7 RotecnaWorld by Rotecna, s.a.

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR Gener Romeu Rotecna’s President

Dear Reader, The livestock industry has once again been hit by a virus outbreak, this time in the poulty sector. It first appeared in Asia, but globalisation being what it is, in only a few hours it had seemingly spread to half the world. This type of news does no good to any livestock sector, and although the pork sector was not involved on this occasion, the way consumers view intensive animal rearing is inevitably affected. This is bad news for everyone, as questions about food safety are raised in the consumer’s mind yet again. Although the main effects of bird flu were felt in Asia, countries closer to the European Union (EU), such as Rumania, were also affected by the disease, with several cases being detected on bird farms. Although Rumania does not yet belong to the EU, its anticipated inclusion as a member state is being discussed for early 2007. Until

then, the development of handling, environmental and animal welfare techniques employed in Rumania and other countries vying for EU membership needs to be monitored, so that they may be brought into line with the very strict standards which EU member states must meet. In addition to food safety, livestock sectors also face the on-going challenge of respecting the environment. Some months ago, the European Union published a report on CO2 levels generated by the livestock industry. As you might imagine, the conclusions were not exactly good. We must therefore continue to make every effort to honour our commitment to the environment, in which we are united with the rest of society, companies, fauna and flora. It is a task in which densely populated European counries like Germany, Spain and France have a major role to play. Gener Romeu Guàrdia

SUMMARY 4

ROTECNA WORLD

FEBRUARY 2006

ISSN: L-156-01

EDITION: ROTECNA, s.a.

EDITORIAL STAFF: Montse Palau

DESIGN: Montse Guerrero

PRINT: Imprenta Barnola

Rotecna World’s editors accept no liability for contributors’ opinion

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR Gener Romeu Rotecna’s President

SUMMARY 4

ROTECNA WORLD

FEBRUARY 2006

ISSN: L-156-01

EDITION: ROTECNA, s.a.

EDITORIAL STAFF: Montse Palau

DESIGN: Montse Guerrero

PRINT: Imprenta Barnola

Rotecna World’s editors accept no liability for contributors’ opinion

ROTECNANEWS the moulds which make Department projects a reality.

Rotecnaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

Technical

Initially, many of the companyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s moulds were manufactured externally. With the consolidation of our work in this area, however, Rotecna has been making its own moulds with cutting edge machinery for several years. In addition to the CNC, the section is also equipped with more conventional machinery to achieve perfect finishes. The machinery in question consists of a manual miller, a lathe, an electronic erosion machine, a rectifier and a radial bore. Rotecna has been making its own moulds with cutting edge machinery for several years The moulding section is also responsible for the maintenance of moulds which are used on a daily basis in the plastics section. One of the operators makes sure each part is polished and in perfect condition for the next time it is used. This task requires great precision and patience, as the most worn parts of the moulds have to be smoothed. Though it may seem surprising, the moulds are an extremely valuable asset to our company, not only because of their high cost but also because they are

essential to our work in manufacturing equipment for pig farms. This is why Rotecna had a fireproof chamber built to store all of our moulds in and protect them from damage in the event of fire. Safeguarding the moulds also safeguards Rotecna. The success of this section also lies in the professional engineering work of the Technical Department and the precise work of the Moulding Section. These two departments work in close collaboration so that the moulds can be used in our plastics section machinery and the end product corresponds exactly to the idea that our technicians have designed by computer. The success of this section also lies in the professional engineering work of the Technical Department and the precise work of the Moulding Section In this sense, both the specific moulding machinery and the professionals who run this section are essential to the smooth running of the team. Although this is not difficult work, their task is complex and requires a degree of specialisation. Since Rotecna started making its own moulds, the resulting challenge has provided professional motivation for the members of the Moulding Section and the Technical Department alike.

moulmaking moulds

Rotecnaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s business activity is based on the design, manufacture and marketing of plastic products for pig farms. In order to make its products unique and exclusive, Rotecna decided long ago to invest in the production of its own moulds for injecting plastic.

art machinery required to carry out this work. One of our star machines is the CNC (numerical control miller), which makes it possible to manufacture parts for moulds faster than manual millers.

In the work of this section of the company, every attention is paid to detail, as the task of making moulds for our products is arduous and time-consuming. However, Rotecna possesses the state-of-the-

Thanks to the CNC, mould designs are fed into a computer, which then gives the coordinates for manufacturing the features of the mould to the machine. The CNC operator simply has to monitor the progress and running of this automatic process. The end result is

ROTECNANEWS the moulds which make Department projects a reality.

Rotecnaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

Technical

moulmaking moulds

art machinery required to carry out this work. One of our star machines is the CNC (numerical control miller), which makes it possible to manufacture parts for moulds faster than manual millers.

RESEARCH & DEVELOP-

effect of

housing and feeding systems on the welfare and INTRODUCTION

Researchers at the UAB carried out a study on the effect of housing and feeding systems on ani-

productivity of

gestating sows

N. Chapinal, J.L. Ruiz de la Torre, M.D. Baucells, J. Gasa, X. Manteca Facultat de Veterinària, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB)

New European animal welfare legislation (directive 2001/88/EC) makes it compulsory to house gestating sows in groups from the 29th day of gestation to 7 days before the expected delivery date from January 1, 2013. The ban on current individual stalls will particularly affect the handling, feeding and welfare of animals. Housing in pens makes it possible to offer each animal its own diet, facilitates the supervision and manipulation of sows and prevents injury as a result of aggression. This system does, however, lead to the development of stereotypies, apathy, social stress (resulting from being unable to resolve interactions among animals), as well as decubitus ulcers and lameness (caused by the limitation of space). Sterotypies are probably the most well-studied welfare problem in sows. The term “stereotypy”refers to any sequence of movements which are repetitive, invariable and lacking in any apparent function (Odberg, 1978). The most frequent in gestating sows are biting bars, making chewing movements with an empty mouth and using drinkers, occasionally consuming excessive quantities of water. The causes of stereotypies have not been clearly established, although in the case of gestating sows, they seem to be due to the chronic sensation of hunger which results from restricting feed.

Several studies suggest that stereotypies diminish if the energy supply is increased (Appleby and Lawrence, 1987; Terlouw et al., 1991) or if straw or another manipulable material that increases ingestion time is added (Spoolder et al., 1995; Whittaker et al. 1998, 1999). Another important factor in the appearance of stereotypies is the restriction of behaviour caused by the housing system. The group housing of sows helps to reduce stereotypies in relation to housing in pens at the same level of ingestion (Jensen, 1988; Broom et al., 1995; Vieuille-Thomas et al., 1995). To minimise stereotypies, therefore, sows should be provided with manipulable material and housed in a way which allows them to display normal exploratory behaviour (SVC, 1997). The group housing of sows helps to reduce stereotypies in relation to housing in pens at the same level of ingestion Although group housing improves many of these aspects of welfare, it does have its drawbacks. As well as making it difficult to provide each sow with the proper ration, supervision is more laborious, and the detection of nutritional, pathological and behavioural problems is thus complicated. The biggest problem as far as welfare is concerned, however, is the increase in stress and injuries caused aggressions among animals, in particular immediately after grouping and during feeding time. When animals are grouped, a hierarchical order is

RESEARCH & DEVELOP-

effect of

housing and feeding systems on the welfare and INTRODUCTION

Researchers at the UAB carried out a study on the effect of housing and feeding systems on ani-

productivity of

gestating sows

N. Chapinal, J.L. Ruiz de la Torre, M.D. Baucells, J. Gasa, X. Manteca Facultat de Veterinària, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB)

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

established, mainly on the basis of aggressive interactions. This being said, aggressions with physical contact diminish considerably after 24 hours (Barnett et al., 1992), the hierarchy being established in a few days (Brouns y Edwards, 1994). The frequency of aggressions diminishes with density (Weng et al., 1998) and also as the group grows in size, as sub-groups are formed (Edwards et al., 1993) and the total available space increases (Broom et al., 1995). Dynamic groups, with periodical animal turnover, present more problems than stable ones (Simmins, 1993). Once the hierarchy is established, the level of aggressions is affected by the competition for resources. In the case of gestating sows, it is very important to choose a feeding system which keeps competition for food to a minimum. A low-intensity food source like straw or beetroot pulp might be helpful (SVC, 1997). Two of the most common feeding systems are those of slow feeding (SF) and electronic feeding (EF) Group housing allows the use of different feeding systems, which is what will determine the design of the pen and group sizes. Two of the most common feeding systems are those of slow feeding (SF) and electronic feeding (EF). With SF, animals feed at the same time, thanks to a system of continuous, slow feed distribution. Two important features of the SF system are the lateral separations (Petherick et al., 1987) and the adjustment of distribution speed, which have an influence on the aggressions which occur at feeding time (den Hartog et al., 1993; Edwards, 1998). In the case of EF, each animal is immediately recognised by microchip by the feed dispenser, which then provides it with the previously programmed ration. This system thus allows individualised but non-simultaneous feeding, which leads to greater competition among animals (van Putten y van de Burgwal, 1990). The animal may be protected while feeding (tunnel type) or not (Fitmix type).

The overall aim of this study was to compare two feeding systems for sows (SF and EF) with the traditional individual stall system (IS) in relation to welfare and productivity.

MATERIAL AND METHODS Sixty sows LW x LD from the first to the eighth delivery were housed from day 29 of gestation to 1 week before birth in three different housing and feeding systems: A) 20 animals were housed in conventional individual stalls (IS) (0.60 x 2.15 x 1 m) with wet feed once a day. B) 20 animals were housed in 2 pens (10 animals/pen) with SF. The animals were offered dry feed once a day, at an average speed of 159 g/min. C) 20 animals were housed in a pen with EF, fitted with a single wet feed dispenser without protections. The feeding cycle was 24 hours, and was updated at 7:00. All the animals had 2.3 m2/animal, excluding the space reserved for the feeding system. The animals were weighed (LW) on days 29, 44 and 110 of gestation and the back fat thickness (BFT) was determined on days 29, 44, 60, 93 and 110 of gestation by ultrasound (RENCO LEAN-METERÂŽ). Behaviour was observed for 12 non-consecutive days for each treatment, 2 hours after morning feeding and 90 minutes in the afternoon.

The recording methods used were scan sampling with 10-minute intervals for recording the posture and oronasal behaviours (ON) of the animals (fig.1), and behaviour display for recording aggressions in the group houisng treatments (Martin y Bateson, 1993). Whenever possible, the details recorded of aggressions were the particular aggressor, the recipient, the outcome, the intensity (from 1 to 4) and location in the pen. This information was used to calculate the social rank index (SRI; Nielsen et al., 1995). In the 24 hours after birth, the number of piglets born alive, dead and mummified was recorded, in addition to the total weight of the litter and that of live births. Statistical analysis was made with the 12.0 version of the SPSS-PC programme (SPSS Inc., Chicago). Data were analysed principally with a one-factor ANOVA with housing system as inter-subject factor, and a repeated-measures ANOVA with housing system inter-subject factor and time as intra-subject factor.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The EF animals were observed to be lying down in a larger proportion of observations than the IS and SF animals (71.39%, 50.15% and 56.16% of recorded observations, respectively; p<0,001). The IS animals displayed ON behaviours in a larger proportion of observations than the SF animals, and the SF animals a greater proportion than the EF animals (p<0,001). The IS animals displayed empty chewing behaviour in a larger proportion of observations than the SF and EF animals (p<0,001), and manipulation of the bars in a larger proportion of observations than the SF animals (p=0,004). The SF animals were observed to be drinking in a larger proportion of observations than the IS animals, and the latter in a larger proportion of observations than the EF animals (p<0,001). These results suggest that the EF system might offer a less restrictive and more comfortable These results suggest that the EF system might offer a less restrictive and more comfortable atmosphere, as these animals apparently developed fewer abnormal behaviours and rested more. Group housing with the EF and SF systems reduced the appearance of stereotypies like empty chewing and the manipulation of bars compared to IS housing. The mean of aggressions for each animal (both as aggressor and reci-

pient) was higher in the EF than the SF system (114,2 vs 39,7; p=0,004). In the EF system, there was a higher percentage of aggressions in the feeding area than in the SF system (81,5% vs 23,5%; p<0,001). The proportion of aggressions with physical contact was greater in the EF than the SF system (39,5% vs 28,7%; p<0,001). A correlation was observed between the SRI and the number of delivery in the SF system (rs=0,467; p=0,038) and the EF system (rs=0,498; p=0,002), and with the initial LW in the EF system (rs=0,648; p<0,002). These results suggest that aggressiveness is an serious problem in the EF system, and is probably due to the fact that sequential feeding makes it more competitive. Providing a low-density feed supply such as straw might reduce feeding-related aggressiveness in this type of systems (van Putten and van de Burgwal, 1990; Jensen et al., 2000). The hierarchical structure seems to be more important in more competitive systems, as the correlations of the SRI with both the initial LW and the number of delivery indicate. There were no differences between treatments in mean feed consumption by animal and day or in the different observations of LW and BFT There were no differences between treatments in mean feed consumption by animal and day or in the different observations of LW and BFT. Thus, energy requirements were not apparently increased in any of the treatments. Also, no differences were observed between treatments in reproductive performance, which would indicate proper handling of the animals in the different systems (SVC, 1997). BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES Consult the publishers.

This study was financed by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport (PETRI 95-0639 OP). The authors gratefully acknowledge the collaboration of SAT â&#x20AC;&#x201C; La Vall, Vall Companys Grup and Rotecna S.A.

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT

The overall aim of this study was to compare two feeding systems for sows (SF and EF) with the traditional individual stall system (IS) in relation to welfare and productivity.

TECHNOADVANTAGES: o Screens larger areas during weaning. o Fewer profiles needed. o With openings for better cleaning. o Creates draught-free comfort

200x600 mothering slat: made-to-measure delivery pens

10% open draught-free comfort Rotecna, S.A. set out in 2005 with the aim of extending its slat range with at least four new models to provide more options for configuring livestock farms and facilities. The first model is a blind weaning slat to meet the new demands of the European market created by national legislation in different countries. 90% of the surface of this slat is completely blind, with small open areas making up the remaining 10%. The slat is used to screen large spaces in weaning rooms, thanks to its measurements. It is this feature which enables the livestock handler to cut costs on installation and the use of profiles. With this and the 600 x 600 weaning slat, Rotecna aims to provide its customers with the best option for equipping weaning rooms with slats which are both large-scale and have fewer joints and, in consequence, fewer places for dirt to build up. Having the slat 10% open makes for easier cleaning in rooms where there is a need for many of these slats. These openings allow dirt to drain away after cleaning

600x600

and animals to grow more healthily in more hygienic conditions. The usefulness of having screened zones during weaning lies in the fact that piglets can be kept warm with screens which reflect heat to the floor. Also, piglets may rest in these draught-free areas, and are thus protected from possible illnesses like colds. This is something which must be taken into consideration in the early days of weaning especially, which is when the animals are still getting used to being without the heat previously given to them by their mothers. This new slat, which may be used with animals of up to 60 kilos, is manufactured with a ribbeddesign to stop animals from slipping and injuring themselves.

ADVANTAGES: Rotecnaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s second innovation in slats this year is the 200 x 600 slat for delivery pens. An addition to the 600 x 200, 600 x 300 and 600 x 400 models, the new slat provides a variation on delivery pen assembly to suit all tastes and dimensions. The 200 x 600 slat is the perfect answer to the needs of delivery pens fitted with iron slats. The smallest size for designing a delivery stall is 60 centimetres, which has prompted Rotecna to complete its slat range with the 200 x 600 model. It allows the pig handler to use up to 25% fewer iron slats, and thus cut costs and enlargen the comfort zone for piglets. Performance levels are maintained, as this new mothering slat is placed at the front and the back of the central part of the deilvery pen. There is no need for an iron slat in either part, as the front part is used for the motherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s feeder and the back is the area where piglets are born and the mother defecates. In these zones, a plastic slat is the best option.

o o o o

Ideal for 60 cm-base delivery pens. Saves on iron slats. Non-slip. Comfortable and hard-wearing.

to be used in conjunction with its Ferrocast slat, Rotecna plans to launch a smaller 60 x 60 Ferrocast slat, as shown in figure 2. This combination in delivery pens has not yet been feasible, as the Ferrocasts measure 60 x 120 and two were needed in each delivery pen. As with all of its mothering slat range, Rotecna has given the new slat a ribbed design to make it non-slip. The ribs have been designed to allow dirt to be cleaned off easily. Also, the 200 x 600 slat offers comfort to piglets, but is tough enough to stand up to the mother.

The fact that there is a plastic slat in the back means that piglets feel warm plastic instead of cold iron when they are born. And as for the feeding area, cleaning up food scraps is much easier with plastic slats. 1. Figure 1: 240x240

To make it possible for this new 200 x 600 slat

1. Figure 1: with iron 170x240

2. Figure 2: with ferrocast.: 60x60 and 120x60 180x240

TECHNOADVANTAGES: o Screens larger areas during weaning. o Fewer profiles needed. o With openings for better cleaning. o Creates draught-free comfort

200x600 mothering slat: made-to-measure delivery pens

600x600

o o o o

Ideal for 60 cm-base delivery pens. Saves on iron slats. Non-slip. Comfortable and hard-wearing.

To make it possible for this new 200 x 600 slat

1. Figure 1: with iron 170x240

2. Figure 2: with ferrocast.: 60x60 and 120x60 180x240

TECHNOLOGY

maxitainer the second mother

Some time ago, ROTECNA, S.A. launched the Maxitainer, a container to continue feeding piglets on milk during the early days of weaning, before they have got used to their new diet of feed. When piglets are separated from their mothers, one of the biggest changes for them is the type of feed they are given. They switch from a practically liquid diet to solids. It is our job to help them grow naturally during this phase, something which requires a swift, stressfree adaptation to the new diet. This is what prompted ROTECNA to launch the Maxitainer, a semi-transparent container connected to a Maxi Pan. The main novelty of this container is that ROTECNA has given it a user-friendly design. In addition, this product is now manufactured at the ROTECNA plant in Agramunt, thus assuring that the Maxitainer passes the same rigorous quality control process as the rest of the companyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s products.

However, it is also a good container for medicating in individual animal stalls. This represents a more economical way of medicating in stalls, as it allows big savings saves on water facilities, especially when pigs are housed in older buildings. Like the Maxi Pan, the Maxitainer can cater for about 10-25 animals, with a capacity of 24 litres. The rounded design of the Maxi Pan helps prevent piglets from spilling liquid, and thus wasting milk and water containing medication. ROTECNA continues to come up with solutions to the day-today problems encountered by livestock-handlers.

ADVANTAGES: o For supplying milk during weaning. o More economical medication per stall. o Easy adaptation for piglets. o View of contents. o Level gauge. o No waste: rounded edges.

The Maxitainer consists of two pieces which together form a container that fits easily to the ROTECNA Maxi Pan. This way, piglets have the ideal place to drink easily without any learning process. The Maxitainer was created to make it possible to provide piglets with milk during the early days of weaning after separation from their mothers.

TECHNOLOGY

maxitainer the second mother

ADVANTAGES: o For supplying milk during weaning. o More economical medication per stall. o Easy adaptation for piglets. o View of contents. o Level gauge. o No waste: rounded edges.

SOMETHING ABOUT …

castellers human towers It’s one o’clock and hundreds of people gather in the Plaza Mayor of any Catalan village. Not even the intense summer heat can stop them coming to see a unique and splendid human construction; the castellers are performing.

of Valls, the so-called ‘birthplace of castells’. The earliest reference to a “colla castellera” dates back to 1805, with mention of associations in Valls and Tarragona. Together with the famous cava-producing town of Vilafranca del Penedès, these places are central to any discussion about castells. The evolution of this popular tradition is closely linked to the history of Catalonia, with eras of both splendour and decadence.

complete the castle by holding up a hand and shouting “Fer l’aleta!” - “Chase after it!”- once he or she has reached the summit. The castle is now built, and it is gradually dismantled floor by floor. If this operation is carried out without the construction collapsing, then the castle is considered to have been successfully loaded and unloaded. In other words, it has been perfectly built. As the Catalan musician, poet and politician Josep Anselm Clavé once remarked, to load and unload a human castle takes “strength, balance and good judgement”.

How is a human castle built? A solid base is needed to take the weight of the human tower. For this purpose, 4 people linking arms form the base, and a solid structure is gradually constructed as more people gather around them to make the ‘pinya’, or clan. The latter extend their arms to reinforce the structure and provide a cushion in case the tower collapses. In casteller jargon, this is known as ‘fer llenya’, or making firewood. When the pinya is ready, more people pile up on top of them to make the second floor, and give the word to the third floor components to do likewise. The gralla then sounds to signal that the building and dismantling of the castle may safely proceed. The other floors are then added until the top is reached. At this point, it is the children – ‘la canalla’ - who take the starring role, as they clamber barefoot up the different floors until they reach the top. The smallest among them must

The hardest constructions to build are castles of 9 or even 10 floors. In 1998, the Minyons de Terrassa (the Lads of Terrassa) made history by loading and unloading the first 10-floor castell. Specifically, it was a ‘3 de 10 amb folre i manilles’, or 3 of 10 with padding and manacles, in which each floor up to the seventh is made up of 3 people, the penultimate of two, and the last of one. Apart from castles, ‘pillars’ of several one-person floors are also built. There are now more than 65 casteller associations in Catalonia, most of which have been set up since 1990. This figure says a lot about the golden era which the tradition is currently enjoying. In summer, it is common to see these performances in the local festivities organised in many Catalan towns and villages, although casteller associations may also be found in the south of France, Argentina and Mexico.

Catalonia boasts several forms of artistic expression among its popular traditions, the most outstanding of which are the Catalan dance called the sardana and the castells, or castles. As a spectacle, however, it is the latter which most impress visitors. The castells are human towers which are steadily built up with ‘floors’ of 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 people, depending on the type of castle. This construction is always accompanied by a group of musicians, who play their strident notes with instruments like ‘grallas’, a sort of Catalan bagpipe. Indeed, they are named ‘grallers’ after this wind instrument, although they are also accompanied by drums. The first records of associations of castellers can be traced to the Catalan town

SOMETHING ABOUT …

FUTURE

which way ahead? Future scenarios for sustainable pig production Stern*, S., Dep. of Animal Breeding and Genetics Gunnarsson, S., Dep. of Animal Health and Environment Kumm, Dep. of Economics Sonesson, Institute for Food and Biotechnology U. and Öborn, I. Dep. of Soil Science P.O. Box 5401, SE-42902 Gothenburg, Sweden, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, *Dep. of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Funbo-Lövsta, 755 95 Uppsala, Sweden, Susanne.Stern@hgen.slu.se Presented at the 54th Annual meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, Rome, Italy. August 31st –September 3rd, 2003.

Abstract Sustainability in pig production is a multidimensional issue. To study future production systems, a step-wise method for scenario construction was used to create future scenarios of pig production based on different sustainability goals. Three future scenarios were constructed. They were deliberately chosen to be extreme in perspective with different goal visions. The first scenario has the focus on animal welfare, natural behaviour of the animals and a good working environment for the caretaker. The second scenario focuses on low impact on the external environment and an efficient use of natural resources, including energy. The third scenario focuses on quality

and safety of the product. The scenarios were then parameterised and the economic effects of the different scenarios were calculated. A Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) will be performed on the same dataset.

Introduction The goal of pig production is to produce pig meat to as low costs as possible, as the industry in large is based on short time profit. At the same time consumers as well as society show a growing interest in production methods and quality of products (Öborn et al., 2002). The negative environmental effects of animal production are also discussed. Therefore the question of sustainability in pig production needs to be taken into consideration. Sustainability can be defined in many different ways. The definition chosen in this study is based on the long-term goals for FOOD 21 which covers eight main sustainability aspects: 1. Efficient use of natural resources, fossil energy, total energy. 2. Low impact on external environment, optimised use of P and N, low emission of green house gases. 3. Animal welfare, animal health, natural behaviour, low use of medicine. 4. Safe products.

5. High product quality. 6. Ethics, accepted production forms. 7.Farmers. 8. Economy. (FOOD21, 2002). The aim of this study was to present three future pig production systems based on the sustainability goals of FOOD 21 and evaluate these from economic and environmental aspects.

Material and methods Creation of scenarios Scenario methology was used (Alcamo, 2001). It is a progressive way of working where conflicts between different sustainability goals are identified and handled in a transparent way. This method is iterative and makes it possible to work in a structured way with both shortterm and more long-term scenarios (Sonesson et al., 2003). The first step in the method is to define the production system to be analysed, in our case pig and pig feed production. The production system is then described as a set of functions required for the production system to work, e.g. housing and feed supply. Secondly, the sustainability goals should be identified. In this case we used FOOD21’s sustainability goals. The goals should be quantifiable as well as possible, an

FUTURE

example is g ammonia/kg pig produced as a measurement of the effect on the external environment. Next the best solution for each goal is discussed in the multi disciplinary group of researchers. This results in as many descriptions of the system as there are goals. By studying these fairly extreme solutions, conflicts between different sustainability goals are identified. The two goals natural behaviour and product quality may, for example, result in very different system designs. Next step is to group goal visions of sustainability. Since we do not know anything about future values several goal visions are described. The three goal scenarios here are (A) animal welfare, natural behaviour of the animals and a good working environment for the caretaker. (B) Low impact on the external environment and an efficient use of natural resources, including energy, and (C) Production safety, production quality and high efficiency. Taking these three goal scenarios as a basis, the earlier descriptions, where only one goal at the time was optimised are combined, to produce scenarios that correspond to the goal vision scenario. These qualitative descriptions of future systems are one of the products of the scenario work. Evaluation of scenarios In order to allow comparisons of the three created scenarios they were parameterised by the multi disciplinary group together with specialists. The parameterisation was based on the scenario descriptions and included diet formulation, production level, slaughter weight etc. Some examples of parameters are given in table 1. Economic calculations Cost of production per kg of pig meat is total long run cost including feed, buildings, labour, interest, and sundry in piglet production and slaughter pigs divided by kg of meat produced. Possible future improvements of growth rate and feed efficiency and reduced labour consumption due to larger herds are taken into consideration in the scenarios as well as reduced cost of feed production due to increased yields, reduced soil tillage and larger farms. On the other

side, animal welfare and environmental restrictions imposed in two of the scenarios tend towards increased costs. The cost of feed grain production is reduced by present EU income support. Environmental evaluation The environmental impact of the scenarios will also be analysed with Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) using the same dataset as in the economic evaluation. LCA is a method for analysis and assessment of environmental impact caused by a production system (see Cederberg, 2002 for a description of LCA analysis of animal production).

Results Scenario one, focus on animal welfare In this scenario production is integrated with both sows and slaughter pigs at the same farm. Groups are kept intact throughout the rearing period, to avoid fighting and re-ranking. Piglets and sows are kept outdoors on pasture with huts during summer. Slaughter pigs are kept indoors on straw, in a veranda system with access to a paddock. The space allowance per slaughter pig is 2.5 m2. Strategic feeding with diets that are diluted with forages to give longer eating times and occupation for the pigs are used. The breeding goal includes the traits growth rate, leanness, appetite and maternal traits. Slaughter is based on age, thus the whole batch is slaughtered at the same time. Scenario two, focus on the external environment and resource effectiveness. In this scenario, the production form is specialised or externally integra-

ted. Both sows withpiglets and slaughter pigs are kept indoors. The buildings are closed, in order to control the nitrogen emissions through air and manure. The ventilation air is filtered and ammonia is regained. Slatted floors and covered manure storage keep nutrient losses and smell low. Diets are based on locally produced energy and they are low in nitrogen. Synthetic aminoacids and enzymes are used to increase the fed efficiency. Phase feeding is practiced to reduce nitrogen and the nutrient losses. Special pathogen free (SPF) pigs are used. In the breeding goal, growth, leanness and feed conversion. Pigs of different sex can be raised to different slaughter weights and males can be kept intact for higher fed efficiency. The pigs are slaughtered in batches. Scenario three, focus on product quality and safety In this scenario, the whole production chain from animal to retailer is integrated. Production is indoors with specialized or external integration. The buildings allows a wellcontrolled environment, regarding ventilation, temperature, feed distribution etc. Feed ingredients are controlled for nutritional and hygienic value. SPF pigs are used. Health is controlled and preventive medical treatment is used. In the breeding goal, leanness, growth rate and product quality (meat quality) is included. It is possible that several different breeding goals will be used depending on the product, such as bacon pigs, heavy pigs etc. Slaughter based on weight (160 kg) in groups on slaughterhouses with high standards to assureproduct quality. Economic calculations The production costs per kg pig meat produced were calculated to 2.08 Euros for the animal welfare scenario, 1.48 Euros for the external environment scenario and 1.64 Euros for the product quality scenario.

Discussion The use of this method resulted in three different scenarios each with one aspect of sustainability in focus, but in conflict with the others. The ranking between the different aspects of sustainability may also differ between different people and over time. It is clear that today there is an increased production cost taking animal welfare into account as in the animal welfare scenario. This is due to increased feed intake and higher building costs. However, the cost of increased space allowance to pigs have recently been calculated by Bornett et al. (2003). They conclude that this could be achieved in pig production to a moderate increase in cost. Furthermore, the economic calculations in this study are performed in a short time perspective. The future profit of consumers confidence in pig production with high animal welfare is not included. Olesen et al.(2000) has described how such non market values effects can be included when designing a sustainable breeding program. Acceptance of pig production systems by the society is fundamental for the survival of the production. Kanis et al. (2003) concludes that even though the prime interest of consumers is low prices on pork, there is a growing concern of safety and healthiness of pork, animal welfare and environmental pollution etc, which needs to be address. How to evaluate different aspects of sustainability is mainly a political question, and legislation and political decisions can easy change the ranking of the scenarios. But these decisions should be based on knowledge. Scenario studies like this one is a useful tool in the search of new knowledge, as a compliment to traditional scientific studies. REFERENCES Consult the publishers.

FUTURE

SWINE PRODUCTION IN sanitary and economic risks linked to fluctuation of pig and piglet prices. The average size of these farms is about 120 sows and 640 fattening pigs. Only one hundred farms have more than 500 sows. Finally, farrowing farms, i.e. 21 % of national pig farms, own 25 % of national sow inventories. Fattening farms, i.e. 40 % of national pig farms, own only 36 % of national fattening pig inventories.

Yves TREGARO Agro-Economist in pig sector OFIVAL (French intervention meat agency) Division Economie et Prospective (Economic and Prospective Department) 80, avenue des Terroirs de France 75607 PARIS CEDEX 12 France e-mail : tregaro.yves@ofival.fr

pig production in france Introduction

French pigmeat sector in search of new dynamic 20

Since 1988, French pigmeat production has grown at a dramatically faster rate (from 1.78 to 2.37 million tons cwe between 1988 and 2003) than consumption (from 2.11 million in 1988 to 2.25 million in 2003), thus making France self-sufficient from 1994 onwards. In recent years, its self-sufficient rate has stabilised at around 105%. However, the French pigmeat sector strongly depends on foreign markets with regard to both imports and exports. In 2003, 23 % and 30 % of national production were imported and exported by the French pigmeat sector, respectively. For this reason, French farmers and slaughtering industry are in competition with other European pigmeat sectors not only in their own domestic market but also in European markets such as Germany, Italy, Greece, which traditionally import pigmeat and, to a lesser extent, international markets. Nowadays, the French pigmeat sector is affected by the fluctuations and turbulences of the European market.

1- French pigmeat production in the European context After the enlargement of the European Union to CEEC’s in May 2004, France, with 15.3 million heads, is ranked fourth among European producing countries after Germany, Spain and Poland. After a dramatic increase between 1988 and 1999 (+ 39 %), sow inventories have decreased 7 % between 1999 and 2003, although the improvement of technical performance has maintained pig production at a higher level than that of 1999. Environmental regulations and pressure from citizens slow down new investments (settlement or enlargement of piggeries) in the whole of France, in both high or low density areas. As in other European countries (Germany, Italy, Spain…), pig production is becoming increasingly concentrated in one area, the West of France (Brittany, Lower Normandy and Loire). Today, this area accounts for 75 % of national pig inventories. Brittany, the French Western foreland, located in the heart of the main production area, accounts for 55 % of national inventories and 6.7 % of European inventories. The pig density of Brittany (4.8 pigs/ha) is lower than in Belgium (6.7) and the Netherlands (5.3), but higher than in Denmark (4.4) and in Nordrhein Westfalen (4.1). French pig farming is mainly based on small family farms. According to the 2000 Farm Census, the number of holders with more than 4 sows and 19 fattening pigs is about 19,000. Although they only represent 39 % of pig farms, farrow-to-finish farms own 74 % of national sow inventories and 61 % of national fattening pig inventories. Until now, this type of production has been encouraged by public authorities and professional bodies to avoid the

2- A large number of independent slaughterhouses in France. In the whole of France, just 220 pig slaughterhouses were inventoried in 2003. A large number of them have a local use, acting as a service provider for local players such as butchers and small pigmeat processors. They are evenly distributed in France. However, the 14 largest slaughterhouses, handling over 70,000 tons a year, i.e. 700,000 heads a year, are all located in the West of France and handle about 70 % of national production. France’s largest pig slaughterhouses, owned by the cooperative sector (60 %) and the private sector (40 %), are considered efficient and well adapted to the European market in comparison with those in other large pig producing countries (Denmark, Germany, Netherlands or Spain). The size of pigmeat groups, however, is smaller than those of its Danish (Danish Crown - 20 million heads) or Dutch (Dumeco – 6.6 millions heads) competitors. Only Socopa and Cooperl, two co-operative groups, have more one slaughterhouse which treat about 2 millions heads. The French slaughtering sector is thus fragmented. Unlike other European countries (Denmark, Netherlands, Germany, Spain…) where mergers and alliances occurred internally or across borders between pigmeat groups, the French slaughtering industry has remained « congealed » over the last ten years. Only some co-operative groups have bought into slaughterhouses previously owned exclusively by private groups. In the present context, concentrations can be seen in the downstream pigmeat sector (pigmeat processors or modern retail market) and abroad. French slaughterhouses appear to be too divided and disorganised to seal large contracts, or make headway in negotiations with customers, seeking new outlets and news products. With regard to the cutting rate of French slaughterhouses, it currently stands at about 70 %. In comparison with other producing countries, this level is lower than in the Danish or Dutch industries (95 % and 85 %, respectively). In the context of a fast-growing cutting market in the European Union and in the World, the French pig industry is currently making the approriate investment, most notably in the West of France. However, although this evolution is unavoidable, this strategy is not without economic risk for French companies. It involves a large change in commercial strategies and having the capacity to send each cut at the most competitive prices, as Danish companies do. This situation poses many problems for observers and

pig production in france Introduction

French pigmeat sector in search of new dynamic 20

SWINE PRODUCTION IN

decision-makers in the French markets : How to develop successful commercial strategies in export markets in order to contribute to a better global carcass price ?; how to maintain the level of outlets in the domestic markets while competition with foreign suppliers is increasing ?; how to provide good service to French and foreign customers ?; or how to provide added value in downstream integration ? 3- Domestic and foreign outlets; a strategic challenge 3-1 Domestic consumption In 2003, pigmeat consumption reached 37.5 kg cwe per capita, i.e. less than the European average (43.8 kg cwe per capita), lower than in Spain (71.6 cwe per capita) or in Denmark (57.6 cwe per capita). Although pigmeat is more consumed than any other meat, poultry meat consumption has dramatically increased in recent years and now competes with pigmeat, whereas beef meat consumption is suffering a slight decline. About 30 % of French pigmeat is sold as fresh pork (6 % to the catering sector and 63 % to the processing industry). Hypermarkets and supermarkets handle about 85 % of these sales. Sales of caseready and elaborated products (sausage products, lardons…) are increasing. For various reasons (traceability, manpower cost…), large-scale distribution prefers to transfer cutting and conditioning work to the slaughtering industry. The processing industry isn’t generally linked with upstream activities. Purchases of raw material are often guided by price more than origin. Moreover, in recent years, American (Sara Lee, Smithfield Foods) and Spanish (Campofrío) companies have bought or have taken a majority holding in some French companies. Profitability being their main concern, these companies do not hesitate to play off domestic and foreign suppliers against each other, thus intensifying competition and cutting margins. The national link between the cutting and processing industries is thus less strict than before. 3-2 International and European trade Trade plays a very important part in maintaining the balance of the domestic market. Eating patterns and cooking practices have led to loin production exceeding demand and shoulder and ham produc-

tion being insufficient to cover the needs of the processing industry. Since the mid-90’s, imports have stayed at the same level, around 500,000 tons cwe, i.e. 20-25 % of French production. Exports, on the other hand, have increased, coming from 100,000 tons cwe in the mid80’s to over 600,000 tons cwe in recent years. In 2003, the trade balance showed a surplus of 115,000 tons cwe and 50 million euros. Imports mainly come from the European Union. Purchases are boned fresh meat, notably cured ham used by the processing industry from Spain, the Netherlands and Denmark. Purchases from Spain, for use by the processing industry, have dramatically increased over recent years and have now reached 50% of all French needs due to a low-price policy. About 80% of exports are sent to the European Union, a figure which amounts to a 9% share of intra-community trade. The main destination is Italy, where 40 % of exported meat is sold. Heavy carcasses and hams are sold for the processing industry (cured and smoked hams). The other main customers are the UK (loins and meat for processing), Greece (carcasses) and Germany (meat for processing). In 2001 and 2002, exports to developing countries were reduced because of sanitary issues (foot and mouse disease and swine fever). France has now recovered its position and sales are strongly increasing at present on the Asian market (South Korea, Japan and Singapore). In contrast, exports to Russia are plummeting due to Brazilian competition.

Conclusion It is clear that the French pigmeat sector is coping with several new challenges. Due to economic and environmental constraints, French production could remain at the present level in the short term. This context could lead to an over capacity of slaughterhouses, notably in Brittany. Competition in both the domestic and European markets could require that the slaughtering and cutting industries reconsider their industrial and commercial strategies. Brittany’s industry, having previously been concerned with quantity, must now shift the emphasis to value added. In addition, recovering and securing the domestic market, which represents about 70 % of French pigmeat outlets, is now a priority.

The pigmeat sector in Brittany After World War II, the farming and food sector in Brittany underwent dramatic changes. Today, thanks to the dynamism of its producers, this area is number one in animal production and accounts for 55 % of

national pig meat production (against 35 % in 1970), 60 % of national poultry meat production and 30 % of national beef production (coming from dairy and suckling cows). At present, the pigmeat sector provides work for 24,000 people, 8,300 of whom work in production. The geographical concentration in all parts of the pig sector (production, collection of pigs ready for slaughter, slaughterhouses, cutting units, processing industries) is the main feature of the increase in pig production in Brittany and the ability of slaughterhouses and processing industries to export out of boundaries. Between 1980 and 2000, pig inventories increased by 55 %, more than in Denmark (+ 17 %) or in Belgium (+ 47 %) but much less than in Este (Spain) or in Lombardy (Italy), where the growth rate is near 100 %. According to the 2000 Farm Census, the number of farms with pigs (with more than 4 sows and 19 fattening pigs) was about 7,400. Inventories were more numerous than in France, with on average 150 sows and 800 fattening pigs per farm, the average land of which is calculated to be 53 ha. The farrow-to-finish system (52 % of pig farms) predominates for sows (89 % of the total in Brittany) and, to a lesser extent, for fattening pigs (70 % of the total in Brittany) because farmers are obliged to fatten a proportion of their piglets outside their farm in Brittany or in neighbouring areas, due to the ban on farm enlargement after the implementation of stringent environmental regulations. In Brittany, pig farms are mainly located in two areas of the region (the Finistere headland and the Lamballe area), where pig density can reach 10 pigs/ha per county. These high animal densities (pig, poultry, cows and steers) have damaged the ecological system and environment (high nitrate concentration in surface water and ground water, seaweed on the Atlantic coast…). The farmers’ organisation and public authorities, aware of this situation, implemented a law of good practice in order to ensure greater respect for the environment. In addition, two programs (Farming Pollution Control Plans 1996-2001 and 2001-2006) were implemented to adapt farms to the new regulations. For this reason, pig production costs have increased and the development of the sow herd in Brittany is slowing down. The present increase is mainly due to technical improvement in pig farms. At present, technical performance is of a very high in Brittany and is probably among the best in the European Union (pigs produced per sow per year : 20.4 ; total feed conversion rate : 3.04 ; daily gain (7-105 kg) : 0.660 kg – average values from ITP -). Artificial insemination is very widely used; farmers organise the on-site production of semen or buy it

from an artificial insemination center. In the first case, the diffusion of genetic progress is ensured by the purchase of boars and sows with a high genetic potential to farmers (multiplication) in connection with genetic firms (selection). Farmers attach great importance to the state of health of their herds and are working on how to control or eradicate various diseases. With the increasing size of farms, activities are more specialized in pig production, and now we often see one person for one activity (nursery, weaning, feeding…) in farms with several hundred sows. Pig production is now conducted in batch management of 3 weeks in traditional herds or one week in large and leading farms. However, this technical potential also has a cost. For these and other reasons like environmental constraints, production and feeding specifications, traceability, production cost ( 1.30/kg including wages) is higher in Brittany than in Spain, but is nearly the same as in Denmark. In comparison with Spain, the gap is not in feed cost but mainly in labour and investment. In Brittany, producers’ groups are mainly involved in these two activities. For example, leaders have taken shares in, or set up their own genetic firms. They have also technicians who regularly visit farms and give them advice on sanitary and feeding practices. Gathering pigs and being in charge of negotiating the “best” price with slaughterhouses are, however, their basic, historical and essential activities. One body, the Marché du Porc Breton (decreasing bidding auction system), was created in 1972 to establish each week a reference of procurement price arising from the confrontation between producers’ groups and slaughterhouses. Producers’ groups thus play a major role in the vertical co-ordination of the pig sector in Brittany because they own upstream and downstream interests (genetics, feeding, slaughtering, processing). About half of national fresh and frozen meat exports is generated by Brittany. In 2000, one third was sent to developing countries, though this share is now weaker due to the fall of exports to Russia. Brittany’s slaughterhouses have required veterinary services to take the necessary steps to open news markets where French meat could be sold.

SWINE PRODUCTION IN