EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 28.10.2009 
SEC(2009) 1433 
 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
  
SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT  
  
accompanying the  
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO  THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE 
COUNCIL, THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE 
COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 
  
Options for animal welfare labelling and th e establishment of a European Network of 
Reference Centres for the protec tion and welfare of animals 
     
{COM(2009) 584 final} 
{SEC(2009) 1432}  
 
EN 2   EN BACKGROUND  
In 2006, the Community Action Plan on the Pr otection and Welfare of Animals 2006 – 2010 
was adopted. This plan highlights the importan ce of consumer information as part of a 
comprehensive communication strategy on animal welfare and the planne d establishment of a 
European centre for animal welfare. 
Three Eurobarometer surveys were carried out in 2005 and 2006 on animal welfare. The 
results showed that there is strong public suppor t for the idea of a label or logo of some type 
to give information on animal welfare in food production.  
In December 2006, DG SANCO published a summary of the results for the consultation  
‘Labelling: competitiveness, consumer info rmation and better regulation for the EU’1, which 
also covered animal welfare labelling. The vast majority of contributors consider information on the animal welfare conditions under which f ood is produced to be relevant for consumers 
and a potential marketing opportunity  for producers and retailers.  
In May 2007, the Council of Ministers adopted  conclusions on animal  welfare labelling
2, 
inviting the Commission to present a report on this issue in order to  allow an in-depth debate.  
Following on from the Action Plan and the surveys, DG SANCO has started to explore 
various legislative and non-legisl ative options for animal welfare labelling and for a network 
of reference centres for animal welfare in order to further the debate. However, neither 
initiative is intended to raise animal welfare standards as such. The aim of the labelling 
initiative is to increase consumer understandin g of animal welfare, among other options, by 
the information provided on the labels, and the proposal for reference centres is intended to 
harmonise accepted animal welfare standards a nd to promote the sharing and use of best 
practice in animal welfare systems. To help  prepare its report, DG SANCO commissioned a 
study to assess the feasibility of different op tions for indicating an imal welfare-related 
information on products of animal origin and for establishing a Community Reference Centre 
for Animal Protection and Welf are. This study was conducted by Civic Consulting  (lead), 
with some input from Agra CEAS Consulting , of the Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 
(FCEC).  
The study concluded that a key issue for consum ers where animal welfare is concerned was 
the lack of information on food products regardi ng animal welfare standards. In the course of 
the study, the consultants found various reasons for the lack of information on the market, 
including: 
– the absence of a harmonised system of animal welfare standards for labelling 
purposes; 
– the difficulty in communicating to the cons umer in a clear way the difference in 
animal welfare standards across food products; and 
                                                 
1 http://ec.europa.eu/food/f ood/labellingnutrition/betterre gulation/competitiveness_ 
consumer_info.pdf.  
2 http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_D ata/docs/pressData/en/agricult/93986.pdf.  
 
EN 3   EN – the evolution of different animal welfar e labelling schemes across Europe, creating 
differentiation between goods and a non-le velled playing field for operators. 
Taking into account the findings from the comprehensive stake holder consultation carried out 
during the external feasibility study, the Commi ssion explores policy options in the report to 
address the current lack of consumer inform ation and inequities in the Single Market, 
including the possibilities for a voluntary/mandatory animal welfare labelling scheme and the 
establishment of a European Network of Refere nce Centres to share best practice on animal 
welfare. At this stage, the report does not outline any commitments already agreed for action, but simply examines various options that could be  used to address the objectives of the Action 
Plan. 
The Impact Assessment provides analysis to supp ort the development of strategic orientations 
on how to better communicate in the field of animal welfare and the establishment of a 
network of references centres for animal welf are, as set out in the report. The report, 
scheduled for autumn 2009, will not contain defi nitive legislative proposals — these will be 
put forward if needed, and be accompanied by their own specific impact assessments. 
Given the different impacts of the areas covered in the report, the impact assessment has been 
divided into two parts — the first concentrat ing on the impacts of different options for 
improving the communication to consumers on anim al welfare related to livestock products 
and the second exploring the im pacts of establishing a Netw ork of Reference Centres. 
P
ART I: ANIMAL WELFARE LABELLING  
DG SANCO is exploring the possibility of estab lishing a system of animal welfare labelling 
to improve consumer information on welfare standards and existing welfare schemes and to harmonise the internal market to prevent wide ly differing welfare standards being used under 
the generic ‘welfare’ term. This initiative does  not aim to raise the minimum standards laid 
down in Community legislation or to impr ove compliance with existing legislative 
requirements. 
This impact assessment has focused on the options outlined in the report for animal welfare 
labelling to give an idea of the likely impacts on stakeholders of each option. Given the early 
stage of policy development, the impact anal ysis remains mainly qualitative, but, where 
possible, quantitative estimates of  the potential impact are provided.  
For mandatory labelling, seve ral options are considered: 
– mandatory labelling of the welfare standard s under which products of animal origin 
are produced,  
– mandatory labelling of the farming system under which products of  animal origin are 
produced, and  
– mandatory labelling of compliance with EU  minimum standards or equivalents.  
The impact assessment also considers voluntary options, including: – establishment of requirements for volunt ary use of animal welfare claims;  
 
EN 4   EN – establishment of a voluntary Community Animal Welfare Label open for all to use if 
they meet the criteria;  
– drafting of guidelines for animal welf are labelling and quality schemes. 
Although this impact assessment does not conclude on any definitive option for animal 
welfare labelling, it does identify the legi slative and non-legislative options that are 
considered the most feasible at this stage (harmonised re quirements for voluntary animal 
welfare claims and/or a Community animal we lfare label). It is hoped that the report and 
Impact Assessment in combination will help facil itate an in-depth inter-institutional debate on 
the subject to consider if fu rther EU action is necessary.  
PART II: EUROPEAN NETWORK OF REFERENCE CENTRES FOR THE PROTECTION AND 
WELFARE OF ANIMALS  
The objective of the second part of the impa ct assessment is to explore and assess the 
feasibility of different options for establishing  a European Network of Reference Centres for 
the Protection and Welfar e of Animals (ENRC). 
The options to develop a central  community reference centre were considered in the light of 
the concerns raised in the consultation on: 
– the lack of harmonised animal welfare standards/indicators for higher animal 
welfare; 
– the lack of coordination of existing resources to share best practices;  
– the need for an independent source of information at EU level; and  
– the duplication of activities due to a lack of coordination at EU level. 
Taking this into account, the Commission is di scussing options that it hopes will achieve 
greater coordination of existing resources while identifying future needs, and will ensure a 
more consistent and coordinated approach  to animal protection and welfare across 
Commission policy areas.  
The main policy options discussed in the impact assessment are:  
– continuation of the current situation (status quo option),  
– various different options fo r a centralised approach, 
– various options for a decentralised approach, and 
– a task-specific strategy to determin e central and decentral elements. 
While the impact assessment does not identify  a preferred option at this stage, it does 
conclude that if EU action were  to be taken in this area some  form of mixed approach based 
on decentralised and centralised elements would be the most feasible.  
 
EN 5   EN ASSESSMENT OF POSSIB LE FUTURE PROPOSALS  
This is the first step in assessing the impacts of the different policy options; any firm policy 
decisions that may be taken as a result of this  debate will be conditi onal on further impact 
assessments to evaluate their budge tary feasibility and to better assess their costs. Evidence 
will be obtained on consumer demands for an imal welfare information, the distortion of 
competition due to the lack of a harmonised Co mmunity framework to establish criteria for 
animal welfare labelling, and the market opportun ities for producers that would like to apply 
higher animal welfare standards than  required by Community legislation. 
The assessment of any future proposal for a la belling scheme will be based on the following 
criteria:  
– extent to which the different policy options  would allow a labelling system to be 
developed based on a sound scientific basis and benchmarks to assess the level of 
animal welfare, 
– extent to which the different policy opti ons would allow for inspection/audit and 
certification by independen t certification bodies,  
– extent to which the different policy opti ons would avoid distortions of competition, 
– extent to which the different policy options constitute a reliable, user-friendly and 
transparent tool to communicate the standa rd of welfare and en able consumers to 
make informed choices, and 
– compatibility with international obligations  towards third-country trading partners. 
Regarding the options for the establishment of an ENRC, the assessment will be based on the 
following principles: 
– the ENRC should complement, not duplicate, current activities by other Community 
bodies, 
– all areas of animal use should be covered, and  
– the Centre should be independe nt from outside interests. 
The impacts expected to be the most significan t are social and economic impacts such as the 
impacts on consumer information, distortion of  competition, consumer prices, costs for 
producers, existing schemes, intra-EU trade an d external trade. Impacts on administrative 
burden, SMEs and the environment, and the impact  of introducing welfare criteria in existing 
or future product quality labelling schemes, such  as organic farming, will be duly taken into 
account.  
These impacts will be assessed using the results of  the Welfare Quality project and an external 
study to carry out a further analysis of th e possible social, economic and environmental 
impacts. Further consumer research (Eurobaromete r) will also be undertaken to determine if 
consumer opinions stated in previous surv eys (willingness to pay, etc.) remain valid or 
whether different factors are now influe ncing consumers’ purchasing patterns.