вход по аккаунту


Animal Welfare EU Strategy 2011

код для вставкиСкачать
Animal Welfare
EU Strategy 2011-2015
•Community Action Plan 2006-2010
The Commission's commitment to EU citizens, stakeholders,
the EP and the Council for a clear map of the Commission’s
planned animal welfare initiatives for the coming years
•Paulsen’s report: May 2010
The EP gave its opinion on the 2006 Action Plan by adopting
the Paulsen Report. The rapporteur considers that the new
action plan should focus on:
- a general European animal welfare law;
- a European centre for animal welfare and animal health;
- better enforcement of existing legislation;
- the link between animal health and public health.
•Evaluation on the EU policy on animal
- In November 2009, the Commission
mandated an external consultant to
evaluate the EU policy on Animal Welfare
- The evaluation was completed in
December 2010 and will be used as a basis
for a future EU Strategy on the protection
and welfare of animals 2011-2015
The Commission (DG SANCO) is
preparing a second EU strategy for
the protection and welfare of animals
2011-2015, which is foreseen to be
adopted in December 2011.
Indicative time frame
January-March: MS and SH consultations
April: Finalization of impact assessment
September- October: Inter-service consultation
December: Adoption
• The Commission organized a meeting with the
Member States on 17th January and with the
main EU stakeholders 31st January 2011 to:
- present the result of the evaluation on the EU
policy for animal welfare
- present the possible policy options for the future
Evaluation on the EU policy on
animal welfare
• Online consultation – 9,086 responses
• Stakeholder interviews – 89 interviews
with 196 individuals
• National missions – 12 Member States
• Literature and data review
• Answers to 11 evaluation questions
Main outcomes of the evaluation on
the EU-PAW
• Q1: To what extent has EU animal welfare
legislation achieved its main objective (i.e. to
improve the welfare conditions of animals within
the EU?)
- Legislation has improved welfare for those
animals covered by targeted legislation
- There is potential to achieve much higher
standards by strengthening the enforcement of
current EU legislation
Main outcomes of the evaluation on
•Q2: To what extent has EU legislation on the
protection of animals ensured proper functioning
of the single market for the activities concerned?
- EU animal welfare legislation has contributed to, but not fully
ensured, the proper functioning of the internal market
- Harmonisation is important in order to avoid competitive
distortions within the internal market
- Specific EU animal welfare legislation has improved the
harmonisation of animal welfare standards across the EU
- Factors affecting harmonisation are: a lack of clarity,
variations in enforcement, and standards that go beyond EU
Main outcomes of the evaluation on
• Q10: To what extent do animal welfare policies
contribute to the economic sustainability of the
sectors concerned
- Widely accepted that animal welfare policies increase costs
of businesses in the farming sectors (estimated additional
annual costs of €2.8 billion for farm animals),
- Higher standards have business benefits, though usually
outweighed by costs
Problem definition
Competitiveness of farmers
Communication to consumers and stakeholders
Science and innovation
Scope of EU legislation
• Member States problem but…needs EU
• Lack of awareness and training of parties
• Conflicts with economic interests
• Complexity and rigidity of the legislation
Competitiveness of farmers
• Animal welfare additional costs
• EU standards not sufficiently known by
• No equivalent standards in third countries
competing with EU producers
Communication to consumers and
• 64% consumers are worried for animal
welfare (EU average)
• No information for most products
• Most private schemes under 20% market
share (national level)
• Stakeholders not sufficiently informed on
what to do
Objectives of the future strategy
• Level of animal protection close to the
citizens’ concern
• Competitiveness in the EU market
• Consistency between EU and TC
Policy options
• No action
• We do more with same tools (non
legislative option)
• We do differently (legislative options)
- Framework law and co-regulation
- Prescriptive regulation
Non legislative (option A)
Communication and education,
Corporate Social Responsibility,
Improved coordination,
International initiatives.
No new law but increased resources.
Legislative options
Framework law and co-regulation =
Animal welfare law (Option B)
• More participative (voluntary and
compulsory standards)
• Animal welfare indicators (for monitoring
• Wider scope (Cows? Rabbits? Etc)
Legislative options
Prescriptive regulation (Option C)
Vertical directives by species
European Network of Reference Centres
Applied research (dissemination)
Education and training
New financial instruments
Common penalties
Stakeholders’ opinions and data
• SH understanding and opinion on the
options (how you see the option working)
• SH data and experiences in relation to the
• SH assessment on the possible impacts
listed (qualitative and quantitative)
• SH priorities
Размер файла
711 Кб
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа