New study reveals preventing an hour of intense pain in chickens costs less than a hundredth of a cent

(Press-News.org) A new study published today in Nature Food evaluates the impacts of the European Chicken Commitment (ECC), an initiative calling on food companies to adopt slower-growing breeds and higher welfare standards. While concerns over increased costs and emissions have been barriers to adoption, the study puts those concerns in perspective. For example, using EU carbon externality costs (the cost for companies to emit one tonne of CO₂ under the EU Emissions Trading System), the study showed that it costs less than one-hundredth of a cent to prevent each hour of intense pain —equivalent to the emissions from driving a standard car for about 15 meters.

The study also shows that switching from fast-growing to slower-growing chicken breeds, in line with the ECC, prevents at least 15 to 100 hours of intense pain per bird—at a cost of just US$1 more per kilogram of meat. The findings challenge assumptions that higher-welfare systems are too costly or inefficient, and offer a robust framework for weighing welfare, economic, and environmental considerations. They also call into question the idea that the intensification of animal agriculture, with a focus on faster growth, can be defended on environmental grounds, given the disproportionate and severe welfare harms intensive production entails and the minimal differences in environmental metrics.

The research applies the Welfare Footprint Framework, a scientific method that now makes it possible to put numbers on animal welfare. When applied to meat chickens—the most populous land vertebrates on Earth (over 70  billion birds are each year) — it reveals the toll of current industrial practices; rapid growth rates lead to widespread lameness, cardiovascular problems, heat stress, and chronic hunger, leading to disabling and excruciating pain.

“These are not abstract values. They allow us to put animal welfare on the same footing as other policy priorities,” said Dr. Kate Hartcher, Senior Researcher at the Welfare Footprint Institute and one of the authors of the study. “When you compare the cost of avoiding intense pain to the cost of other externalities, the numbers speak for themselves.”

The welfare impact estimates also include the hidden conditions of the parent birds used to produce meat chickens. Because they share the same genetics for fast growth and weight gain but need to survive for much longer, these birds must be severely feed-restricted, resulting in lifelong hunger and thousands of hours in intense distress. “Few people are aware that the pain and distress behind chicken meat production begins even before a chick is born — with the life of their mother”, said Dr. Cynthia Schuck-Paim, Scientific Director of the Welfare Footprint Institute and the study’s lead author. “To meaningfully improve welfare in meat chicken production, we need genetic changes. Without them, mother hens must continue to endure extreme hunger to avoid the health problems caused by rapid growth.”

Until now, animal welfare has lacked a standardized metric that can be integrated alongside financial and environmental indicators. The Welfare Footprint Framework fills that gap, enabling animal welfare impacts to be understood and  compared in common and easy-to-understand units. This study marks a turning point in how animal welfare is considered in food systems. By providing a clear, science-based way to measure animals' experiences, the Welfare Footprint Framework makes it possible to drive meaningful reforms and ensure animals are no longer left out of the conversation. 

The study was carried out through a collaboration between the Welfare Footprint Institute, the Stockholm Environment Institute, and the University of Colorado Boulder.

Publication: The Welfare Footprint Framework can help balance animal welfare with other food system priorities. Nature Food. DOI: 10.1038/s43016-025-01213-z

For more information: media@welfarefootprint.org.

The Welfare Footprint Framework is freely available for research and policy use at welfarefootprint.org

END