Raising welfare standards for bacon and eggs in the UK could help protect farm incomes, as research shows shoppers are willing to pay more when information about animal welfare is clear.
The findings come as the UK government develops a new animal welfare strategy for the UK, published last month, which proposes significant changes to farm animal welfare standards.
The research suggests that improved welfare could add billions of pounds of value across the pig and egg sector if higher standards were clearly reflected in the market.
The strategy has been hailed as a major welfare change, but farmers have raised concerns that high-cost British produce could be undermined by cheaper imports produced to lower standards.
Industry bodies have warned that without comparable welfare requirements for imported goods, UK producers could face unfair competition, particularly if higher production costs are not passed on through the supply chain.
The government says it will continue to uphold welfare standards in trade negotiations, but farmers want clearer safeguards to ensure welfare improvements do not come at the expense of competitiveness.
Research supporting this strategy shows that clearer benefit labeling could help address this risk by allowing farmers to capture added value from higher standards rather than absorbing costs at farm level.
Professor Richard Bennett, who developed the animal welfare assessment tool used by the government, said his research showed consumers were willing to pay more if the relationship between price and welfare was transparent.
“The government’s strategy recognizes that consumers currently lack the information they need to make informed decisions about animal welfare standards,” Professor Bennett said.
“The public’s desire for transparency is clear, with eight in 10 shoppers asking for welfare scores on food labels. Our assessment tool provides a score out of 100 and can provide clear and comparable evidence about the welfare standards of animal-based foods on supermarket shelves.”
Proponents of welfare labels argue that a standardized system could help bridge the gap between farm standards and consumer understanding, especially in areas where high welfare costs are not currently reflected in prices.
It also said consistent labeling could reduce confusion caused by the wide range of warranty schemes already in use.
The study found that animal welfare considerations influenced the purchasing decisions of around two-thirds of household food shoppers.
Most consumers believe that high-welfare products are healthier, taste better and are more environmentally sustainable, strengthening the commercial case for improved standards.
The report provides the economic basis for several policy proposals set out in the strategy, including banning cages for laying hens and phasing out farrowing boxes in pig farming.
Breaking away from the existing system will require significant farm investment, especially for pig and egg producers facing housing changes.
While the strategy acknowledges the need for phased implementation alongside support to help businesses adapt, farmers stress that timetables, capital subsidies and reliable market returns are critical to sustainably delivering higher welfare.
Professor Bennett led the research at the University of Reading’s School of Agricultural Policy and Development after being commissioned by Defra to create a standardized method for assessing welfare improvements in policy-making.
“It is gratifying to see this research directly informing national policy,” he said.
“The Animal Welfare Strategy identifies phasing out colony cages and farrowing boxes as a priority action in agriculture. Our economic analysis shows that the UK public sees value in these welfare improvements.”
“Shoppers will pay more, but they need to be able to see the impact their purchasing decisions have on animal welfare.”
The study found that removing colony cages during egg collection improved the welfare scores of caged laying hens from 32 points out of 100 to 51 points.
UK shoppers will be willing to pay an extra 20p per egg for the improvements, which equates to an estimated £496m a year.
In indoor pig farming systems that use farrowing boxes, eliminating the box increases the welfare score from 27 to 47.
The changes will increase the value of pork products to consumers by an estimated £1.4 billion a year.
The study also highlights the link between animal welfare, productivity and long-term farm resilience.
Proponents argue that improved welfare is associated with improved animal health, reduced risk of disease, and reduced dependence on veterinary intervention, which could help offset some of the transition costs.
The University of Reading’s contribution to this strategy also drew on earlier research into the cost of disease in livestock.
Professor Bennett’s previous research estimated that endemic livestock diseases, often associated with poor welfare, cost UK farmers more than £300 million each year.
Taken together, the findings suggest that although improved welfare comes with an initial cost, clearer market signals may allow farmers to recoup their investment while improving animal health, resilience, and long-term survival.
