatch between what is expected by society (an assurance of good animal welfare) and what is actually being delivered (an assurance of the absence of welfare problems). This paper explores how far we have come, and what work still needs to be done, if we are to develop a protocol for use on commercial dairy farms where the aim is to demonstrate the presence of positive welfare. Following conceptual considerations around a perceived “ideal” protocol, we propose that a future protocol should be constructed (i) of animal-based measures, (ii) of indicators of affective state, and (iii) be structured according to indicators of short-term emotion, medium-term moods and long-term cumulative assessment of negative and positive experiences of an animal's life until now (in contrast to the current focus on indicators that represent different domains/criteria of welfare). These three conditions imposed the overall structure within which we selected our indicators. The paper includes a critical review of the literature on potential indicators of positive affective states in cattle. Based on evidence about the validity and reliability of the different indicators, we select ear position, play, allogrooming, brush use and QBA as candidate indicators that we suggest could form a prototype positive welfare protocol. We emphasise that this prototype protocol has not been tested in practice and so it is perhaps not the protocol itself that is the main outcome of this paper, but the process of trying to develop it. In a final section of this paper, we reflect on some of the lessons learnt from this exercise and speculate on future perspectives. For example, while we consider we have moved towards a prototype positive welfare protocol for short-term affective states, future research energy should be directed towards valid indicators for the medium and long-term.

Positive Welfare in Science and Society: Differences, Similarities and Synergies

Societal and scientific perspectives of animal welfare have an interconnected history. However, they have also, somewhat, evolved separately with scientific perspectives often focusing on specific aspects or indicators of animal welfare and societal perspectives typically taking a broader and more ethically oriented view of welfare. In this conceptual paper, we examine the similarities and differences between scientific and societal perspectives of positive welfare and examine what they may mean for future discussions of animal welfare considered as a whole. Reviewing published studies in the field we find that (UK and Republic of Ireland) farmers and (UK) members of the public (i.e., society) typically consider both negatives (i.e., minimising harms) and positives (i.e., promoting positive experiences) within the envelope of positive welfare and prioritise welfare needs according to the specific context or situation an animal is in. However, little consideration of a whole life perspective (e.g., the balance of positive and negative experiences across an animal's lifetime) is evident in these societal perspectives. We highlight how addressing these disparities, by simultaneously considering scientific and societal perspectives of positive welfare, provides an opportunity to more fully incorporate positive welfare within a comprehensive understanding of animal welfare. We suggest that a consideration of both scientific and societal perspectives points to an approach to welfare which accounts for both positive and negative experiences, prioritises them (e.g., by seeing positive experiences as dependent on basic animal needs being fulfilled), and considers the balance of positives and negatives over the lifetime of the animals. We expand on this view and conclude with its potential implications for future development of how to understand and assess animal welfare.

Exploring the Potential of Precision Livestock Farming Technologies to Help Address Farm Animal Welfare

The rise in the demand for animal products due to demographic and dietary changes has exacerbated difficulties in addressing societal concerns related to the environment, human health, and animal welfare. As a response to this challenge, Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) technologies are being developed to monitor animal health and welfare parameters in a continuous and automated way, offering the opportunity to improve productivity and detect health issues at an early stage. However, ethical concerns have been raised regarding their potential to facilitate the management of production systems that are potentially harmful to animal welfare, or to impact the human-animal relationship and farmers' duty of care. Using the Five Domains Model (FDM) as a framework, the aim is to explore the potential of PLF to help address animal welfare and to discuss potential welfare benefits and risks of using such technology. A variety of technologies are identified and classified according to their type [sensors, bolus, image or sound based, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)], their development stage, the species they apply to, and their potential impact on welfare. While PLF technologies have promising potential to reduce the occurrence of diseases and injuries in livestock farming systems, their current ability to help promote positive welfare states remains limited, as technologies with such potential generally remain at earlier development stages. This is likely due to the lack of evidence related to the validity of positive welfare indicators as well as challenges in technology adoption and development. Finally, the extent to which welfare can be improved will also strongly depend on whether management practices will be adapted to minimize negative consequences and maximize benefits to welfare.

Enhanced Understanding of Horse-Human Interactions to Optimize Welfare

Horses (Equus caballus) have been domesticated for millennia and are regularly utilized for work, sport, and companionship. Enhanced understanding of human-horse interactions can create avenues to optimize their welfare. This review explores the current research surrounding many aspects of human-horse interactions by first highlighting the horse's sensory capabilities and how they pertain to human interactions. Evidence exists that suggests that horses can read humans in various ways through our body odours, posture, facial expressions, and attentiveness. The literature also suggests that horses are capable of remembering previous experiences when working with humans. The interrelatedness of equine cognition and affective states within the horse's umwelt is then explored. From there, equine personality and the current literature regarding emotional transfer between humans and horses is examined. Even though horses may be capable of recognizing emotional states in humans, there remains a gap in the literature of whether horses are capable of empathizing with human emotion. The objective of this literature review is to explore aspects of the relationship between humans and horses to better understand the horse's umwelt and thereby shed new light on potential positive approaches to enhance equine welfare with humans.

The Importance of Farm Animal Health and Natural Behaviors to Livestock Farmers: Findings From a Factorial Survey Using Vignettes

There is increasing interest in enabling positive experiences, not just minimizing negative experiences, to improve the welfare of farmed animals. This has influenced the growth of private agri-food standards and supported arguments to integrate animal welfare into policy on sustainability and climate change. However, much research finds that farmers predominantly focus on the minimization of negatives (i.e., health issues). This may impact the positioning of farmers within these wider societal debates, affecting their social license to farm. It is thus important to better understand farmers' priorities relating to the minimization of negative factors (e.g., health issues) and the promotion of positive experiences (i.e., natural behaviors). A novel 2 × 2 factorial survey using vignettes, which experimentally manipulated health (health issues minimized/not minimized) and natural behavior (natural behaviors promoted/not promoted) provision, was completed by livestock farmers (n = 169), mostly with extensive systems, in the UK and Republic of Ireland. The majority (88%) considered “minimizing health issues” to be the most important factor for animal well-being. However, the overall welfare of animals was judged to be highest when both health and natural behaviors were supported. Several individual characteristics, including farming sector, production system, gender, belief in animal mind and business type influenced how participants judged the welfare of animals and the level of importance they gave to health and natural behaviors. Findings suggest that although farmers prioritize the minimization of health issues they want animals to be both healthy and able to express natural behaviors, and individual characteristics are important for understanding farmers' welfare-related judgements.

Happy or healthy? How members of the public prioritise farm animal health and natural behaviours

The importance given to minimising health issues and promoting natural behaviours is a polarising issue within farm animal welfare. It is predominantly thought that members of the public prioritise animals being able to behave naturally over other aspects of farm animal welfare, such as addressing health issues. However, public perspectives may be more multi-dimensional than is generally thought, with the importance given to these different elements of welfare dependent on the situation and state of the animals in question. To examine this, a factorial survey using vignettes, which experimentally manipulated the different levels of health (high health vs. low health) and natural behaviour provision (high behaviour vs. low behaviour), was completed by a sample (n = 810) representative of the UK population (on age, gender, ethnicity). Contrary to the predominant view, this study found animal health had the greatest effect on participants’ judgements, explaining more of the variance in their assessments of animal welfare than any other factor. However, findings also indicated that participants considered animal welfare to be most positive when both health issues are minimised and natural behaviours are promoted. Attitudes to natural behaviours also varied more between participants, with females, individuals who do not (regularly) eat meat and those with a greater belief in animal mind giving greater priority to natural behaviours. In the context of public and private welfare standards seeking to meet public expectations, this study provides important insights into how public perspectives of animal welfare are more nuanced than previously thought, influenced by the context of the animal, the aspect of welfare in question and personal characteristics.

Human-animal relationship influences husbandry practices, animal welfare and productivity in pig farming

The nature of the relationship between humans and farm animals has multiple repercussions on the animals and the farmers and varies with farmers attitudes towards their animals. In particular, this relationship influences animal welfare and human working conditions. The present study, part of a larger research project investigating human-animal relationship (HAR) in pig farming and ways to improve it, had two objectives: 1) to investigate the HAR in a diversity of pig farming situations and to evaluate the possible correlation between farmer attitudes, pigs' reactions to humans, husbandry practices, animal health, welfare and productivity and 2) to find a way to rapidly assign a farmer to a profile, in order to better adapt course content during training sessions on HAR. The study focused on 52 farrow-to-finish farms and consisted of a semi-structured interview with the farmer, observations of the farmer in contact with his/her livestock, two human approach tests conducted on sows and growers and productivity data. Finally, a questionnaire was left at the farm to be filled out by all stockpersons on the farm. Interviews, analyzed using a thematic analysis followed by multiple correspondence analysis and ascendant hierarchical clustering, showed that some farmers develop husbandry practices to improve their HARs and identified three farmer profiles that have been named in relation to the place of the HAR in their profession: Profile 1 farmers for whom HAR is secondary in their work with their pigs, Profile 2 for whom the HAR is useful in their work with their pigs and Profile 3 for whom HAR is central in their work with their pigs. Logistic regression models of the relationships between behavioral tests and productivity data showed that confident sows produce and wean more piglets than fearful sows and that sows of Profile 3 farmers trust more humans than those of Profile 1 or 2 farmers. Farmers' responses to the questionnaire did not predict their profile assignment. Our results confirm the main role of the farmer's attitude towards animals on their farming practices, animal welfare and productivity. The farmers who have more confident pigs and better productivity are those for whom the farm animal is central to their profession, express the most pleasure in working with them and convey empathy for them.

From Land to Water: Taking Fish Welfare Seriously

This article aims to use contemporary (terrestrial) animal welfare science as a lens to evaluate the state of knowledge concerning welfare in fish species, focusing on farmed fishes. We take advantage of the vast expertise-including previous pitfalls and accomplishments-in the investigation of welfare in terrestrial vertebrates, borrowing questions and methodologies from terrestrial animal welfare science in order to (1) better understand the challenges and opportunities in the study of welfare in fish species, and (2) propose strategies for filling knowledge gaps.

Factors that Influence Farmers' Views on Farm Animal Welfare: A Semi-Systematic Review and Thematic Analysis

Farm animal welfare (FAW) is a growing societal concern, reflected by over 30 years of research to inform policy and practice. Despite the wealth of evidence to improve FAW, implementation of good practice continues to be an issue. The role of the stakeholder, particularly farmers, is pivotal to FAW improvement. This semi-systematic review synthesizes the evidence published in the last 30 years, worldwide, to address two main questions "what do farmers think (farmer's general view) about farm animal welfare?" and "what are the factors that influence their thinking?". A thematic analysis was conducted to identify factors that influenced the implementation of FAW innovation. The main outcomes extracted from 96 peer-reviewed publications on a range of livestock species identified 11 internal factors including farmer knowledge, empathy, personality, values, and human-animal bond; 15 external factors including economic advantages, communication, time and labor influenced the perception of FAW. Farmers' knowledge and cost implications of FAW were the most frequently reported factors. The review further highlights the need for promoting interdisciplinary collaboration and stakeholder participation. This study suggests strategies to improve FAW, including tools to support behavioral changes amongst farmers.

Positive Welfare and the Like: Distinct Views and a Proposed Framework

Positive welfare and related terms such as good welfare, happiness, and a good life are increasingly used in the animal welfare science literature. Overall, they highlight the welfare benefits of providing animals opportunities for positive experiences, beyond the alleviation of suffering. However, the various terms remain loosely defined and are sometimes used interchangeably, resulting in discrepancy. In this perspective article, we lay out the terms and concepts used in the literature. We identify two distinct views: "hedonic positive welfare," arising from likes and wants and their positive outcomes on welfare; and "positive welfare balance," as an overall positive welfare state based on positive experiences outweighing negative ones. Eudaimonia, satisfaction with one's life, may emerge as a third view. We propose a framework that is applicable across the different views. The "Vienna Framework" outlines different facets: frequency, duration, arousal, context, previous experience, individual differences, sense of agency, and long-term benefit. The framework aims to encourage researchers to consider the relevance of these facets for their own research, to indicate how the facets are affected by different interventions (e.g., greater sense of agency in enriched compared to non-enriched animals), or to compare different topics with respect to the different facets (e.g., high arousal of play behavior and low arousal of social affiliation). We encourage researchers to carefully consider and clearly state how their work falls along these views and facets, conceptually, and operationally. This should prevent dilution of the meaning of positive welfare and thereby preserve its potential to improve the welfare of animals.