The Ministry of Health has announced the publication of the report “The science–policy interface on farm animal welfare in the EU” , dedicated to the relationship between scientific research and the development of European policies on the welfare of farm animals.The document, produced within the Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR) – Collaborative Working Group on Animal Health & Welfare, analyzes how scientific evidence is transferred into decision-making processes and identifies possible tools to make the dialogue between research, institutions, and economic operators more effective.
The study highlights how, despite the progress made in research and regulation, gaps remain between the production of scientific knowledge and the needs of European policy.
Why companies in the sector need to pay attention to us
The report is based on 20 interviews with experts — officials from the EU Commission, EFSA, EURCAW, researchers, but also representatives of COPA-COGECA (farmers) and AVEC (poultry sector) — and provides a snapshot of the current state of the relationship between science and EU legislation on animal welfare .For agri-food companies, it's a useful map to understand where future regulations are coming from and how to anticipate them.
Key points for companies
The picture is set to hardenOne interviewee puts it clearly: "Without comprehensive regulation, the animal welfare situation will be difficult to change." Unlike animal health (already harmonized by the Animal Health Law), animal welfare remains fragmented across Member States, and the report recommends a more coherent and binding regulatory framework.
Towards "output-based" standards
The report recommends moving beyond rigid input standards (e.g., square meters, bedding materials) in favor of measurable indicators of actual welfare (behavioral, health). This could give companies more operational flexibility, but will require more sophisticated monitoring and data collection systems.
Market and retail move faster than the law
The report cites concrete examples: Albert Heijn's decision to eliminate caged eggs, McDonald's broiler chicken welfare program, and the guidelines of the Spanish Aquaculture Association.Business dynamics and corporate governance can preempt regulation by years —a sign that it's worth acting before you're forced to.
The economic issue is central
Interviewees emphasize that welfare improvements at the farm level cost relatively little (a few cents per kg), but it is distribution (retail) that inflates final prices, preventing farmers from obtaining a fair share of the added value —a transparency issue along the supply chain that directly concerns agri-food companies and large-scale retailers.Industrial data underutilized for fear of consequences
Companies possess large datasets but rarely share them for fear of misuse or competitive disadvantage. The report recommends anonymized and secure data sharing mechanisms —an area where companies could proactively engage.Animal welfare, sustainability and economic balance
Another relevant message concerns the economic sustainability of the transition .The report emphasizes the importance of considering not only the effects of measures on animals, but also their feasibility for farmers and businesses.
From this perspective , the One Welfare approach is valued, which links animal welfare, the well-being of farmers and workers, environmental sustainability, profitability and food safety .
The document also recommends further integrating cost-benefit analyses, also considering factors such as reputation, social trust, and contribution to more sustainable agricultural systems.
Direct involvement of stakeholders is therefore essential, starting from the research design phase. Recommendations include co-designing projects and trials with farmers and end users to increase the applicability of solutions and their ability to be implemented in practice.
The market can anticipate the regulation
A new front: fish welfare
The report dedicates a separate chapter to aquaculture and fisheries, sectors in which—unlike land-based farming—producers are more receptive to welfare science, grasping the direct link between welfare, growth, and profitability. For Italian fisheries, this is an area undergoing rapid regulatory evolution, with Italy (through IZSLER) already involved in the National Reference Center.What to monitor
For companies in the livestock and feed sectors , the report represents an early indicator of the directions that future EU regulation could take:- increased demand for animal welfare data and traceability,
- more stringent scientific standards
- growing attention to the economic impacts of new regulations on production chains.