Research in Organic Animals and Livestock Production

Over the last 80 years a wide range of diverse organic livestock systems have developed. The driving force behind these developments has mainly been the farmers, consumers and various movements; and it has happened more “despite research” than “because of research.” Most production methods have developed in Western Europe and USA, where they are primarily niche products for consumers who give priority to environmental and animal welfare concerns. In these countries organic livestock production offers the option of establishing a niche product that can be sold at a higher price, e.g. as for milk and eggs. In some cases, the potential of organic farming is associated with the adoption of organic principles into existing systems with the aim of improving sustainability, and achieving environmentally friendly production, food security and good food quality. In the US, government support for organic research, some of which was for livestock studies, increased from 15 million dollars in 2002 to 78 million in 2008. In Australia where more than 95% of the certified organic land is pasture, government-supported research tends to focus on organic dairy and meat production. In addition, research into agro-forestry systems is also of potential interest to the Australian organic sector. In many African and Asian countries, organic livestock plays a very minor role compared with production of high value organic crops, and hence is not covered specifically in research initiatives. A recent survey on African organically-oriented research projects concluded that no significant research focuses on organic livestock. In South America, a number of research projects have been carried out on integrated agro-ecological farming, which includes livestock. These are not necessarily certified organic systems, as “organic” is often perceived as high value products, while “agro-ecological farming” is basically the application of the fundamental organic principles, so research in these systems provides valuable insights for organic research in general. Research is necessary for many reasons, but at a fundamental level it is relevant to both provide specialised knowledge relevant to organic situations (e.g. feed stuffs) and to take a systems approach through interdisciplinary research (e.g. how grazing systems integrate good animal welfare aims with environmental care). A third aspect important to consider is the human and social structures around organic livestock systems, e.g. farmer attitudes, actions, practices and interactions with advisory services

Organic Farming as A Development Strategy: Who are Interested and Who are not?

Much evidence shows that implementation of organic farming (OF) increases productivity in the Global South, and that it will be possible to feed a growing world population with food produced in OF systems. OF is explored, analysed and discussed in relation to the principles of Ecology, Health, Care and Fairness as enunciated by IFOAM, as a developmental strategy. Major financial powers are involved in the agro-related industries. A number of civil society-based organisations point to the major negative side effects of the trade with and use of agro-chemical products environmentally and in the further deepening of the gaps between rich and poor. The MDGs target the environmental sustainability explicitly, and OF is regarded as being a relevant strategy to meet many goals. A global development strategy is needed that explicitly includes future generations, ecosystems, biodiversity and plant and animal species threatened by eradication

Learning and empowerment in farmer groups as one way of creating a healthy process of animal health and welfare planning

An animal health and welfare plan is a useful document as a tool for improving the farm in ways which will lead to improvements in the herd. Atkinson & Neale (2008) distinguished between ‘animal health plan’ and ‘animal health planning’, where the first was the document, and the latter was the necessary process leading to formulating a plan. This means that the document becomes useful because it is a result of an active planning process, which involves a systematic analysis of the situation and a reflective process where the people, who are actually responsible for changes in the farm, are actively participating in the analysis of the situation and articulating their perceptions and planned actions. This process can be carried through in very many ways in practice, although based around some overall principles which ensure that there is room to carry through the process

Participatory Common Learning in Groups of Dairy Farmers in Uganda (FFS approach) and Danish Stable Schools

Farmer Field Schools (FFS) is a well-known concept, which is widely used in many types of farming systems in the Global South. In this report different approaches to FFS adjusted to Ugandan smallholder dairy systems and to Danish organic dairy systems are explored and discussed. The report is based on a Master Thesis in Health Anthropology and a mini manual to the so-called Stable Schools. Improvements of farming practices should be based on the context of the individual farm and include the goals of the farmer and the farming system. This should be the case in all types of farming systems. Viewing learning as a social phenomenon and process, as well as an interaction between the learner and the learning environment (including other farmers) may give opportunities for context based innovations and developments towards a common goal in a group of farmers. It is also seen as a result of common transformative learning and legitimate peripheral participation in a social learning environment

Implementation of farmer groups for animal health and welfare planning considering different contexts

This paper reflects some of the discussions that took place during the ANIPLAN workshop where participants discussed the special farming and farmer characteristics, needs and conditions in their own country in relation to farmer discussion groups, as well as more generic issues to consider when taking a farmer group approach to animal health and welfare planning. Farmer discussion groups are not unique, and there are examples of different approaches to, and aims of, farmer groups worldwide. Perhaps an important starting point when analysing the successes and characteristics of these groups is to consider their original purpose. The starting point of the discussion in the ANIPLAN project has been the so-called Danish Stable Schools (Vaarst et al., 2007; Vaarst et al. 2008; mentioned in Vaarst ibid.), as well as existing approaches within the other participating countries, such as the Dutch Caring Dairy groups (Smolders, ibid.). A major feature of the Danish Stable Schools has been the time limited intensive working towards a common goal based around equal participation within the group. This is quite a different approach to other examples, such as the so-called ‘erfa-groups’ in Denmark (‘erfa’ as an abbreviation of ‘erfaring’, which in Danish means ‘experience’) that have worked for decades on dissemination of new knowledge and ideas to and among farmers, focusing on separate themes at each meeting, such as approaches to parasite control, winter feeding strategies, or the use of body condition scores. Similar focused dissemination programmes exist in many countries. What characterises the ANIPLAN project is that the focus is on a rather more systematic animal health and welfare planning process which is meant to be continuous at the farm level

The ANIPLAN project: Reflections on the research approaches, methods and challenges

The objective of the ANIPLAN project is to ‘investigate active and well planned animal health and welfare promotion and disease prevention as a means of minimising medicine use in organic dairy herds’. The basic idea lying behind this objective is that the active development of plans at the farm level to improve herd health and welfare will enable individual farmers to practically achieve the organic principles with regard to the health and well-being of organically-farmed animals. To fulfil the objective, the project needs to be carried out in close collaboration with farmers and conducted in real farm situations. This means that the research is being carried out in an environment which is not under control the control of researchers. This, in turn means that there are inevitable methodological issues which will arise during the course of the study. This paper describes some of the issues arising during the first part of the study i.e the setting up of the project and the first year of data collection. One major challenge for the research team involved in this project is to identify research methods which can describe and document the planning process as well as the disease, production and medicine use on study farms. This documentation will enable the researchers as well as the end-users of the research to evaluate the approach and the effect of animal health and welfare planning on herds. This includes the process of animal health and welfare planning, which can be regarded as an iterative social and individual human development process. The transformative learning process (Vaarst, ibid.) leading to a change of perceptions and priorities of those involved should be expected before actual changes are implemented in the herds. Again, there are methodological issues to consider in this respect

CORE Organic pilot project ANIPLAN - presentation at mid-term: Minimising medicine use in organic dairy farms through animal health and welfare planning

Presentation of the project with experience from the participants, including main results at mid-term, research ideas, experience with transnational researc

Enhancing animal health security and food safety in organic livestock production

Sustaining Animal Health and Food Safety in Organic Farming (SAFO) is a European Commission funded project, with the objective to contribute to improved animal health and food safety in organic livestock production systems in existing and candidate member countries of the European Union. Workshops form a central part of the SAFO ctivities. This volume, with the contributions from the 3rd SAFO Workshop at the Institute of Grassland and Wetlands in Falenty, Poland in September 2004, is one in a series of five proceedings published during the lifetime of the project (2003-2006). Electronic versions of the proceedings are available at the SAFO web-site at ttp://www.safonetwork.org/ Animal health security, the role of zoonotic diseases and the risk of environmental contaminants in organic livestock produce were the key issues discussed in Falenty. Allowing livestock access to outdoors is a fundamental principle in organic farming. Such access is seen as part of the animal’s freedom to natural behaviour and can be argued to offer substantial health benefits to animals. Outdoor access, however, also allows access to potential invironmental contaminants, contact with other livestock or wildlife with different disease status and with vectors and fomites that may be carriers of zoonotic diseases. Interesting research papers were presented on the level of toxoplasmosis in organic pigs, paratuberculosis in organic cattle and campylobacterial carriage in organic layers. Mycotoxin and dioxin contamination of organic livestock produce and the control of heavy metal contamination in organic systems were also discussed. The papers and the discussions at the workshop suggest that the link between higher risk for zoonoses and environmental contamination and outdoor access and other organic management practices is not a straightforward one and that the risks are not necessarily greater in organic systems. However, it is clear that monitoring of zoonoses and contaminants is just as important in the organic as in the conventional animal production context. In this workshop, generous time was reserved for presentations about the development of organic livestock production in the new and emerging EU countries. A wealth of information about the strides forward and the problems and difficulties encountered was produced by the delegates. The presentations highlighted barriers to such development including the lack of a domestic market for organic produce and, at the farm level, the need for improvements in veterinary and hygiene management and for major investments to bring farm buildings up to the standards required in EU 2092/91. On the other hand, most of the new countries, while still developing organic livestock systems, see great potential in them, particularly in preserving rare breeds and vitalising rural communities in areas that appear particularly suitable for organic animal production

Not just any plan

Dr Mette Vaarst explains how, through a practical and integrated approach, ANIPLAN sets out to inspire organic farmers to go beyond minimum requirements

Communication in animal health and welfare planning

The project ‘Minimising medicine use in organic dairy herds through animal health and welfare promotion’ is focused on animal welfare assessment and its role in the active use of animal health plans in order to improve animal health and welfare on organic farms. To be active, a health plan requires dialogue between the farmer and those who are able to view the farm from the outside e.g. vets and advisors. The importance of this communication is the focus of this paper. Across Europe we see highly diverse farming systems and similarly diversity in advisory systems and their approaches to communicating with farmers. One of the objectives of the AniPlan project is to develop approaches to health planning that are robust yet sufficiently adaptable to be applied across these various conditions. This will involve utilising knowledge of current approaches to communication between farmer and advisor, but also the opportunity for new ways of communication that contribute to the process of animal health and welfare promotion. Relevance to the farmer is paramount. In this paper, three current approaches are summarised, focusing on the dialogue between farmer and ‘external persons’. These are the Danish Stable Schools, the Dutch farmer study groups (where farmers participate in doing animal welfare assessment in a fellow-farmer’s herd) and the Swiss pro-Q project, where there is a very active dialogue between advisors and farmers in a continuous feed-back system. Further to these descriptions, the paper summarises the results of discussions between participants at the first AniPlan workshop in Hellevad, Denmark on the subject of communication in the animal health planning process