Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the various systems of rearing laying hens in particular those covered by Directive 1999/74/EC {SEC(2007) 1750}
Date: 2008-01-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European standard, animal health, animal welfare, consumer information, laying poultry, livestock farming, protection of animals

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 8.01.2008 
COM(2007) 865 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

on the various systems of rearing laying hens in particular those covered by Directive 
1999/74/EC 

{SEC(2007) 1750} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

on the various systems of rearing laying hens in particular those covered by Directive 
1999/74/EC 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

1. 

BACKGROUND 

Council Directive 1999/74/EC of 19 July 1999 lays down minimum standards for the 
protection  of  laying  hens1  and  outlines  in  particular  provisions  applicable  to 
unenriched and enriched cage systems and alternative (non-cage) systems.  

The  Directive  provides  that  the  rearing  of  laying  hens  in  unenriched  cage  systems 
will be prohibited with effect from 1 January 2012. The Directive also mandates the 
Commission  to  submit  to  the  Council  a  report  based  on  a  scientific  opinion  on  the 
various  systems  of  rearing 
into  account  pathological, 
zootechnical,  physiological  and  ethological  aspects  as  well  as  environmental  and 
health  impacts.  The  report  shall  also  be  based  on  a  study  of  the  socio-economic 
implications of the various systems and their effects on the Community’s economic 
partners2.  The  Directive  is  complemented  by  legislation  on  the  registration  of 
establishments keeping laying hens3 and on the labelling of eggs4 as well as on food 
safety aspects5. 

laying  hens 

taking 

The protection and welfare of animals is of high interest for the Community policies. 
The Protocol on the protection and the welfare of animals annexed to the EC Treaty 
by  the  Treaty  of  Amsterdam  states  that  the  Community  shall  pay  full  regard  to  the 
welfare  of  animals  in  formulating  and  implementing  Community  policies  on 
agriculture,  transport,  the  internal  market  and  research.  The  primary  objectives  and 
main areas of action identified in the Community Action Plan on the Protection and 
Welfare of Animals6 adopted in 2006 are also relevant to this communication.  

1 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

OJ L 203, 3.8.1999, p. 53. 
All studies and position papers used for the purposes of this Communication are listed in Commission 
Working Document No. SEC(2007) 1750. All documents referred to in that document are cited in their 
original language. 
Commission Directive 2002/4/EC on the registration of establishments keeping laying hens, covered by 
Council Directive 1999/74/EC (OJ L 30, 31.1.2002, p. 44). 
Council Regulation (EC) No 1028/2006 on marketing standards for eggs (OJ L 186, 7.7.2006, p. 1) and 
Commission Regulation No 557/2007 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation 
(EC) No 1028/2006 on marketing standards for eggs (OJ L 132, 24.5.2007, p. 5). 
Regulation  (EC)  No  852/2004  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the  hygiene  of 
foodstuffs (OJ L 139, 30.4.2004, p. 1) and Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament 
and of the Council laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin (OJ L 139, 30.4.2004, 
p. 55). 
COM(2006) 13 final. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

VARIOUS SYSTEMS OF REARING LAYING HENS 

2.1. 

Pathological, zootechnical, physiological and ethological aspects 

In November 2004 upon a request from the Commission the European Food Safety 
Authority (EFSA) issued a scientific report and opinion on welfare aspects of various 
systems  of  keeping  laying  hens7  which  confirm  that  animal  health  and  behavioural 
aspects  are  of  the  utmost  importance  for  the  welfare  of  the  animals.  Concerning 
animal  health  the  opinion  highlights  that  infectious  diseases  may  appear  in  any 
housing system but that their occurrence differs between systems. While in outdoor 
systems the contact with wildlife represents a risk for the health, in indoor systems an 
important health risk factor is the more frequent bird-to-bird contact due to a higher 
stocking  density  and  an  environment  where  pathogen  density  is  likely  to  be 
increased.  In  general  it  can  be  concluded  that  the  probability  of  exposure  to 
infectious agents and relevant consequences are influenced by environmental factors, 
management systems and hygiene measures.  

Concerning  the  main  aspects  that  could  affect  laying  hen  welfare  and  health  under 
farming conditions scientists have made the following considerations:  

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Injurious pecking presents a serious problem and may lead to extensive tissue 
damage,  cannibalism  and  mortality.  The  risk  of  pecking  decreases  with  the 
increase  of  the  quality  of  farming  methods  such  as  in  extensive  systems  and 
when  the  farming  skills  and  the  knowledge  by  the  managers  about  the  risk 
factors  are  higher.  The  use  of  systematic  beak-trimming  to  control  injurious 
pecking is criticised by the scientists as painful.  

Cannibalism is an unpredictable problem which can be difficult to control and 
often results in high mortality. It has more severe consequences in alternative 
systems8, especially in hens with intact beaks.  

Bone  breakage  is  less  frequent  in  hens  in  enriched  cages  and  alternative 
systems  that  have  shown  significantly  stronger  bones  and  less  bone  breakage 
than hens in unenriched cages.  

Foot  disorders  or  deformation  of  the  keel  bone  occur  mainly  due  to 
inappropriate perch design.  

Concerning mortality rates in some large enriched cage or alternative systems, 
latest studies suggest9 that the use of the most developed large enriched cages 
or alternative systems can result in low mortality rates. 

7 

8 
9 

Opinion  of  the  Scientific  Panel  on  Animal  Health  and  Welfare  on  a  request  from  the  Commission 
related to the welfare aspects of various systems of keeping laying hens. 
Non-cage systems as referred to in Chapter I of Directive 1999/74/EC. 
LayWel, workpackage 3, p. 58 et sqq.  

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
As regards the respect of the behavioural priorities of the animals the EFSA opinion 
concludes that hens prefer to lay their eggs in a nest site, preferably an enclosed nest 
and formed by a pre-moulded or mouldable substrate. Therefore, suitable, adequately 
distributed  nests  should  be  provided  in  housing  systems.  Also  drinking,  feeding, 
foraging and probably dust bathing are high priority behaviours. Furthermore, resting 
and perching are important aspects of birds’ welfare and all birds should be able to 
perch  at  the  same  time.  In  particular  roosting  at  night  on  an  elevated  perch  is  a 
behavioural  priority  as  are  other  necessary  movements  such  as  foraging  and  dust-
bathing.  If  hens  cannot  perform  such  high  priority  behaviours,  this  may  result  in 
significant  frustration,  or  deprivation  or  injury,  which  is  detrimental  to  their  health 
and welfare. 

Lower  stocking  densities  as  applied  in  enriched  cages  have  been  proven  to  be 
beneficial  in  this  respect.  However,  the  behavioural  repertoire  is  still  restricted  in 
enriched cages compared with hens kept in alternative systems. 

2.2. 

Public health and environmental protection aspects 

The  EFSA  opinion  and  report  contained  a  specific  chapter  on  the  consequences  of 
different housing systems on food safety (microbiological and chemical hazards).  

Research up to date does not allow the conclusion that one of the existing husbandry 
systems needs to be phased out due to risks for public health. 

Concerning  the  impact  of  hen  farming  on  environmental  protection  a  study, 
undertaken for the Commission, concluded in 2005 that the expansion of all intensive 
egg production systems had a significant negative impact on the quality of water, air 
and landscape10. However, it is becoming more evident that in the future any aspect 
related to sustainability will have to be taken into account in further development of 
husbandry systems for laying hens11. 

2.3. 

Relevant Community Funded Research Projects 

The  Community  co-financed  research  project  “Welfare  implications  of  changes  in 
production systems for laying hens” (LayWel12) aimed at optimising rearing systems 
for  laying  hens  and  in  particular  enriched  cage  systems.  The  project,  concluded  in 
2006,  confirms  that  unenriched  cages  present  inherent  animal  welfare  problems. 
With the exception of unenriched cages it was found that alternative systems had the 
potential  to  provide  satisfactory  welfare  for  laying  hens  although  further  research 
was  still  needed.  Mortality  rates  vary  remarkably  between  different  group  sizes, 
system designs, genotypes and beak-trimmed or non-beak trimmed birds. The study 
highlights that mortality can be low in large enriched cages. 

10 
11 

12 

http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eval/reports/pig_poultry_egg/eggsum_en.pdf. 
Renewed EU Sustainable Development Strategy, 
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/06/st10/st10117.en06.pdf. 
http://www.laywel.eu/ 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  project  “EGGDEFENCE13”,  suggested  that  the  housing  system,  which  is  only 
one  of  the  possible  contamination  routes,  did  not  affect  the  penetration  of  eggs  by 
Salmonella. Therefore further research projects have been set and are under way on 
related  issues.  The  SAFEHOUSE14  project  will  analyse  the  epidemiology  of 
contamination  of  eggs  and  colonisation  of  laying  hens  with  Salmonella  and  other 
zoonotic  pathogens  in  relation  to  the  housing  environment,  and  carry  out  risk 
assessment studies, enabling to describe and rank the risks to the consumer of eggs. 
complementary  project,  RESCAPE15,  will 
Meanwhile 
a 
multidisciplinary  strategy  at  the  level  of  hens  (breeding)  and  eggs  (egg  defence 
mechanisms,  decontamination  and  sorting  of  eggs)  to  reduce  the  risk  of  eggs 
unsuitable for human consumption entering the food chain. 

implement 

a 

Finally, the Community funded Welfare Quality project16 explores the integration of 
animal  welfare  in  the  food  quality  chain.  The  development  of  animal  welfare 
indicators and their use for the monitoring of welfare conditions will provide tools to 
respond  to  consumers'  demand  for  reliable  and  transparent  information  about  the 
animal  welfare  standards  applied.  It  aims  at  enhancing  the  competitiveness  for 
animal welfare friendly products. 

2.4. 

Socio-economic implications and effects on the Community’s economic partners 

The Commission financed an independent study on the socio-economic implications 
of the various systems to keep laying hens17 (Agra CEAS study). The study analyses 
the  development  of  production  costs  and  the  competitiveness  of  EU  producers  in 
relation  to  the  implementation  of  animal  welfare  requirements,  also  simulating  the 
EU situation after the ban on unenriched cages as well as various scenarios of future 
potential changes affecting the European egg market. Additional data on the socio-
economic  consequences  of  Directive  1999/74/EC  have  also  been  taken  into 
consideration (see annex). 

It  should  be  noted  that  until  today  limited  data  are  available  concerning  enriched 
cages. According to the Agra CEAS study production costs, variable as well as fixed 
costs  in  the  EU  increase  in  line  with  higher  animal  welfare  standards.  In  a  study 
commissioned by the industry it is stated that the increase in production costs could 
amount to about 10% compared to unenriched cages18.  

13 
14 

15 
16 
17 

18 

http://ec.europa.eu/research/agriculture/projects/qlrt_2000_01606_en.htm 
http://www.safehouse-project.eu/index.php?rub=Egg_contaminating_zoonotic_pathogens.  The  3  year 
project started on 1 October 2006. 
http://www.rescape-project.eu. The 3 year project started on 1 October 2006. 
http://www.welfarequality.net. 
“Study on the socio-economic implications of the various systems to keep laying hens”, Final Report 
for The European Commission submitted by Agra CEAS Consulting Ltd., updated version 2005. 
“Impact of EU Council Directive 99/74 “welfare of laying hens” on the competitiveness of the EU egg 
industry” p. 21. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
However,  extra  costs  of  producing  an  egg  in  a  barn  instead  of  an  unenriched  cage 
system are estimated at 1,3 cents and extra costs of producing an egg in a free-range 
instead  of  an  unenriched  cage  system  at  2,6  cents19.  Granted  that  an  average  egg 
from an unenriched cage costs at present around 9 cents, the change from unenriched 
to enriched cages might increase the costs of each egg by less than 1 cent. 

According  to  the  Agra  CEAS  study  the  producer  gross  margins  per  kilogram  eggs 
rise in line from the unenriched cage to the barn and to the free range systems. With 
free  range  systems  the  producer  gross  margins  are  twice  as  high  compared  to 
unenriched cage systems. In organic systems gross margins are not quite as high as in 
free range systems. Analysing the gross margins it was evident that although margins 
are  rising  with  higher  animal  welfare  standards,  the  overall  production  per  farm 
might decrease. 

Today some disadvantages for EU producers are alleviated by factors such as tariffs 
and transport costs20. The importance of the proximity of EU-producer to the market 
is relevant to the market for eggs in shells. Due to a limited shelf-life of shell eggs 
imports  from  third  countries  mainly  concern  processed  eggs  (dried  or  liquid)  for 
which a competitive gap shall be recognised.  

2.5. 

Consumers’ attitude to the welfare of laying hens 

In 2005 and 2006, two EUROBAROMETER surveys on consumers’ attitudes to the 
welfare of animals were carried out in the EU21. They show that animal welfare is an 
issue  that  citizens  rank  highly  giving  it  an  8  out  of  10  on  average  in  terms  of 
importance. In particular poultry (laying hens and broilers) is a priority area of action 
for animal welfare in the views of citizens. Concerning the welfare of laying hens 44 
%  of  the  consumers  answer  that  their  welfare  should  be  improved  the  most, 
compared to 42 % for broilers and 28 % for pigs. Importantly, welfare of laying hens 
was rated to be bad by 58% of the interviewees. Data show that the EU-consumers 
mostly  assume  that  they  have  the  power  to  influence  animal  welfare  standards  by 
selective purchases. However, consumers do not seem to be completely content with 
the existing labelling schemes, also with the one for eggs. 

The actual EU-wide buying pattern also shows that consumers are aware of different 
systems  of  keeping  laying  hens  and  they  pay  attention  to  the  production  system 
indicated on the label. 16 % of the interviewees indicate that they buy mostly eggs 
coming  from  hens  kept  in  cage  production;  10  %  buy  eggs  from  indoor  alternative 
systems and 38% eggs from free-range systems. 18 % admit not to pay attention to 
the husbandry system and 8 % of the consumers answered that they do not buy eggs 
at all. 

19 

20 

21 

Compassion  in  World  Farming  on  the  basis  of  the  Commission's  socio-economic  study,  cp. 
"Alternatives to the barren battery cage for the housing of laying hens in the European Union" p. 27. 
Cp. "Impact of EU Council Directive 99/74/EC "welfare of laying hens" on the competitiveness of the 
EU egg industry". 
“Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed animals” and "Attitudes of EU citizens towards 
Animal Welfare", cp. Annex "Studies". 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
A majority of citizens in the EU (57%) stated that they are willing to pay more for 
eggs  sourced  from  an  animal  welfare  friendly  production  system.  In  detail  25%  of 
the interviewees indicated that they are willing to pay an additional 5%, 21% to pay 
an  additional  10%,  7%  to  pay  an  additional  25%  and  4%  are  even  willing  to  pay 
more than an additional 25%.  

The  results  of  the  EUROBAROMETER  surveys  are  supported  by  data  on  the 
development of alternative systems. According to the Agra CEAS study the share of 
the EU laying hen flock kept in non-cage systems rose between 1993 and 2003 from 
3,56% to 11,93%. 

Further analysis on consumers' interests is ongoing in the framework of the Welfare 
Quality22 project. 

2.6. 

Registration of establishments and egg labelling 

As  foreseen  in  Directive  1999/74/EC,  Commission  Directive  2002/4/EC  obliges 
Member States to register all egg producing establishments and to attribute to them a 
code indicating the farming method, the Member State and the registration number. 
According to the marketing standards for eggs23 class A eggs shall be stamped with 
this code. Furthermore the husbandry system shall be indicated on the pack in easily 
visible  and  clearly  legible  type  and  in  defined  terms.  The  husbandry  systems  are 
specified  by  a  reference  to  Directive  1999/74/EC  with  additional  requirements  for 
eggs from free range systems.  

In general, class A eggs imported from third countries shall be stamped with the ISO 
code of the country of origin preceded by “non-EC standards” if no evaluation by the 
Commission has stated equivalence with EC standards.  

The  current  egg  labelling  system  does  not  foresee  a  mandatory  differentiation 
between  eggs  coming  from  unenriched  or  enriched  cages.  It  is  allowed  to  add 
voluntarily an indication if the egg was produced in an enriched cage.  

Furthermore,  farmer  organisations,  animal  welfare  organisations  and  retailers  have 
developed  in  several  Member  States  an  increasing  number  of  labelling  schemes 
indicating that they are welfare friendly. The visibility and the effect on the market 
are under study24.  

2.7. 

Relevance of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to hen's farming 

As  regards  potential  benefits  for  animal  welfare  measures  are  foreseen  under  rural 
development  policies25.  Support  for  investments  in  agricultural  holdings  or  the 
processing and marketing of agricultural products can be granted by Member States 
to improve animal welfare, co-financed by the Community. 

22 
23 
24 
25 

http://www.welfarequality.net. 
Council Regulation (EC) No 1028/2006 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 557/2007. 
Cp. for example Welfare Quality Reports No. 3.  
Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural 
Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ L 277, 21.10.2005, p. 1). 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.8. 

Implementation and enforcement of Directive 1999/74/EC 

Most  Member  States correctly transposed Directive 1999/74/EC.  But until today in 
most  Member  States  producers  have  made  very  little  progress  in  introducing 
enriched cages or shifting toward alternative systems. However, the Commission is 
informed  that  major  retailers  in  several  Member  States  are  developing  marketing 
strategies for eggs produced in alternative systems.  

The FVO published in 2005 a report about a series of missions concerning laying hen 
farms  carried  out  during  2004.  These  missions  provided  evidence  that  in  some 
Member States there were still difficulties with the implementation of the Directive. 
Each of the Member States concerned has subsequently provided to the Commission 
an  action  plan  on  how  they  intend  to  address  these  issues  in  the  future.  The 
Commission  services  take  further  follow-up  action  where  areas  of  non-compliance 
continue to be addressed in a unsatisfactory manner.  

3. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Animal  welfare  is  a  core  value  for  EU  citizens  who  seem  particularly  concerned 
about  the  welfare  of  farmed  poultry  and  in  particular  of  laying  hens.  By  Council 
Directive  1999/74/EC  Member  States  agreed  on  various  measures  laying  down 
minimum standards for the protection of laying hens, with a staged implementation 
of  some  provisions  over  a  time  period  extending  to  2012  taking  into  account  the 
economic impact of the measure. 

Studies have shown that the animal health problems occurring in alternative systems 
can mainly be minimized or even solved by a proper management or suitable design. 
Enriched  cages  improve  the  welfare  of  the  animals  in  comparison  with  unenriched 
cage  systems  and  further  optimisation  seems  possible  in  the  future.  In  contrast  the 
unenriched  cages  cause  several  animal  welfare  problems  that  are  inherent  to  the 
systems.  Scientific  studies  have  concluded  that  the  disadvantages  of  unenriched 
cages  outweigh  the  possible  advantages  of  reduced  parasitism,  good  hygiene  and 
simpler management. Further research is, and will continue to need to be, performed 
to  assess  the  extent  to  which  rearing  systems  for  laying  hens  inter  alia  provide 
optimal standards of animal health and welfare as well as food safety. 

Inspections have shown that several Member States have problems with the correct 
implementation  of  Directive  1999/74/EC.  The  Commission  will  intensely  monitor 
the  development  by  performing  further  FVO  missions  and  act  by  ensuring  an 
appropriate follow-up of FVO missions.  

The estimation on consumption trends in significant EU 15 Member States reports a 
regular increase of consumption of table eggs from non-cage systems26. 

26 

"Trends in laying hen numbers and the production and consumption of eggs from caged and non-caged 
production systems", Agra CEAS, p. 18. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Clear  information  to  consumers  is  the  key  to  allow  producers  to  market  eggs  from 
welfare  friendly  rearing  systems.  In  this  context  it  should  be  noted  that  processed 
eggs, unlike table eggs, are currently not submitted to any legislative requirement for 
welfare related labelling.  

Already 
today  certain  retailers  and  food  service  operators  are  marketing 
predominantly  non-caged  eggs.  Research  is  ongoing  to  analyse  in  which  ways 
retailers  may  benefit  from  the  various  types  of  animal  welfare  schemes27.  Any 
postponement of the ban on unenriched cages would distort competition and penalise 
those  producers  who  have  today  already  invested  in  alternative  or  enriched  cage 
systems that stand for scientific and technological development. 

4. 

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS 

4.1. 

Providing for new opportunities for competitiveness 

High animal welfare standards applied in the EU, including for laying hens, should 
be  promoted  as  a  marketing  and  competitive  advantage  at  European  level  using 
mechanisms  as  the  ones  already  foreseen  and  discussed  in  the  framework  of  the 
Community Action Plan on the protection and welfare of animals such as: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Sensitize  both,  public  and  private  sector,  to  give  priority  to  the  support  of 
scientific investments, information and education in this area; 

Promoting  information  campaigns  on  the  rearing  systems  in  the  framework 
given by the marketing standards for eggs; 

Ensure  cooperation  between  stakeholders  across  the  supply  chain  (e.g. 
producers, processors, retailers, caterers, consumers, governments, NGOs);  

Examining the possibility of the creation of a general EU framework to allow 
animal  welfare  labelling  on  the  basis  of  welfare  indicators  and  certification 
schemes valid at European level. Such prospective study should be done in line 
with  the  general  principles  of  "Better  Regulation",  in  particular  assessing 
thoroughly the economic impact. 

The  communication  to  consumers  on  high  animal  welfare  standards  applied  in  the 
laying hen sector should include objective information on:  

– 

– 

– 

the production methods applied, 

the  fact  that  implementing  higher  animal  welfare  standards  could  incur  extra 
costs for producers and 

the impact of improved animal welfare standards on egg prices.  

27 

"Retailers dealing with welfare schemes", p. 48. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Consumers  should  be  assured  that  they  buy  eggs  produced  in  compliance  with 
European  values.  The  improvement  of  animal  welfare  in  husbandry  systems  is  an 
element to promote sustainable development, a principle reflecting those values28. 

Farmers  could  be  rewarded  for  producing  premium  quality  products  which  are 
distinguishable from others and therefore benefit from a price premium. 

4.2. 

Change to new husbandry systems and CAP 

Based on the scientific studies it is not recommended to amend the current provisions 
of Directive 1999/74/EC.  

The  change  to  new  husbandry  systems  has  to  be  further  supported  both  from  the 
technical and economic side. Efforts of the Member States’ authorities should focus 
on providing technical support for farmers and on encouraging them to shift to new 
husbandry  systems  in  line  with  European  values  on  which  they  can  capitalise.  The 
opportunity  of  training  as  foreseen  under  Regulation  (EC)  N°  882/2004  should  be 
considered. 

The relevance of CAP and in particular rural development policies to the laying hen 
sector  should  be  analysed  and  be  made  more  visible,  including  support  for 
investments in agricultural holdings or the processing and marketing of agricultural 
products  which  aim  to  improve  animal  welfare.  Under  the  CAP  it  is  possible  to 
finance  communication  campaigns  aiming  at  restoring  consumer  confidence  in 
agricultural  products  including  eggs.  This  may  include  the  support  of  initiatives  to 
communicate better on animal welfare to citizens. 

4.3. 

Research 

In the 7th Research Framework Programme a topic is proposed on "Improving animal 
health, product quality and performance of organic and low-input livestock systems 
through integration of breeding and innovative management techniques"29. The topic 
description  includes  poultry  production  systems.  In  addition,  other  topics  are  put 
forward on the use of genomic tools and genetics in livestock production. 

Further  research  should  be  promoted  and  prioritised  to  optimise  systems  for  the 
rearing of laying hens and to minimize health and welfare problems linked to genetic 
selection.  Further  research  on  non-cage  systems  if  they  are  profitable  should  be 
promoted.  

28 

29 

Renewed EU Sustainable Development Strategy, 
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/06/st10/st10117.en06.pdf; cp. also "Good Practice Note 
Animal Welfare in Livestock Operations", International Finance Corporation, 
http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/p_AnimalWelfare_GPN/$FILE/AnimalWelfar
e_GPN.pdf. 
Theme 2, Call 2A FP7-KBBE-2007-1-3-07, 2007/C133/07 of 15 June 2007. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Animal welfare indicators and reliable on-farm monitoring systems once delivered in 
the  frame  of  the  Welfare  Quality  Project  will  have  to  be  kept  updated  and  further 
assessed.  Also  the  research  in  opportunities  of  marketing  of  welfare  friendly 
products, carried out in the framework of this project, should be followed up.  

The role of animal welfare in the sustainability strategy should be assessed further. 

EN 

11 

   EN