The German pork industry responds to societal demands

Transcription

Les Cahiers de l’IFIP
Revue R&D de la filière porcine française
Vol 1 - N° 1 - 2014
The German pork industry responds
to societal demands:
from private labels to sectoral initiative
Christine ROGUET (1) et Michel RIEU (2)
(1) IFIP-Institut du Porc, La Motte au Vicomte, 35651 Le Rheu Cedex, France
(2) IFIP-Institut du Porc, 34 boulevard de la Gare, 31500 Toulouse
[email protected]
In Germany, faced with society’s growing demands for animal-friendly production and the risk of tighter regulation, the actors
in the pork industry have organized themselves to make a credible response without undermining their competitiveness. Two
approaches were chosen. The first one imposes stringent requirements for animal welfare at production level, and distinguishes
animal-friendly products with a label. Examples include the labels Aktion Tierwohl of the slaughter cooperative Westfleisch and
Für Mehr Tierschutz of the slaughter firm Vion. However, their higher costs and prices lock these labelled products in a market
niche, and their abundance is confusing. Germany has tried another graduated approach involving more farms. The industry’s
collective sectoral “animal welfare initiative” - Initiative zum Tierwohl, launched in 2012, brings together all the stakeholders in
the pork industry: producers, slaughter companies, retailers and NGOs. One pig in three will be concerned. Here we describe why,
how and with what results these responses have been developed. Our analysis is extended by examples from the Netherlands
and Denmark.
2014 -Ifip-Institut du porc - All rights reserved
La filière porcine allemande face aux demandes
de société : des labels privés à l’initiative collective
En Allemagne, devant la montée en puissance des demandes de société pour des modes d’élevage plus respectueux du bien-être des
animaux et face au risque d’un durcissement de la réglementation, les acteurs de la filière porcine se sont organisés pour apporter
une réponse crédible sans entamer leur compétitivité. Deux voies ont été choisies. La première consiste à imposer des exigences à la
production très fortes et à différencier les produits par un label. Les labels «Aktion Tierwohl» de la coopérative d’abattage Westfleisch
et «Für Mehr Tierschutz» de l’abatteur Vion en sont l’illustration. Mais en raison des coûts et prix plus élevés, ces labels ne parviennent
pas à dépasser le stade de la niche de marché et leur profusion sème la confusion. L’Allemagne a alors tenté un autre pari : faire progresser plus d’élevages mais d’un pas moins grand. Lancée en 2012, l’initiative collective de branche «bien-être animal» - «Initiative
zum Tierwohl» - associe tous les acteurs de la filière porcine : producteurs, abatteurs-découpeurs, distributeurs, ONG. Elle devrait à
terme concerner un porc produit sur trois. L’article montre pourquoi, comment et avec quel résultat ces initiatives se sont développées.
Une ouverture sur les Pays-Bas et le Danemark enrichit la réflexion.
Keywords: labels, differentiation, animal welfare, Germany, pork
Mots clés : labels, différenciation, bien-être animal, Allemagne, porc
Les Cahiers de l’IFIP - Vol 1- n° 1 - 2014
1
The German pork industry responds to societal demands: from private labels to sectoral initiative
Introduction
A degraded context
Pork production in Germany saw a strong growth between
2000 and 2011 (+31%). It has since been stagnating in a less
favourable economic and political context. Pig farming has
become more intensive, with an ever increasing geographical and structural concentration. Specialisation of farming
activity into breeding or fattening, and the considerable live
animal flows this generates (10 million piglets imported
into Germany in 2013, counting only cross-border trade),
have lent the activity a strongly industrial image.
These trends are being challenged by German citizens,
whose voice has lately become louder. Their concerns find
a sympathetic ear in the country’s main farming Länder
among Ministers of Agriculture from the environmentalist
party die Grünen (the Greens).
Initially shaken by virulent criticism, the German pork
industry has rallied and mounted a counterattack based
on two thrusts: (i) make modern farming better known,
and (ii) cause it to evolve to meet societal demands without under-mining its competitiveness. Communication
involves classical measures such as open days, which have
proliferated (top agrar, 2014a). In Germany, like in France,
despite societal criticism of certain farming modes, farmers
have a good image in public opinion, and enjoy the confidence of consumers (poll conducted in 2013 in Germany by
GfK Panel Services Consumers, SUS, 2013a). Professional
communication also makes use of the social networks, websites and blogs.
In Germany’s current social and political context, in particular in the north-west part of the country, communication
is a necessary but non-sufficient condition for refurbishing
the image of pork production. The actors in the pork sector
fully appreciate the risks incurred by ignoring societal
demands (tighter regulations, drop in meat consumption,
etc.). To improve farming conditions and inform customers, they have thus taken two routes. The first consists
in imposing very strict requirements on production and
distinguishing the resulting products with a quality label.
However, the extra costs and higher prices of these products
trap them in a narrow market niche. The second route proposes graduated requirements to mobilise larger volumes,
and does not differentiate the products. The communication on the progress made benefits everyone, and the extra
cost is spread overall.
Supported by original documentation, contacts with professionals and thorough knowledge of the pork industry in
northern Europe, we present these two approaches, namely
private quality labels and sectoral initiative, developed in
recent years in Germany. Our analysis is extended with a
look at responses in the Netherlands and Denmark.
Geographical and structural concentration
2
Gross home production,
base 100 in 2000
Trends
2000 - 2013
130
Germany: +29%
120
110
Denmark: +10%
Belgium:
100
Netherlands: -2%
France :
-4%
90
Source: IFIP from Eurostat
and national sources, estimates for 2013
80
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13
Figure 1: Evolution of pork production in France and
in northern European countries
The trends depicted in Figure 1 have been accompanied by
a strong geographical and structural concentration of production. This led to record animal densities in some regions
such as North Brabant in the Netherlands (7.5 LU /ha UAA)
or western Flanders in Belgium (6.0 LU/ha). In comparison,
the density is half this level in Côtes-d’Armor in Brittany or
Farm size class:
the Weser-Ems
Lower Saxony
(Roguet
et al., sub<100 region
sows in100-199
200-499
500-749
750 et +
mitted).
2003 2010 2003 2010 2003 2010 2003 2010 2003 2010
Structurally,
the farming model has changed radically in
100
the last decade (Rieu and Roguet, 2012). For pig breeding,
trends have been especially marked in Denmark and the
Netherlands (Figure 2).
75
he livestock unit (LU) is a reference unit which facilitates the aggregation of livestock from various species and age as per convention, via the use of specific
T
coefficients established initially on the basis of the nutritional or feed requirement of each type of animal (1 dairy cow = 1 LU, 1 breeding sow weighing 50 kg
and over = 0.5 LU...)
+4%
50
22
21
19
1
With more than 5 million tons of carcass equivalent produced, Germany is by far the biggest pork producer in
the EU. The strong growth in its production since 2000
contrasts with the stagnation and subsequent regression
seen in France (Figure 1). Along with its Danish, Dutch and
Belgian neighbours, Germany forms a powerful production
area, responsible for 42% of pork production in EU-28 in
2013 (Roguet and Rieu, 2011).
Political measures
Farm size class:
<100 sows
100-199
200-499
500-749
750 et +
2003 2010 2003 2010 2003 2010 2003 2010 2003 2010
100
75
50
22
19
21
7
25
14
25
56
18
8
35
0 Denmark Netherlands
3
11
3
Belgium
5
23
14
Germany
7
9
10
7
France
Source: Eurostat, structure survey in 2003
and agricultural census of 2010, processed by IFIP
Figure 2: Distribution of sows per farm size class according to
country, and trends from 2003 to 2010
Mounting social protest
The spatial concentration of animal production has been
accompanied by growing opposition from the population,
local or not, who have been protesting against the negative
effects on their surroundings (odours, noise, pathogens, etc.)
and on the general environment (pollution of air and water).
However, social debate on farming in northern Europe
more specifically concerns the farming model itself and
the modes of production under development. These are
deemed industrial, too intensive, over-reliant on importing raw materials for feed and on exporting live animals
or meat, inefficient in terms of conversion of vegetable
proteins into animal proteins, risky for health (epizootics,
zoonosis, antibiotic resistance) and neglectful of animal
welfare (Roguet, 2012).
In Germany, all the main associations for the protection
of animals and the environment, some thirty in number
(listed on the website http://www.wir-haben-es-satt.de/),
have come together in an umbrella organisation, “Wir
haben es satt! Bauernhöfe statt Agrarindustrie” (“We’ve
had enough! farms, not agroindustry”). This association
supports demonstrations against local farming or slaughtering projects, and organises every year a large demonstration outside the Berlin agricultural show (die Grüne
Woche) to protest against the industrialisation of animal
production in Germany (30,000 participants in 2014
according to the organisers).
Citizens also express themselves by voting. At the last elections in Lower Saxony in 2013, the socialists and ecologists (die Grünen) made intensive agriculture one of their
policy targets. After Johannes Remmel in North Rhine –
Westphalia in 2010, Christian Meyer became Minister
for Agriculture in Lower Saxony in February 2013. In all,
today, six Länder have a Minister for Agriculture from
the Green party.
New stringent farming regulations have been voted in,
contributing to an appreciable extent to the arrested growth
of animal production in north-western Germany:
•Right to collective action in 2013 in North Rhine –
Westphalia for recognised animal protection associations
to file complaints on behalf of animals.
• “Animal welfare” action plan in Lower Saxony with three
objectives for pig farming: ban tail docking, ban castration
without anaesthesia, and ban farrowing crates.
•More stringent building laws in 2013 for farms with more
than 560 sows or 1500 fattening stalls.
•Implementation of better available methods: compulsory air washer for farms with more than 750 sows
or 2000 fattening stalls in the three Länder in northwestern Germany.
•New directions for aid from the second pillar of the CAP
(Agrarinvestitionsförderprogramm, AFP, programme
for the promotion of investments) towards better animal
welfare (Table 1).
Table 1: Subsidy rate for pig farm building 2014–2017
Land
Lower Saxony
N. Rh. – Westphalia
Schleswig-Holstein
Baden-Württemberg
Bavaria
Hesse
Rhineland-Palatinate
Saarland
Brandenburg
MecklenburgVorpommern
Saxony-Anhalt
Saxony
Thuringia
Base (%)*
Higher (%)**
20
20
20
15
20
20
301
30 ou 402
40
40
40
353
40
40
20
40
20
40
40% (50% in disadvantaged areas)
20
40
Source: top agrar, 3/2014, translation C. Roguet
* Obligations for base programme: bedding area with appropriate dry
litter, deep litter or comfortable surface, at least three different manipulable materials.
** Obligations for higher programme: 20% more surface area per animal
at all stages, farrowing crate with a minimum surface area of 6 m² and
sows free running after farrowing.
1 +10% if there are even stricter animal welfare requirements (surface
area, handleable materials, etc.) - 2 Sows: 40% up to 200 stalls, 30% thereafter, fattening pigs: 40% - 3 +5% if on straw.
3
Gross home production,
base 100 in 2000
Trends
2000 - 2013
130
The German pork industry responds to societal demands:
+29% private labels to sectoral initiative
Germany: from
120
The Dutch example
110
Denmark: +10%
From imposition to incentive
Belgium:
+4%
In the Netherlands, faced with societal demands
for
100
better farm animal welfare, the public authorities
first
Netherlands: -2%
-4%
chose a regulatory approach. The first lawFrance
on: animal
health
and welfare (Gezondheids- en Welzijnswet voor
90
Dieren) of 1994, which officially entered
force
Source: IFIPinto
from Eurostat
and national
sources,
estimates forwith
2013
(Varkensbesluit) in 1998, attested
to their
ambition,
80
standards set well above European rules: gestating sows
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13
in groups by the fourth day after insemination (4 weeks
in the directive), 0.40 m² per piglet, and 1 m² per fattening pig (Table 2).
Table 2:
Farm size
class:Minimum surface area per pig (in m²)
These surface
area standards
imposed on
farms built
<100 sows
100-199 are
200-499
500-749
750after
et +
2003. All farms are to comply by 2013 at the latest.
In the Netherlands, the total sales turnover of Beter Leven
products has increased dramatically since the label was
created, climbing from 22 to 473 million euros between
2008 and 2013 (Figure 3).
472.9
Source: Ministerie van Economische Zaken,
Monitor Duurzaam Voedsel, 2010 and 2013,
translation C. Roguet
147.2
311.7
2003 2010 2003 2010 2003 2010 2003 2010 2003 2010
Netherlands
objective for
Germany
2013
(for
comparison)
Revised
Law of
2005 in 2010
Directive
Live
weight
2001/88/
75
(kg)
EC
50
< 10
22
21
10 - 20
20 – 30
25
0.15
19
0.20
25
14
0.30
0.20a
0.20a
0.40b
0.30b
7
5
8
23
3
14
11
300– 50
0.40
0.603
0.50
Denmark Netherlands Belgium
Germany
56
18
50 – 85
0.55
85 - 110
0.65
≥ 110
1.00
35
0.80
1.30
1.00
0.20
2008
0.35
9
7
10
7
0.50
France
1.00
Source: IFIP from Neufassung der Tierschutz-Nutztierhaltungs-verordnung
(Germany, August 2008) and Varkensbesluit (Netherlands, March 2005)
However, in view of the extra costs generated, the Ministry
for Agriculture had to moderate its ambitions in 2010.
The choice was thus made to give more encouragement
to private initiative in the sector to differentiate and identify products that met societal demands. Organic production (Milieukeur varkens and De Groene Weg) was the first
example. But its market share is extremely small. Fewer
than 1% of animals are raised by organic farming in the
Netherlands.
Between organic and standard, the Beter Leven label
To improve the living conditions of 99% of the animals on
conventional farms, Dierenbescherming, a powerful Dutch
association for animal protection, launched its Beter Leven
label in 2007. Labels with stars show consumers the products derived from animals that have enjoyed the best welfare. For example, a “one star” chicken has had a longer
time to grow and has had more space and stimulation.
68.1
22
0.80
0.65 structure survey in 2003
Eurostat,
0.75 by IFIP
and agricultural census of 2010, processed
1.00
135.6
0.15
(a) Up to 15 kg, (b) from 15 to 30 kg
4
An expanding market
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Figure 3 : Evolution of Beter Leven turnover
(million euros)
In pork production, some 900 farmers produce more than
800,000 Beter Leven pigs (Table 8). Thirteen out of the 16
biggest distributors in the Netherlands offer products with
the Beter Leven label. In 2011, Albert Heijn, leader in food
distribution in the Netherlands with a market of 1 million
pigs, claimed to sell only Beter Leven pork.
Table 4: Number of Beter Leven raised animals in the
Netherlands in 2010 (total 6.8 million)
Beter
Leven
Total
Meat
chickens
Laying
hens
Pigs
Cattle
3 391 900
273 300
536 700
78 000
502 500
1 554 890
288 000
200 000
-
30 000
-
-
3 894 400
1 858 190
824 700
278 000
Source : Ministerie van Economische Zaken
In practice, although almost all the pork they sell has at
least one star, some products are not labelled. Albert Heijn
explains this by procurement difficulties and by the fact
that prepared products containing more than 5% of other
animal products are not entitled to carry the label.
100
A “two star” pig has had straw and access to outdoors. The
“three star” level denotes fully organic agriculture.
The specifications for the Beter Leven label for pigs are
summarised in Table 3 (opposite).
Table 3: Beter Leven specifications
Criterion
Standard
2.25 m² per sow
0.4 m² (+30%) / piglet
1 m² (+42 to +20%)
2.5 m² per sow
0.5 m² per piglet
1.2 m² per FP*
2.5 m² per sow
0.6 m² per piglet
1.3 m² per FP*
None
None
1 m² per FP*
1.9 m² per sow
1 m² per piglet or FP*
1.9 m² per sow
Pasture for pregnant sows
Group
husbandry of
pregnant sows
Mandatory since
2013
Mandatory since 2007
Feeders banned in 2020
Farrowing
crates
3.5 m² min
Sows restrained
3.8 m² min
Sows restrained
Chains
Wood, tube with straw
From 2015, at 40
pigs and more, straw
mandatory
Straw
Type of floor
60% slatted,
40% solid
60% slatted,
40% solid
50% slatted,
50% solid
Castration
Allowed with
anaesthesia
Banned
Banned
Banned
Tail docking
Allowed
Allowed but less short
(length of piglet’s tail
≥ 2.5 cm)
Banned
Banned
Tooth
reduction
Allowed
Transport
No time limit
Surface area
2.25 m² per sow
0.3 m² per piglet
0.7–0.8 m² per FP*
Access to
outdoors
Enrichment of
environment**
Mandatory since 2007 and on straw
6.5 m² min
Sows restrained
5 days max
7.5 m²
Sows restrained
3 days max
Allowed, but with commitment to stop the practice
6 h to a farm
4 h to a farm
8 h to a slaughterhouse 6 h to a slaughterhouse
4 h to a farm
6 h to a slaughterhouse
* Fattening Pig. ** Large groups of pigs (20–40 pigs instead of the usual 8–12) are encouraged because they offer animals more room to move (for the same space
per animal) and the possibility to divide up the space into separate areas (bedding, feeding, and defecation). Also, large stalls are better suited to the installation of
equipment (e.g. straw dispensers), which are paid off sooner with a large group of animals.
Source: Dierenbescherming, translation C. Roguet
In Germany, the sector is getting organised
Specifications lacking in transparency
The Westfleisch cooperative,
a forerunner with the Aktion Tierwohl label
The specifications that the farms are supposed to meet
were not very clear, however. Although the castration of
piglets was banned, together with the administration of
antibiotics for pigs weighing more than 40 kg, there were
no obligations stricter than the general regulations in force
for surface area per animal, handleable materials, tail docking, etc. This drew sharp criticism from consumer and
animal welfare associations. Producers received a bonus of
0.02 € / kg carcass, and the sale price of products was about
10% higher (Qualbrink, 2013).
Investments were made in the Coesfeld slaughterhouse
to monitor stunning, make a better assessment of pigs’
health status, and detect boar odour in particular. This
slaughter-house has, since October 2012, been the first in
Lead-up and partners
Starting with the realisation that animal welfare is a
growing concern among consumers, the Westfleisch cooperative, Germany’s third largest slaughterer with 7.41
million pigs and 12.6% of the total in 2013, was the first
to market, in 2010, an animal welfare labelling concept
for fresh meat and sausages. The label, Aktion Tierwohl
(“action for animal welfare”), mirrored those developed in
the Netherlands (Beter Leven) and the United Kingdom
(Red Tractor, Freedom Food).
5
Commercial development
In 2012, 120 farms participated in the Aktion Tierwohl
label scheme with 410,000 pigs sold, and 80 farms were
awaiting certification for some 350,000 pigs produced
(topagrar.com, 2012). In 2013, Aktion Tierwohl reached
the figure of 650,000 pigs commercialised, coming close
to its objective of one million pigs. The Aktion Tierwohl
range counted about twenty products (sausages and
meat) distributed nationally from 2,000 retail outlets.
In 2014, Westfleisch decided to stop its own label,
officially to make way for the collective initiative (see
below) in which the cooperative participates, informally
because of its too limited success.
Für Mehr Tierschutz, label of Vion
and the German association
for the protection of animals
Seeking to stand out with a label set up in association with a recognised NGO, Vion, Germany’s second
largest slaughterer with 9.60 million pigs and 16.3%
of the total in 2013, initiated in 2012, with the poulterer Wiesenhof and in partnership with the German
association for the protection of animals (Deutscher
Tierschutzbund, DTB), the creation of the label Für
mehr Tierschutz (“for more animal protection”). The
federal Minister for Agriculture (BMEL) supported this
project both politically and financially. A subsidy of 1
million euros was granted to set up a system of certification and inspection, and a market survey was entrusted
to the University of Göttingen. The label was officially
launched by the Ministry for Agriculture in January
2013 during the Grüne Woche.
Ilse Aigner, Federal Minister for Agriculture from 2008
to 2013, has always refused to use regulations to impose
more stringent standards of animal welfare that would
weaken Germany’s competitiveness. She preferred
to encourage the creation of quality labels and labelling of products according to production conditions.
Campaigning European-wide for animal welfare labelling, the German Minister saw in the Für Mehr Tierschutz
label “an example for the whole of Europe of reliable labelling based on high standards of animal welfare that meets
consumer expectations and improves farming conditions”
(topagram.com, 2013).
6
Transparent, demanding specifications
The Für Mehr Tierschutz label proposes two levels of requirements (against three for Beter Leven in the Netherlands),
similarly distinguished by stars. The specifications are summarised in Tables 2 and 3. The extra cost arising from the
increased surface area alone (1.1 m² instead of the German
standard of 0.75 m²) is estimated at about 0.1 €/kg of carcass
by the University of Göttingen (Theuvsen, 2013).
Table 5: Specifications for Für Mehr Tierschutz label
Upper level
Entry level
•N
o tail docking (from 01/01/14)
• No castration without analgesics: Entire males,
castration under analgesics and anaesthesia
(inhalation of isoflurane or injection, CO2 forbidden)
or vaccination against boar taint.
• S ystem for cooling air or fine water spray (high pressure).
• Daylight mandatory with openings of minimum crosssection 3% of the ground area, minimum lighting 80 lux
in activity area, day/night cycle followed.
•T
ransport : 200 km and 4 h max.
• S laughter: deep anaesthesia with CO2 or electric, health
inspections
• Maximum size: 3000
fattening places
•M
aximum size: 950
fattening places
• Surface area: +33% over
• Surface area: +100% over
standard prescribed by law standard prescribed by law
•F
loor: activity area slatted, • F
loor: activity area slatted,
bedding area on straw or
bedding area on straw
equivalent (mat)
•L
arger stalls to separate
•H
andling equipment:
areas of activity, bedding
straw dispenser
and defecation
(1 for 12 pigs)
•D
ifferent temperature
areas: access to small yard
• GMOs forbidden in feed
Source: IFIP from specifications of DTB (DTB, 2012),
translation C. Roguet
For the country’s animal protection associations, the Für
Mehr Tierschutz label offers real improvements for animals. Its requirements go well beyond national regulations,
even at its entry level.
Germany to be certified by the Dutch label Beter Leven,
just before Tönnies’s Rheda and Sögel plants. One of the
conditions for this recognition is compliance with the IKB
specifications, a Dutch quality guarantee system comparable to the German QS.
Table 6: Minimum surface area per pig for Für Mehr Tierschutz label
One star
Two stars
Stall
m²/pig
Stall
of which bedding
of which bedding
Outdoor yard
< 50 kg
0.70
0.25
0.75
0.25
0.30
50-120 kg
1.10
0.60
1.60
0.60
0.50
≥ 120 kg
1.60
0.90
2.40
0.90
0.80
Source: IFIP from specifications of DTB (DTB, 2012)
However, the ultimate aim of the associations is for the
upper level obligations, which are met by NEULAND,
to apply eventually to all farms. For the DTB, “This twolevel label will increase the pressure on the legislator to raise
minimum standards, because it will show that a transition
towards better welfare is possible” (Agrarheute.com, 2013).
According to Vion, the potential market share is 10–15%
for products from farms offering animals better living
conditions. They expect to reach this figure in five years,
from 2012 to 2017. Germany’s main large retail chains
(Edeka, Lidl, Aldi, Netto, Kaiser’s und Tengelman, Coop
eG Kiel with Sky, and Kaufland) theoretically commercialise products labelled Für Mehr Tierschutz. However, at
the beginning of 2014, after a year on the market, results
were disappointing. Only 40,000 labelled pigs (and 9 million meat chickens) had been commercialised out of a total
of 10 million pigs slaughtered by Vion in Germany. The
market share is insignificant, and only 16 pig farms (14
“one star” and two “two star”) and 44 poultry farms (all
“one star”) are certified.
For the researchers at the University of Göttingen who
have been monitoring the approach, the current failure is
not explained by low consumer demand. In a survey on
purchasing behaviour in Germany conducted in 2013 at
the request of the Federal Ministry for Agriculture, 44%
of those polled claimed to be mindful of animal welfare
when making their purchases, and 76% wanted information on animal welfare for food products (BMEL, 2014).
The researchers also cite several studies confirming that
consumers are willing to pay extra for better animal welfare. For Achim Spiller, who teaches food marketing at
the University of Göttingen, a broad marketing campaign
with television commercials would be necessary to inform
consumers about this new label and give it a chance to
succeed.
At the beginning of January 2014 at the Grüne Woche in
Berlin, the briefly appointed Federal Minister for Agriculture
Hans-Peter Friedrich made a positive assessment of the Für
Mehr Tierschutz label, considering it to be “an important
step towards more transparency and freedom of choice for
consumers, and towards better welfare on the farm”. For the
chairman of DTB: “The effect of this label has been to deepen
the political debate on the farming model”. The DTB intends
to broaden the label’s scope to cover all animal productions.
The Tierwohl initiative:
the power of collective action
The fact that none of the many labels that have been created
has managed to assert itself, combined with the desire of
Tönnies, the top slaughter company in Germany, with 15
million pigs (25.5% of the total), not to remain outside the
race helped to foster the idea of a collective sectoral initiative (top agrar, 2012). Unlike its competitors, Tönnies
does not propose a concept in its own name, but instead
an initiative associating all the different actors. “We must
stop racing for the best label. We can penetrate this market
only by acting together. The aim is to communicate more
openly on animal welfare and so regain the confidence of
consumers who are lost in a forest of different labels” declares
Dr. Wilhelm Jaeger, Head of the Agriculture Department
at Tönnies.
The first success of the project was the signature, at the end
of August 2012, of the declaration Initiative zum Tierwohl
by the main slaughterers (Tönnies, Vion, Westfleisch and
the meat syndicate), three of the country’s four biggest retail
chains (Edeka, Rewe and Kaufland) and the organisations
representing the farmers (DBV, ISN and ZDS). Its leitmotiv is “by financial incentives, enable farmers to take more
account of animal welfare, without undermining their competitiveness”.
Founded in 1988 by five NGOs, including the German association for the protection of animals (DTB), the Association for the Environment and Protection of
Nature (BUND) and the Association for Rural Agriculture (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Bäuerliche Landwirtschaft, AbL), the association NEULAND drew up a very
stringent set of specifications for production that was respectful of animals and the environment. The products are commercialised under the NEULAND marque
through buchery retailers and restaurants.
2
7
Pig and poultry farmers (meat chickens and turkeys) will
receive a bonus to offset extra costs if they raise their animals according to welfare criteria that are stricter than
those in force in current regulations.
For one year, the representatives of the entire sector worked
on the concept, motivated -despite difficulties in reaching
agreement- by the same evidence: the sector must act on
animal welfare now because societal and political pressure
has become too strong.
On 5 September 2013 was signed the collective sectoral
initiative for better animal welfare for pigs and meat poultry
(Initiativen zum Tierwohl, 2013, signatories in Table 4). QS
(Qualität und Sicherheit GmbH) coordinates its implementation. It will also carry out audits in farms. Welfare and QS
audits will be combined (cost about 100 euros per farm site
to be borne by the farmer). Among the signatories to the
initiative, some have drawn attention to the risks inherent
in bringing the Initiative Tierwohl (voluntary) too close to
the QS programme (compulsory). The animal protection
NGO PROVIEH joined the initiative in March 2013.
The planned timeline includes an assessment in 2014 of
the Initiative by the Bundeskartellamt (fair trading body),
which will make sure it does not hinder competition among
retailers. To preclude this risk, the bonuses will be paid
independently of market trends. A compensation fund will
be set up through which the bonuses will be paid. The farm
audits are to begin in October 2014, and the first bonus
payments will be made to farmers at the beginning of 2015.
The founding principles of the Welfare Initiative
The primary principle of the sectoral initiative for better
animal welfare is to avoid forming a niche, to make the
consumers happy “in spite of themselves”. When consumers have the choice, they always choose the cheapest product.
For the project designers, this choice must be removed in the
future (top agrar, 2013a). The products from farms that participate in the initiative will be no different from the others: no
distinction (no specific labelling), and no price differences are
planned (top agrar, 2013b).
In addition, the distributors do not want a new label or any
differentiation of meat because of the extra logistic costs this
would generate for separating products. Lastly, the sector is
agreed on the negative effects of splitting the market with
labels, as animals not part of the initiative will end up with a
lower value (top agrar, 2013c).
The second principle of the initiative is that the extra cost
generated by improved farming conditions will be made
up by bonuses. These bonuses will be financed by an acrossthe-board increase in meat retail prices. Their amount will be
itemised on the invoice sent by the slaughter-butchery operator to the distributor. The distributor will pay the slaughterbutchery operator, who in turn will send the amount to the
initiative’s compensation fund for payment to the producer.
The third founding principle is the free participation of
every farmer and the free choice of the criteria applied in
each farm.
This initiative offers two major advantages. Firstly, the extra
costs borne by the farmers are offset, as the distributors are
committed to the bonus. Thus unlike a regulatory obligation, evolution towards production that is more respectful of animal welfare is neutral in terms of costs and does
not undermine the competitiveness of German farmers.
Secondly, the German pork industry hopes to take the lead
on this issue. The end of meat produced to the initial standards (without the additional welfare criteria) is envisioned
in the long term.
Specifications: mandatory and optional criteria
Farmers who wish to take part in the programme must fulfil
two obligations:
1) meet one of two criteria in block B1 (greater surface
area or straw), and
2) ensure that the total bonus, which depends on the
measures taken by each farmer, exceeds a threshold
(Table 8). Farmers are also free to apply further optional
criteria (Block B2).
Table 7: Participants à l’Initiative zum Tierwohl
Abattage
DBV (Deutscher Bauerverband)¹
BVDF (Bundesverband der deutschen
Fleischwarenindustrie)⁵
ISN (Interessengemeinschaft der
Schweinehalter Deutschlands e.V.)²
VDF (Verband der Fleischwirtschaft)⁶
ZDS (Zentralverband der Deutschen
Schweineproduktion e.V.)³
Tönnies Lebensmittel
DRV (Deutscher Raiffeisenverband e.V.)⁴
Westfleisch
VION Food Deutschland
Distribution
Aldi Nord
Aldi Sud
Edeka Zentrale / Netto
Kaiser’s Tengelmann
Kaufland
Lidl
METRO
REWE
¹ German farmers’ union - ² Group for the defence of German pig farmer’s interests - ³ Central association for pork production, to which belong groups of producers,
genetic organisations, etc. - ⁴ Association of farm cooperatives ⁵ National association of the German meat industry - ⁶ Meat industry association
Source : IFIP from Initiativen zum Tierwohl, 2013.
8
Production
Table 8: Compulsory and optional criteria, and bonus amounts
All pig farms taken together
Participation in a quality control system (QS or similar)
Annual farm audit
Participation in an antibiotics record scheme
Block A
Participation in the programme for slaughterhouse data collection
Compulsory Controlled ventilation
entry criteria Controlled drinking water
Daylight (1.5% of ground surface area)
Overall entry bonus 500 € per physiological stage (i.e. 1500 € for farrowing plus fattening)
Bonus
according
to activity
Block B
Farrowing
Criterion
Permanent access to straw
Block B1
(dispenser, rack, etc.)
At least one 10% extra surface area
criterion is
20% extra surface area
compulsory
Extra manipulable natural
object
Extra watering trough
(suckling)
(pregnant sows)
Castration with efficient
pain relief
Post-weaning
€/
piglet*
0.90
1.40
2.20
4.40
1.15
0.18
€/
piglet*
Criterion
object
Block B2
Optional
criteria
Threshold
amount
2 € per piglet
0.40
0.80
1.20
2.40
0.30
0.40
Criterion
10% extra surface area **
object
€/
pig*
2.00
2.80
4.00
8.00
1.00
0.70
Raising of whole males
1.50
0.07
1.50
Climate zones
Grouping of sows 6 days
after insemination
Grubbing possible
(grouped sows)
Natural ventilation during
pregnancy
Comfortable bedding
surface
Access to outdoor yard
Free farrowing crate,
minimum surface area
7.5 m²
Suckling period 4 weeks
Accessible area to piglets
from different sows
Nests for piglets
Peat for piglets during
suckling
Fattening
0.20
1.40
Automatic air cooling
system
Compartmentation of
stalls with partitions
0.20
0.20
0.05
Grubbing possible
0.40
Grubbing possible
0.60
0.30
Natural ventilation
0.30
Natural ventilation
1.00
0.80
0.60
Comfortable bedding
surface
0.50
0.30
Comfortable bedding
surface
2.50
1.00
2.00
1.00
0.05
0.10
0.33
1 € per piglet
3 € per pig
* For flat-rate farms, 10.7% VAT must be added - ** Regulation surface area = 0.75 m² / pig
Source: RaiffeisenMagazin 05/2013, page 5, translation C. Roguet
9
The bonus amount is fixed for a period of three years. There
will then be a reassessment to allow for any changes in cost
data and criteria.
Extra cost paid by the consumer
Retail distribution plays a central role in the financing of
this initiative by offsetting the extra cost borne by the farmers. The main retail chains are committed to supporting
the Tierwohl initiative up to a ceiling set at about a hundred
million euros per year, i.e. a financial volume close to that
at the disposal of the central marketing organisation of the
agricultural industry (CMA) (SUS, 2013b). This ceiling will
no doubt be reached only after a fairly long time because
the evolution towards these products requires efforts to
convince consumers. These will have to pay a probably
long-term higher price for the meat to sustain the compensation fund. The question of whether they will tolerate
this price increase remains open (top agrar, 2012).
The basis for economic calculations in the pork sector is
turnover in fresh meat sales. This is meant to prevent distributors undermining the system by importing cheap meat.
In addition, small merchants and sausage makers are not
yet part of the initiative. In the future any merchant who
wants to sell QS meat will be integrated in the Tierwohl
initiative. One financial problem is that only 30% of the
meat is sold fresh on the domestic market; 40% is processed
and 30% is exported. Thus the extra cost of welfare must be
borne by 30% of the meat sales.
In July 2014, the distributors fixed at 0.04 € / kg of commercialised meat their payment to finance bonuses for farmers
taking part in the initiative (topagrar.com, 2014a).
The following workplan was drawn up by the programme
initiators: (SUS, 2013b, top agrar, 2013c):
•2015 (Year 1): 2000 fatteners taking part with 4 million
welfare pigs. Sum in the compensation fund: 10–20 million euros.
•2017 (Year 3): 10,000 farms taking part with 20 million
welfare pigs. Sum in the compensation fund: 100 million
euros/year.
Other estimates are based on a higher average bonus (9 €
per pig), with a total cost of nearly 200 million euros per
year (top agrar, 2013b).
The compensation fund should start up in summer 2014,
but Edeka’s reluctance to finance the initiative is delaying
its implementation.
10
Risks for the pork base price
A survey conducted at the beginning of 2014 by the professional journal top agrar, to which 360 pig farmers responded, gives some indication about how they perceive the
Tierwohl Initiative, and their intentions (top agrar, 2014b).
Of the respondents, 35% considered the initiative equitably
conceived (voluntary participation, bonus and involvement of distributors), and useful in that it could improve
the societal image and acceptability of pig farms; 28% were
critical and 37% gave no view; 26% were considering taking
part, 36% were undecided and 38% were not interested;
64% of the respondents thought that the initiative would
not prevent new stricter regulatory standards in the long
term; 87% thought the bonuses would not last longer than
three years because the distributors would not want to go
on paying.
Many farmers feared that the bonuses would push down
pork reference prices (Vereinigungspreis) even though the
system was designed to prevent such an effect (amount and
payment of bonuses independent of reference prices).
Distrust and sharp criticism
The association for animal protection DTB, while underlining the laudable objective of improving animals’ living
conditions, has pointed out that the initiative in no way
guarantees that this objective will be met, because the products are not differentiated from the retail standard (no
specific labelling), and the criteria are left to the farmer to
choose. The DTP states: “Transparency for the consumer is
the big loser. The purchaser cannot know how much welfare
value is added”. For Bioland, which is even more critical:
“This sectoral solution is a mere public relations campaign
designed to brighten the tarnished image of the pig farmers.
It is a mis-judged attempt to keep the politicians quiet for
longer and delay their intervention” (topagrar.com, 2014b).
In addition, for Bioland, an initiative of such scope holds
back the development of other more demanding labels.
Conclusion
In Germany, in the face of rising societal demands for farming methods that are more respectful of animal welfare,
the actors of the pork sector have organised themselves to
respond credibly without impairing their competitiveness.
The challenge is daunting. The objectives are both strategic and commercial. The task is to reconcile farming
and society against a background of blocked projects for
farms and slaughterhouses and the risk of consumers
shunning pork.
In a survey conducted in 2013 by the Universities of
Hohenheim and Göttingen, 3.5% of those polled claimed
to be vegetarian and 11.6 % flexitarian (moderate reasoned consumption of meat); 9.5% wanted to reduce their
meat consumption (Cordts et al., 2013). Their choices were
Otherwise, it may additionally eschew tail docking of
piglets (Block C). They must then take part in one of the
experimental programmes and receive technical support.
Given the difficulty in implementing this practice, the
bonus is raised to 6 euros per pig.
motivated by a negative perception of the impact of animal
production on the environment and on the living conditions of farm animals.
According to annual studies conducted by the polling institute Allensbach, the German Vegetarian Union (VEBU)
estimates the number of vegetarians in Germany to nearly
7 million in 2014 (8-9% of the population) and that of the
vegans to 1.2 million (1.5%). In 2014 Aldi Süd announced
the launch of the V-label in partnership with VEBU. In
this context, the DTB emphasises that “the label [Für Mehr
Tierschutz] is not intended to encourage greater consumption
of meat, which must fall in the long term”.
The pork industry, by showing itself to be proactive, thus
hopes to postpone the imposition of stricter regulations,
which by becoming the common standard, will abolish any
possibility of drawing added value from the efforts made.
However, for the DTB and Ministers for Agriculture, the
labels are just one step towards a stiffening of regulatory
standards for all farms. Finally, the sectoral initiative for
better animal welfare also aims to secure the domestic
market and conquer other markets by taking a lead in the
animal welfare issue.
In this context, France is currently at the stage of individual initiatives by groups of producers, in partnership with
distributors, and according to the case, with animal protection associations: “welfare pork”, “antibiotic-free pork”,
“new agriculture pork”, etc.
North-European experience brings out four factors conducive to the success of these initiatives that France could usefully consider:
1) maintenance of political dialogue to forestall tightening
of regulations that could displace the approach,
2) associating distributors in the financing of extra costs,
and NGOs for credible communication,
3) motivation of farmers who are doubtful about the longterm future of compensation for extra costs, and
4) fostering awareness among consumers that animal welfare has its price.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by CASDAR funding.
In the wake of the Netherlands and Germany, a common
initiative for a pig welfare label was launched in Denmark
in 2013 by the country’s two slaughterers, Danish Crown
and Tican. The concept also aims to fill the gap between
standard pork and organic pork. Its principle is to support the transition towards better farm animal welfare
with compensation for extra costs (+0.27 €/kg of carcass).
The specifications for the label Velfærdsgrisen (“welfare
pigs”), signalled by the statement “anerkendt af Dyrenes
Venner” (“recommended by Animals’ Friends”), are drawn
up in partnership with the association for the protection of
animals Dyrenes Venner (Animals’ Friends) and the pork
research centre Videncenter for Svineproduktion. The obligations include no tail docking, supply of straw, and lifelong
grouping of sows. However, this label had barely come into
being before it came under fire from another animal protection association Dyrenes Beskyttelse, which has accused it
of deceiving consumers... and above all of competing with
organic production, which it supports.
Further to this label, a declaration in favour of “Danish
pork production combining animal welfare and growth”
was signed on 13 March 2014 by a broad governmental coalition, consumer and animal protection associations, scientists and practitioners. The action plan presented by the
Ministry for Agriculture includes the banning of castration
of male piglets without anaesthesia from 2018, a significant
reduction in tail docking, an end to the tethering of sows
as far as is possible, and a significant increase in the rate of
piglet survival (20% reduction in their mortality by 2020).
11
References
• Agrarheute.com, 2013. Neues Tierwohl-Label - ein Etikettenschwindel ? 07.02.2013. www.agrarheute.com/treport-mainz-tierwohllabel.
• BMEL, 2014. Einkaufs- und Ernährungsverhalten in Deutschland. TNS-Emnid-Umfrage des BMEL. http://www.bmel.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/
Umfragen/TNS-Emnid-EinkaufsErnaehrungsVerhaltenInDeutschland.pdf
• Cordts A., Spiller A., Nitzko S., Grethe H., Duman N., 2013. Imageprobleme beeinflussen den Konsum: von unbekümmerten Fleischesser, Flexitariern und
(Lebensabschnitts-)Vegetariern. FleischWirtschaft 7/2013, 59-63.
• DTB, 2012. Zeichen für ein besseres Leben. Kriterienkatalog für eine tiergerechte Haltung und Behandlung von Mastschweinen im Rahmen des
Tierschutzlabels «Für Mehr Tierschutz». Deutscher Tierschutzbund e.V., 23 pages.
• Initiativen zum Tierwohl, 2013. Absichtserklärung zur Umsetzung der Initiativen zum Tierwohl für Schwein und Geflügel. Berlin, den 5 September 2013,
4 pages.
• Qualbrink H., 2013. Westfleisch. Fachtagunh Tierwohl, Haus-Düsse, 8.3.2013. www.duesse.de/lehrschau/pdf/2013/2013-03-07-tierwohl-02.pdf
• Rieu M., Roguet C., 2012. Tendances de l’élevage porcin dans l’Union européenne : un modèle en pleine mutation. Journée Rech. Porcine, 2012, 44,219-228
• Roguet C., Rieu M., 2011. Essor et mutation de la production porcine dans le bassin nord-européen : émergence d’un modèle d’élevage transfrontalier
inédite. NESE No 35, October 2011, pp.125-140.
• Roguet C., 2012. Acceptabilité sociale de l’élevage dans le nord de l’Europe : acteurs et controverses. Baromètre porc, No 424, synthesis.
• Roguet C., Gaigné C., Cariou S., Carlier M., Chatellier V., Chenut R., Daniel K., soumis. Dynamiques spatiales des productions animales en Europe : état
des lieux et facteurs explicatifs. Productions Animales, INRA Editions, 20 pages.
• SUS, 2013a. Öffentlichkeitsarbeit : Infos aus erster Hand bevorzugt. 5/2013, p. 5.
• SUS, 2013b. 100 Mio.€ für mehr Tierwohl. 5/2013, pp 18-21.
• Theusen L., 2013. Tierwohl und Größenstrukturen in der Schweinehaltung. Presentation ’at ISN annual general meeting’, 22.02.13.
• Topagrar.com, 2012. Westfleisch zählt boni, Auflagen bei Aktion-Tierwohl. 10.02.2012. www.topagrar.com.
• Topagrar.com, 2013. „Für Mehr Tierschutz“: Aigner und Tierschutzbund stellen neues Label vor. 16.01.2013. www.topagrar.com.
• Topagrar.com, 2014a. Initiative Tierwohl : Steht Unterzeichnung kurz bevor ? 07.07.2014. www.topagrar.com.
• Topagrar.com, 2014b. Bioland : Initiative Tierwohl bloß PR-Kampagne des DBV. 18.01.2014. www.topagrar.com.
• Top agrar, 2012. Tierwohl : zieht der Handel mit ? 11/2012, pp 134-135.
• Top agrar, 2013a. Tierwohl : kommt es zum Schwur ? 2/2013, pp 156-157.
• Top agrar, 2013b. Initiative Tierwohl auf der Zielgeraden ? 8/2013, pp 144-146.
• Top agrar, 2013c. Bald 20 Millionen Tierwohl-Schweine ? 10/2013, pp 116-118.
• Top agrar, 2014a. Offentlichkeitsarbeit ist keine gerade Furche. 5/2014, pp36-39.
• Top agrar, 2014b. Inititative Tierwohl : jeder Vierte willl teilnehmen, 3/2014, pp S6-S9.
• VEBU, 2014. Anzahl der Vegetarier in Deutschland. URL : https://www.vebu.de/lifestyle/anzahl-der-vegetarierinnen. Consultation, 26.08.2014.
Reference to this article
• Roguet C., Rieu M., 2014. The German pork industry responds to societal demands: from private labels to sectoral initiative. Les Cahiers de l’IFIP, 1(1), 1-12.
12

The German pork industry responds to societal demands

Transcription

Similar documents

Champions of Animal Care - Indiana 4-H

Ava-Maria Iesha Thomas - Coady International Institute

pork burger pork burger

Proceeds go to support NJROTC scholarships and the Port

4Day Sale! - Foodland: Atlantic

Print - Pork Food Service

Facing reality: What it Takes to implement systems change

Ginsters brochure April 2014

Boi na Braza - Downtown Cincinnati Restaurant Association

The 23rd IFIP World Computer Congress (WCC 2015)