The development of animal welfare science has had a fundamental influence on the development of public policy towards the treatment of animals, not only in individual countries such as the United Kingdom, but also within the institutions of the European Union. This has led to a new a body of legislation which is intended to promote welfare and to complement the traditional prohibition on causing cruelty. If this process is to continue, however, it is important that conducting research should not be regarded as the sole function of animal welfare scientists. It is essential that they are also fully engaged in ethical debate, policy formulation, regulatory mechanisms, and their enforcement.

Animal well-being issues are addressed by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) through a variety of agencies and in various formats. Most farmers are good stewards of their animals and will raise them according to societal demands as supported by market choices. Management standards that are perceived to improve upon current practices are being demanded of farmers by buyers of animal products, including corporate restaurant chains and groceries. Professional organisations, USDA, and university representatives, help to address well-being issues and help to create and evaluate standards. The USDA provides leadership in several cooperative programs involving activists and industry, coordinates certification programs, and provides liaisons to multi-state university research committees. A USDA Animal Well-Being Work Group facilitates communications among agency personnel. The USDA developed the Animal Welfare Issues Compendium, a national animal well-being symposium, and cooperates with industry, activists and universities on projects. The USDA provides grant funds for projects that are encouraged to include a component on animal well-being. Special grant funds from Congress have resulted in educational and research projects that complement existing USDA national research and educational initiatives. Regulatory commitments by USDA include the enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act and the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act.

The Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) develops guidelines on issues of current and emerging concern in response to the needs of the scientific community, advances in animal care, and the needs of the CCAC Assessment Program. Guidelines are developed by subcommittees of experts, and are based on sound scientific evidence. However, the process of guidelines' development can involve consideration of areas where there is little scientific certainty or where scientific evidence needs to be tempered by other ethical considerations. Often these are areas where recommendations to the community are most needed, to provide assistance to both investigators and animal care committees on how best to balance the well-being of experimental animals and the goals of scientific research. The process for drafting the CCAC guidelines on: the care and use of fish in research, teaching and testing (in preparation) will be used as an example of the development of guidelines in the face of uncertain science, alongside a discussion of the CCAC guidelines on: transgenic animals (1997), as an example of the employment of a precautionary approach. Fish are now one of the most commonly used laboratory animals in Canada. However, what constitutes well-being for fish is an emerging field with often conflicting scientific data, and this presents unique challenges in guidelines' development.

Despite interest and willingness to apply advances in animal welfare science, it is becoming increasingly difficult to do so. This paper addresses three main areas. The first deals with economic consequences and, while recognising the cost of implementing change, highlights the importance of hidden costs in animal disease. It argues that when these costs are taken into consideration more money can be allocated to the prevention of welfare problems. The second section relates to the fact that as animal welfare science progresses, there will tend to be scientists who focus on theoretical concepts and those who focus on practical problems. This specialisation may mean that intermediate research is needed to bridge the gap between the original idea and its practical implementation. It may also mean that the scientist making the original advance may not be well placed or even interested in doing this. The final section on the difficulties of applying scientific advances makes the point that as the number of scientists in the area increases, so does the discussion of methods and results. In the long-term these intellectual exchanges obviously benefit the science, but in the short-term they slow down the implementation of findings. Scientists focus on differences in interpretation not on similarities, leading non-scientists to sometimes miss the large areas of agreement and see only uncertainty in other areas. The paper concludes by suggesting that awareness of the factors affecting the application of scientific advances will help to minimise the risks that good ideas and results are not implemented in practice.

The traditional concerns about farm animal welfare have centred around the impact of intensive environments and management practices on the animal. This emphasis on the physical environment is changing, however, with greater consideration being given to animal factors and in particular to the selective breeding of farm animals. In this paper we use examples from our own research on dairy cattle and sheep breeding that have made positive and practical contributions towards reducing welfare problems by creating more balanced breeding programmes. In both examples, inclusion of health and fitness traits into breeding indexes can be shown to be more profitable than selecting on production traits alone. In addition, we propose that in principle animal breeding combined with economics research can make a more general contribution towards resolving animal welfare issues, by providing a framework for the quantitative evaluation of the costs and benefits of an animal production system. The advantage of the approaches currently used in multi-trait selection is that they transform all traits (production-based or welfare-based) to a common currency allowing direct comparisons of costs and benefits. Currently the weights applied to traits reflect their economic value to the producer. This approach is likely to underestimate non-economic welfare aspects such as the pain or discomfort associated with lameness, and new approaches are needed to more fully account for these non-economic welfare costs. We therefore propose that consideration is given to the use of approaches such as contingent valuation, which has been widely used in economics to derive values for non-economic activities. The question of who would pay for the addition of these welfare costs to a breeding index remains open, but it would seem most reasonable to treat these as a public good and pay for them as such through appropriate mechanisms.

It is imperative to provide adequate quantity and quality of space for all captive animals. Yet practically all guidelines on the housing of primates in the laboratory specify minimum cage sizes based solely on body weight. We argue that no single factor, such as body weight, is sufficient to determine cage size. Instead a suite of characteristics should be used that include morphometric, physiological, ecological, locomotor, social, reproductive and behavioural characteristics. Ideally, the primate's age, sex and individual history should also be taken into account. In this paper we compare this suite of characteristics for some commonly used primates whose weights overlap, to illustrate important differences amongst them. For good animal welfare and good quality science it is necessary to be sensitive to such species differences when determining suitable cage sizes.

Much of my research has been devoted to determining the cognitive and communicative abilities of Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus), but other companion animals and those in captivity in Zoos also have considerable capacities that are often under-utilised in such settings. Many such animals are left to their own devices for large parts of the day; their boredom may translate into unsuitable behaviour patterns. In order to address this problem, my colleagues and I began to devise various computer-based ‘toys’ that would not only provide enrichment in the sense of relieving boredom and reproducing situations somewhat like the challenges faced by animals in the wild on a daily basis, but also would help us determine the extent of these animals’ cognitive capacities. Some of these systems allow remote interactions between owners and their pets and others might be adapted for animal-animal interactions. In this paper I will describe these projects, their aims, and our limited progress.

Rats are a well-understood and widely used laboratory species that should be provided with environmentally enriched caging in line with modern animal welfare guidelines. This paper reviews which sources of enrichment are effective and should be prioritised, and how methods for providing enrichment might be selected using rats’ preferences as a guide. Rats demonstrate high demand for social contact and prefer larger cages, and cages with shelters, nesting material and foraging devices. Rats also discriminate between different methods of providing a given type of enrichment. It is clear that rats should be provided with enrichments such as social contact and shelter, and, in fact, that these should probably be considered basic husbandry requirements rather than optional improvements. It is still difficult, however, for animal caretakers to access proven, standardised methods for providing appropriately enriched caging, and the level of enrichment routinely provided to most rats in the laboratory appears to be low. Further research is required to assess the impact of enrichment upon research variables and to develop commercially viable enrichment products for rats in the laboratory.

Traditional battery cages for laying hens will soon be banned in the EU but the increased risk of feather pecking (FP) hampers the adoption of alternative housing systems. FP can cause injury and lead to cannibalism and the painful death of target birds. Current management practices (beak trimming, low light) have associated problems. In a joint European project we sought alternative solutions. In our study of associated traits, birds from a line showing low (LFP) rather than high feather pecking (HFP) exhibited greater sociality (motivation to be near companions) and a passive ‘coping’ style. High sociality and passivity were also negatively associated with FP in adults. These findings may guide future breeding programs. Trimming hens’ feathers to mimic the results of FP elicited pecking and some cannibalism, even by birds that had previously shown no FP. Social transmission of gentle but not severe FP occurred when LFP and HFP birds were housed together. Gentle pecking could conceivably lead to severe FP. We then examined chickens’ pecking preferences to guide environmental enrichment strategies. Bunches of string elicited substantially greater interest than other stimuli, including feathers, and white or yellow string was the most attractive. The birds’ manipulation of the string resembled preening. Incorporating silver beads or moving the devices reduced pecking. String sustained lengthy interest, reduced FP in HFP birds, and decreased feather damage in caged layers on a commercial farm. String offers effective, affordable and practicable environmental enrichment. The integrated application of appropriate environmental and genetic strategies is likely to attenuate the expression of FP and its harmful consequences.

Ethical, regulatory and scientific issues arise from the use of animals in education, from secondary level schooling through to veterinary and medical training. A utilitarian cost-benefit analysis can be used to assess whether animals should be used in scientific education. The ‘benefit’ aspect of this analysis can be examined through comparative studies of learning outcomes from animal-based versus alternative training methods, while the ‘cost’, in terms of harms to the animals used, can be subject to technical assessment using Russell and Burch's (1959) 3Rs rationale. Science has only just begun to delineate the effects of educational exercises on the welfare of subject animals. It has also begun to develop technologies and modes of instruction that reduce, refine or replace animal use in education, and instances of their successful implementation in the UK and in the USA will be highlighted. The implementation of these alternatives to animal use is inconsistent, and barriers to the adoption of alternatives include specific curriculum and legislative requirements, traditional educational methodology, and resource and training limitations, particularly when the alternative methods involve new technologies. A further problem arises from the lack of existing research data comparing the educational value of alternative, with traditional animal-based, instruction methods. Greater consistency in the use of methods that reduce, refine or replace harmful animal use could be achieved through improved knowledge of the extent and type of alternative resources currently used in particular fields of scientific education; international comparisons of educational practice; close scrutiny and harmonisation of evaluation methods; and consistency in the ethical review of educational animal use. Information and training, both in the 3Rs and in the use of specific alternative methods, could be disseminated throughout the life sciences. Evaluative research of the educational efficacy of traditional animal-based methods versus refinements or replacements would provide high quality data on which to base decisions regarding teaching methods. Since educational exercises involving animals also impart ethical training, whether inadvertently or directly, instruction in applied ethics should be considered a key element of any education program involving animals.

Mongolian gerbils (Meriones unguiculatus) are a widely used model species in parasitology and epilepsy research. Under standard laboratory housing conditions gerbils develop stereotypic digging, a behavioural abnormality, which is caused by the lack of a burrow in the laboratory cage. Here we show that gerbils reared with access to an opaque artificial burrow (nest-box with access tube) develop significantly less stereotypic digging than those reared with transparent artificial burrows. Subadult gerbils also preferred opaque artificial burrows to transparent ones. Based on these findings we developed an artificial burrow system that could be integrated into laboratory Makrolon Type IV cages to prevent the development of stereotypic digging in gerbils by addressing their behavioural needs. Faecal cortisol levels were measured as a non-invasive method of comparing stress reactions in gerbils given access to the new integrated artificial burrow system or to an equivalent transparent burrow. Behavioural differences were observed between gerbils in the two housing conditions, but faecal cortisol levels were unaffected. We conclude that simple refinement of housing is effective in improving gerbil welfare in the laboratory.