Balancing Welfare-Productivity Trade-Offs: Logical Frameworks and Strategic Approaches for Sustainable Dairy Development

Year : 2025 | Volume : 14 | 02 | Page : –
    By

    Md. Emran Hossain,

  • Shilpi Islam,

  1. Professor, Department of Animal Science and Nutrition, Chattogram Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Khulshi, Chattogram-4225, , Bangladesh
  2. Professor, Department of Animal Science and Nutrition, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University, Salna, Gazipur-1706, , Bangladesh

Abstract

Balancing animal welfare and productivity remains a critical challenge in modern dairy farming. This study explores diverse frameworks for evaluating the welfare-productivity trade-offs essential for achieving sustainable dairy systems. Key approaches are categorized into six thematic areas: animal-centric frameworks, management-oriented models, environmental assessments, economic and policy perspectives, technological innovations, and holistic methodologies. Each framework offers unique metrics and evaluation tools, including behavioral assessments, physiological indicators, precision livestock farming, cost-benefit analyses, and lifecycle approaches. The integration of these frameworks provides a multi-dimensional understanding of how management practices, environmental factors, and technological advancements influence both welfare and productivity. By bridging knowledge gaps and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, this study highlights the need for adaptive, region-specific solutions that prioritize animal well-being without compromising economic and environmental sustainability. The findings aim to guide policymakers, researchers, and stakeholders in designing dairy systems that harmonize welfare, productivity, and sustainability goals for sustainable dairy development.

Keywords: Animal welfare, dairy farming, economic viability, genetic selection, health, housing systems, precision farming, productivity trade-offs, sustainability metrics

How to cite this article:
Md. Emran Hossain, Shilpi Islam. Balancing Welfare-Productivity Trade-Offs: Logical Frameworks and Strategic Approaches for Sustainable Dairy Development. Research and Reviews : Journal of Veterinary Science and Technology. 2025; 14(02):-.
How to cite this URL:
Md. Emran Hossain, Shilpi Islam. Balancing Welfare-Productivity Trade-Offs: Logical Frameworks and Strategic Approaches for Sustainable Dairy Development. Research and Reviews : Journal of Veterinary Science and Technology. 2025; 14(02):-. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/rrjovst/article=2025/view=202201


References

  1. H. C. Costa, M. J. Hötzel, C. Longo, and L. F. Balcão, “A survey of management practices that influence production and welfare of dairy cattle on family farms in southern Brazil,” J. Dairy Sci., vol. 96, no. 1, pp. 307–317, 2013.
  2. A. Oltenacu and D. M. Broom, “The impact of genetic selection for increased milk yield on the welfare of dairy cows,” Anim. Welf., vol. 19, no. SUPPL. 1, pp. 39–49, 2010.
  3. F. Brito et al., “Genetic selection of high-yielding dairy cattle toward sustainable farming systems in a rapidly changing world,” Animal, vol. 15, p. 100292, 2021.
  4. J. C. Phillips et al., “A review of the impact of housing on dairy cow behaviour, health and welfare,” Livest. Hous. Mod. Manag. to Ensure Optim. Heal. Welf. Farm Anim., pp. 37–54, 2013, doi: 10.3920/978-90-8686-771-4_02.
  5. M. Banks, “Behavioral research to answer questions about animal welfare,” J. Anim. Sci., vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 434–446, 1982.
  6. Grelet et al., “Identification of chronic stress biomarkers in dairy cows,” animal, vol. 16, no. 5, p. 100502, 2022.
  7. Giannuzzi et al., “Milk phenomics: leveraging biological bonds with blood and infrared technologies for evaluating animal nutritional and health status,” Ital. J. Anim. Sci., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 780–801, 2024.
  8. R. Silva, J. P. Araujo, C. Guedes, F. Silva, M. Almeida, and J. L. Cerqueira, “Precision technologies to address dairy cattle welfare: Focus on lameness, mastitis and body condition,” Animals, vol. 11, no. 8, p. 2253, 2021.
  9. Pinedo et al., “Associations of reproductive indices with fertility outcomes, milk yield, and survival in Holstein cows,” J. Dairy Sci., vol. 103, no. 7, pp. 6647–6660, 2020.
  10. H. Stygar et al., “Measuring dairy cow welfare with real-time sensor-based data and farm records: a concept study,” animal, vol. 17, no. 12, p. 101023, 2023.
  11. M. Bewley, L. M. Robertson, and E. A. Eckelkamp, “A 100-Year Review: Lactating dairy cattle housing management,” J. Dairy Sci., vol. 100, no. 12, pp. 10418–10431, 2017, doi: 10.3168/jds.2017-13251.
  12. Gaillard and J. Abarnou, “Responses of dairy cows to weekly individualized feeding strategies regarding their metabolic status,” J. Dairy Sci., vol. 107, no. 12, pp. 10776–10786, 2024.
  13. Hopster et al., “Stress responses during milking; comparing conventional and automatic milking in primiparous dairy cows,” J. Dairy Sci., vol. 85, no. 12, pp. 3206–3216, 2002.
  14. F. Johnsen et al., “Is rearing calves with the dam a feasible option for dairy farms?—Current and future research,” Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., vol. 181, pp. 1–11, 2016.
  15. C. Cantor, H. W. Neave, and J. H. C. Costa, “Current perspectives on the short-and long-term effects of conventional dairy calf raising systems: a comparison with the natural environment,” Transl. Anim. Sci., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 549–563, 2019.
  16. Liu et al., “Effects of pair versus individual housing on performance, health, and behavior of dairy calves,” Animals, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 50, 2019.
  17. G. Cook, P. T. Pepler, L. Viora, and D. L. Hill, “Assessing transition cow management in dairy cows for improved health, milk production, pregnancy, and culling outcomes,” J. Dairy Sci., vol. 107, no. 12, pp. 11381–11397, 2024.
  18. Tobin, M. Janowiak, D. Y. Hollinger, R. H. Skinner, R. Steele, and R. Radhakrishna, “Northeast regional climate hub assessment of climate change vulnerability and adaptation and mitigation strategies,” 2015.
  19. Mandel, H. R. Whay, E. Klement, and C. J. Nicol, “Invited review: Environmental enrichment of dairy cows and calves in indoor housing,” J. Dairy Sci., vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 1695–1715, 2016, doi: 10.3168/jds.2015-9875.
  20. R. Ahmmad, “Daylighting and electric lighting for sustainable cattle buildings,” Introd. Pap. Fac. Landsc. Archit. Hortic. Crop Prod. Sci., no. 2024: 3, 2024.
  21. Grandin, “Behavioral principles of livestock handling,” Prof. Anim. Sci., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1–11, 1989.
  22. Dimov, T. Penev, and I. Marinov, “Importance of Noise Hygiene in Dairy Cattle Farming—A Review,” Acoustics, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1036–1045, 2023, doi: 10.3390/acoustics5040059.
  23. Ivana and N. Puvača, “Economic and Ecological Sustainability of Dairy Production,” J. Agron. Technol. Eng. Manag., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1088–1104, 2024, doi: 10.55817/tqxu2115.
  24. B. Martins and J. Rushton, “Cost-effectiveness analysis: adding value to assessment of animal health, welfare and production,” Rev. Sci. Tech, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 681–689, 2014.
  25. Brennan, T. Hennessy, E. Dillon, and D. Meredith, “Putting social into agricultural sustainability: Integrating assessments of quality of life and wellbeing into farm sustainability indicators,” Sociol. Ruralis, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 629–660, 2023.
  26. Christensen, S. Denver, and P. Sandøe, “How best to improve farm animal welfare? Four main approaches viewed from an economic perspective,” Anim. Welf., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 95–106, 2019.
  27. Choden, M. P. Timsina, D. B. Rai, and N. B. Tamang, “Effects of government subsidy support on livelihood of dairy farmers in Bhutan,” Bhutan J. Anim. Sci., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–4, 2017.
  28. I. Papakonstantinou, N. Voulgarakis, G. Terzidou, L. Fotos, E. Giamouri, and V. G. Papatsiros, “Precision Livestock Farming Technology: Applications and Challenges of Animal Welfare and Climate Change,” Agriculture, vol. 14, no. 4, p. 620, 2024.
  29. Alipio and M. L. Villena, “Intelligent wearable devices and biosensors for monitoring cattle health conditions: A review and classification,” Smart Heal., vol. 27, p. 100369, 2023.
  30. Neethirajan and B. Kemp, “Digital Livestock Farming,” Sens. Bio-Sensing Res., vol. 32, p. 100408, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.sbsr.2021.100408.
  31. Neethirajan, “Artificial intelligence and sensor innovations: enhancing livestock welfare with a human-centric approach,” Human-Centric Intell. Syst., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 77–92, 2024.
  32. I. Gargiulo et al., “Comparison of ground-based, unmanned aerial vehicles and satellite remote sensing Technologies for Monitoring Pasture Biomass on dairy farms,” Remote Sens., vol. 15, no. 11, p. 2752, 2023.
  33. K. Mediboyina, S. O’Neill, N. M. Holden, and F. Murphy, “Prospective life cycle assessment of an integrated biorefinery for production of lactic acid from dairy side streams,” Sustain. Prod. Consum., vol. 50, pp. 376–390, 2024.
  34. Piotr Pregowski, One Welfare: A Framework to Improve Animal Welfare and Human Well-being, vol. 32, no. 6. CAB international, 2019. doi: 10.1080/08927936.2019.1673070.
  35. Shamsuddoha, T. Nasir, and N. U. I. Hossain, “A sustainable supply chain framework for dairy farming operations: a system dynamics approach,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 10, p. 8417, 2023.
  36. Veissier, K. K. Jensen, R. Botreau, and P. Sandøe, “Highlighting ethical decisions underlying the scoring of animal welfare in the Welfare Quality® scheme,” Anim. Welf., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 89–101, 2011.
  37. P. M. Meuwissen et al., “A framework to assess the resilience of farming systems,” Agric. Syst., vol. 176, p. 102656, 2019.
  38. Webber, M. L. Cobb, and J. Coe, “Welfare through competence: a framework for animal-centric technology design,” Front. Vet. Sci., vol. 9, p. 885973, 2022.
  39. E. Cabrera, J. A. Barrientos-Blanco, H. Delgado, and L. Fadul-Pacheco, “Symposium review: Real-time continuous decision making using big data on dairy farms,” J. Dairy Sci., vol. 103, no. 4, pp. 3856–3866, 2020.
  40. F. Mee and L. A. Boyle, “Assessing whether dairy cow welfare is ‘better’ in pasture-based than in confinement-based management systems,” N. Z. Vet. J., vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 168–177, 2020.
  41. S. Chauhan et al., “Impact of heat stress on ruminant livestock production and meat quality, and strategies for amelioration,” Anim. Front., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 60–68, 2023.
Ahead of Print Subscription Review Article
Volume 14
02
Received 05/02/2025
Accepted 24/02/2025
Published 27/02/2025
Publication Time 22 Days
Total Visits: 174


My IP

PlumX Metrics